2024 Tesla Cybertruck

The contact owns a 2024 Tesla Cybertruck. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, the vehicle made an abnormal rattling sound, and the contact noticed that the metal quarter panel was loose. The contact was concerned that the quarter panel detachment could cause a crash. The vehicle was taken to the local dealer, where a replacement quote was provided. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was contacted and confirmed that there was no coverage. The failure mileage was approximately 3,000.

Approximately 10 minutes after my vehicle was serviced at a Tesla Service Center for a Full Self-Driving (FSD) concern, I entered the highway and engaged FSD. The service center had stated the system was operating correctly. While traveling approximately 75 mph through a highway curve, FSD suddenly changed to an "Unavailable" state. According to Tesla's own accident data, I did not disengage FSD. There was no audible warning, no effective visual warning, no takeover request, no controlled deceleration, and no safe handoff to the driver before the vehicle stopped controlling itself. Within about one second of FSD becoming unavailable, the vehicle left its intended path and struck a concrete highway divider. If the divider had not been present, the vehicle likely would have crossed into oncoming highway traffic, creating the risk of a catastrophic head-on collision with other vehicles, including a semi-truck. Tesla's accident report confirms I did not disengage FSD and shows no warning or takeover request before impact. I possess documentation supporting that FSD became unavailable without a safe transition to the driver. This failure occurred immediately after Tesla serviced the vehicle and represented that the FSD system was functioning properly. Despite the accident data, Tesla Customer Support and the Service Center have refused to acknowledge or investigate what appears to be a failure of the FSD system's fail-safe behavior. The failed component appears to be the FSD/Autopilot system and its driver handoff logic. The vehicle and electronic records are available for inspection. An automated driving system should not terminate operation at highway speed without providing adequate warning, a safe transfer of control, or controlled deceleration. I believe this presents a serious safety defect that could result in fatal crashes. The collision caused approximately $15,500 in vehicle damage.

PCS system has failed. This causes the vehicle to be unable to charge and can lead to loss of power if unable to get to a supercharger before the battery is depleted. It can now only be charged at full Tesla superchargers and not at other brands, hotel chargers, or home AC chargers. The vehicle did notify me of the PCS failure and recommended using a supercharger. Tesla proactively updated my account to allow for free supercharging, but this does not eliminate the risk when going to areas that do not have superchargers available. Parts are not currently available to repair the problem and my service requests are left in a "review" state. Vehicle is available for inspection if needed.

This is reporting an issue with v14.3.3 and v14.3.4 of Tesla Full Self Driving (FSD) Supervised. This month I have driven over 4,000 miles with FSD enabled, approximately 2/3rd on 14.3.3 and 1/3 on 14.3.4. FSD has regularly failed to respect speed limit changes, even though it seems to recognize / observe the speed limit signs. I am certain it’s observing the signs because it renders them on the in-car display, but it doesn’t actually adjust its speed in response to those signs. The most egregious of cases have been when driving through Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona where the speed limit is often 75 mph on Interstate highways (e.g., [XXX]). On multiple occasions the vehicle has ignored construction speed limit changes to 55 mph, and instead has tried to maintain 75-80 mph through the construction zone. Not only could that get me a nasty speeding ticket, but it could also put construction workers lives at risk. It has also happened in non-construction zones, like when on a non-interstate highway that passes through towns and reduces speed when doing so. It doesn’t fail 100% of the time, but it has been an issue more than 50% of the time I enter a construction zone. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

I was driving my Tesla Cybertruck on the highway when I experienced unexpected steering movements from side to side. I attempted to maintain control of the vehicle and slow down. The vehicle ultimately left its intended path and collided with the median. I do not know the cause of the incident. At the time of the accident, I believe a Tesla driver-assistance feature may have been engaged, but I am requesting that Tesla review the vehicle data and logs to determine exactly what systems were active and whether any vehicle malfunction contributed to the event. The accident resulted in significant vehicle damage. I am submitting this report because I am concerned that a potential steering, vehicle control, or driver-assistance system issue may have contributed to the incident and I believe the event should be investigated.

The rear passenger side sail applique flew off the truck while I was driving on the freeway.

Tesla does a warning if it can not detect your eyes on the road when using FSD (Full Self Driving). After few warnings on a trip it becomes a strike. After 5 strikes, they remove FSD and AutoPilot for a week. It becomes dangerous now since I have been driving on FSD for several years to drive the big CyberTruck without FSD. The removing FSD for a week behavior needs to be stopped. Without FSD chances of accident are 10000% increased.

PCS2 charging failure, PCS_a094 / a095 errors, loss of AC charging, reduced charging speeds, and PowerShare charging issue.

On 05/30/2026 at approximately 15H24, my Tesla Cybertruck was parked and stopped at approx. [XXX] of Target). No one was seated in the driver seat. A passenger entered the vehicle and sat in the front passenger seat to play music. Shortly after the passenger sat down, the vehicle suddenly and unexpectedly moved forward on its own and rear-ended the vehicle parked directly in front of it and causing damages. This occurred while the vehicle was supposed to be parked/stationary and while there was no driver in the driver seat. We do not understand what triggered the vehicle to move forward. This appears to be a serious safety issue because a parked, unattended vehicle should not move forward without driver input. The incident created a collision risk to nearby vehicles, pedestrians, and anyone standing in front of or around the vehicle. I am requesting that NHTSA review this as a potential unintended movement / unintended acceleration / park-to-drive activation / rollaway safety defect. Tesla should be required to investigate the vehicle logs and determine whether the movement was caused by a software issue, gear selection issue, Autopark/FSD/Summon/mobile app activation, brake hold/parking brake failure, sensor/occupancy issue, accelerator pedal issue, or any other defect. Video and photos in the link: [XXX] There was property damage to the vehicle parked in front. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

My Tesla Cybertruck has experienced a failure of the Power Conversion System (PCS), which prevents the vehicle from charging at home using the installed residential charging equipment. Tesla diagnosed the issue and advised that the required replacement part is unavailable, with no estimated date for repair. As a result, I have been forced to rely exclusively on public Superchargers for several months. While Tesla has provided free Supercharging, this does not restore the vehicle’s intended functionality and requires significant additional travel, waiting time, and disruption to my daily activities and business operations. The vehicle was purchased and represented as capable of convenient home charging, and the prolonged inability to repair a critical charging system due to parts unavailability substantially impairs its use, value, and practicality. I am submitting this complaint because Tesla has been unable to provide a repair timeline, and I am concerned that other owners may be experiencing similar failures and extended delays in obtaining repairs. The offered loaner vehicle is a Tesla Model Y, which is not comparable to a Cybertruck and does not meet the hauling and cargo needs associated with my business operations.

My vehicle's windshield wipers were completely inoperable for an extended period. I drove this vehicle across multiple states without functional windshield wipers — confirmed on a recorded Tesla corporate support call dated May 21, 2026. This is also covered under NHTSA Recall 24V456000 (Windshield Wiper Motor failure), which Tesla Pensacola failed to identify or perform. Tesla Council Bluffs, IA identified this recall as requiring urgent attention. Safety risk: Operating a vehicle at highway speed without functional windshield wipers in any precipitation is extremely dangerous. I drove cross-country in this condition. Manufacturer response: Tesla Pensacola stated the vehicle had "nothing wrong." Tesla Council Bluffs identified the recall. Recall has still not been performed.

NHTSA Recall 24V832000 covers a drive inverter defect that can cause complete loss of drive power. This recall was identified as active on my vehicle when I drove cross-country to XXX. Tesla Pensacola [XXX] ) told me "nothing was wrong" and did not perform this recall despite having the vehicle in for service multiple times. Component: Drive inverter / power train. Safety risk: Complete loss of drive power at highway speed is an extreme safety hazard. Manufacturer response: Tesla Pensacola stated the vehicle had no issues and performed no recall work. Tesla Council Bluffs, IA immediately identified this recall as requiring urgent attention on the same vehicle. Available for inspection: Yes — vehicle currently at Tesla Tallahassee Service Center. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

All vehicle cameras failed simultaneously on May 12, 2026 at approximately 4:41 PM. Tesla app displayed "Cameras Unavailable — Please try again later." All camera-dependent systems were completely inoperable: Autopilot, FSD, Sentry Mode, dashcam/TeslaCam. Component failed: Entire forward and perimeter camera system. Vehicle available for inspection at Tesla Tallahassee Service Center. Safety risk: Vehicle cannot safely operate driver assistance systems with all cameras dead. Total loss of rear/side visibility systems while driving. No warning prior to failure. Manufacturer response: Tesla Pensacola general manager intentionally cancelled 8 consecutive service appointments — confirmed on recorded Tesla corporate call May 29, 2026. Owner drove 2.5 hours to one appointment and the GM rescheduled it without any notice. Tesla corporate agent confirmed on record: "You shouldn't have to travel to a service center that's over 100 miles away when you have one that's close to you." As of May 29, 2026 vehicle is at Tallahassee SC — Tesla refusing to provide a loaner or complete repairs. Owner has been without vehicle 24-48 hours despite being promised a loaner at time of tow. Prior warning: TeslaCam left-repeater camera failure events auto-saved December 15, 2025 — system was already failing 5 months prior to total failure. Was defect reproduced by dealer: No — Tesla refused to inspect despite 8 cancelled appointments.

NHTSA Recall 24V276000 covers an accelerator pedal pad that can dislodge and become trapped under the pedal, causing unintended acceleration. This recall was identified as active and unperformed on my vehicle by Tesla Council Bluffs, IA. Tesla Pensacola told me the vehicle had "nothing wrong" and performed no recall work despite multiple service visits. Safety risk: Unintended acceleration is an extreme safety hazard capable of causing fatal accidents. Manufacturer response: Tesla Pensacola failed to identify or perform this safety recall. Tesla Council Bluffs immediately identified it as requiring urgent attention. Available for inspection: Yes — vehicle at Tesla Tallahassee Service Center.

The vehicle's tonneau cover was defective from the day of delivery and remained unusable for approximately the first 12 months of ownership. Factory over-application of adhesive forced the rear window against the tonneau rollers, preventing operation. I purchased this vehicle specifically for its cargo bed functionality for business use. The cover was finally repaired at Tesla Lincoln, NE when a senior technician was present — root cause identified as a manufacturing defect present from the factory. Component: Tonneau cover / rear bed cover system. Safety: Debris containment failure — unsecured cargo bed.

NHTSA Recall 26V255000, issued April 22, 2026, covers brake rotor studs that may crack, potentially causing wheel separation at speed. This critical safety recall has not been performed on my vehicle. Tesla Pensacola cancelled all service appointments since December 2025 without performing any recall work. Safety risk: Wheel separation at highway speed is a life-threatening defect. I have been driving this vehicle since April 22, 2026 — over one month — with potentially cracked brake rotor studs because Tesla has refused to schedule and complete service. As of May 27, 2026, the vehicle was towed to Tesla Tallahassee without my knowledge or a loaner vehicle provided, and Tesla is now refusing to perform service without my in-person presence. Available for inspection: Yes — vehicle at Tesla Tallahassee Service Center.

My vehicle achieves only 80-100 miles of real-world range per charge, requiring charging to 100% to reach even this reduced figure. On April 30, 2026 at 11:08 PM, I documented energy consumption of 460.8 Wh/mi — 37% worse than the specification required to achieve Tesla's advertised range of 318-340 miles. Component: High voltage battery / power distribution system. Safety risk: Severe undisclosed range reduction means the vehicle may reach 0% charge in locations and at times the driver does not anticipate based on advertised specifications, creating stranding and safety risks. Manufacturer response: Raised on May 21, 2026 recorded call with Tesla corporate. Tesla acknowledged the issue and said to discuss at service — but all service appointments have been cancelled since December 2025.

Beginning approximately December 2025, my vehicle produces a severe grinding sound when attempting to accelerate. The sound has been consistent and ongoing for approximately 6 months. Confirmed verbatim on recorded Tesla corporate support call May 21, 2026: "If I try to accelerate it's making this horrible grinding sound. This has been going on since December." Component: Drivetrain / power unit (unknown — Tesla has never inspected). Safety risk: Grinding on acceleration indicates mechanical failure in the drivetrain that could result in sudden loss of power or vehicle control. Manufacturer response: Tesla Pensacola GM intentionally cancelled 8 consecutive service appointments since December 2025 — confirmed on recorded Tesla corporate call May 29, 2026. Owner stated on Tesla's recorded line: "For the last two years it's been broken. I've literally had it in the shop more than I've driven it." Tesla has never examined the source of the grinding sound. As of May 29, 2026, vehicle is at Tallahassee Service Center. Tesla escalated to Regional Manager on May 29, 2026. Available for inspection: Yes — vehicle at Tesla Tallahassee Service Center.

Pcs2 failure

I am submitting a safety complaint regarding the rear visibility system on my Tesla Cybertruck. The physical rear view mirror does not provide any usable visibility of the roadway behind the vehicle. The design of the rear window and cargo area blocks the view, which makes the mirror ineffective for its intended safety function. Because the physical mirror cannot be used, the driver must rely on the rear camera feed displayed on the center screen. This is the only way to see directly behind the vehicle during normal driving. However, the rear camera feed disappears every time the turn signal indicators are activated. When the indicators turn on, the screen automatically replaces the rear view with the side camera view. This removes all rear visibility at the exact moment when the driver needs full awareness for lane changes, merging, and turning. This behavior cannot be disabled or overridden. It is part of the default software design. As a result, the driver is left without any functional rear visibility method during critical maneuvers. This creates a clear safety risk and raises concerns regarding compliance with FMVSS 111, which requires reliable rear visibility. The loss of rear visibility during lane changes and turns increases the risk of collisions with vehicles approaching from behind. Since the physical mirror is unusable and the digital feed is removed by the software, the driver has no safe or compliant way to monitor rear traffic during these maneuvers. I request that NHTSA investigate this issue and require Tesla to provide a remedy. A potential remedy would include keeping the rear camera feed visible at all times unless the driver manually chooses to remove it, or adding a dedicated rear view camera feed that remains active during all driving conditions.