2022 TESLA MODEL S — Problems, Recalls & Safety Data

Complaint Category: Tires / Suspension Summary of Issue: I am reporting a recurring and deceptive safety defect involving extreme inner-edge tire wear on my Tesla Model S. On three separate occasions, my rear tires have worn down to the metal structural cords exclusively on the innermost shoulder, while the remaining 90% of the tread appeared in excellent, near-new condition. Safety Hazard: This defect creates a high risk of catastrophic blowout at highway speeds. Because the wear is hidden on the far interior edge of the tire, it is invisible to the driver during standard daily visual inspections. The vehicle’s non-adjustable rear suspension geometry (aggressive negative camber) places extreme stress on the inner shoulder, causing it to fail structurally while the rest of the tire looks safe. Tesla’s Response: Tesla Service has been unable to provide a permanent remedy, stating the vehicle is "within spec," despite the recurring nature of the failure. I am filing this to urge the NHTSA to investigate whether this suspension geometry constitutes a design defect that requires a mandatory recall or corrective hardware.

Incident Description: While driving through a parking lot at 20 mi/hr, my vehicle's AEB system activated in response to another vehicle approaching from a perpendicular direction. However, the system's response was dangerously delayed and inappropriate stopping the car right in front of the other car: The system failed to provide any advance warning or alert before applying the brakes The braking occurred too late to create adequate separation from the approaching vehicle The vehicle stopped directly in the path of the oncoming car, increasing rather than decreasing collision risk The abrupt stop left my vehicle in a position where I was at greater risk of being T-boned Only the other driver's quick reaction prevented a collision. Had that driver not stopped in time, the AEB system would have contributed to, rather than prevented, a serious accident.

Incident Description: While driving through a parking lot at 20 mi/hr, my vehicle's AEB system activated in response to another vehicle approaching from a perpendicular direction. However, the system's response was dangerously delayed and inappropriate stopping the car right in front of the other car: The system failed to provide any advance warning or alert before applying the brakes The braking occurred too late to create adequate separation from the approaching vehicle The vehicle stopped directly in the path of the oncoming car, increasing rather than decreasing collision risk The abrupt stop left my vehicle in a position where I was at greater risk of being T-boned Only the other driver's quick reaction prevented a collision. Had that driver not stopped in time, the AEB system would have contributed to, rather than prevented, a serious accident.

Incident Description: While driving through a parking lot at 20 mi/hr, my vehicle's AEB system activated in response to another vehicle approaching from a perpendicular direction. However, the system's response was dangerously delayed and inappropriate stopping the car right in front of the other car: The system failed to provide any advance warning or alert before applying the brakes The braking occurred too late to create adequate separation from the approaching vehicle The vehicle stopped directly in the path of the oncoming car, increasing rather than decreasing collision risk The abrupt stop left my vehicle in a position where I was at greater risk of being T-boned Only the other driver's quick reaction prevented a collision. Had that driver not stopped in time, the AEB system would have contributed to, rather than prevented, a serious accident.

Vehicle: 2022 Tesla Model S (HW 3.0) System in Question: Full Self-Driving (FSD) Capability, initially purchased (Level 1 equivalent) for $6,000, and then upgraded (Level 2 equivalent) for an additional $3,000 (Total $9,000). I. Initial FSD Purchase and Unsafe Performance (Level 1) Upon initial purchase of the FSD package, the system (what Tesla later called FSD Beta, or its precursor) consistently demonstrated unsafe and aggressive behavior that necessitated immediate driver intervention to prevent a crash. Specific Safety Concern: The system would often execute turns, both in city and highway off-ramp scenarios, with excessive speed and aggressive lateral acceleration. This erratic behavior felt uncontrolled and risky, frequently causing the driver to feel unsafe and to rapidly override the system by taking manual control of the steering wheel. Resulting Risk: The system was virtually unusable for anything beyond basic highway cruising (a feature standard on many vehicles), yet its aggressive behavior posed a safety risk on the highway when attempting lane changes or taking exits. II. Upgrade and Deterioration of Practical Safety (Level 2) I upgraded to the top-tier FSD package with the hope of receiving a safer, more functional system that matched the "Full Self-Driving" name. Instead, the system introduced new safety and usability defects: Forced Disengagement/Driver Monitoring Defect: The system's driver monitoring is overly aggressive and interferes with safe, necessary driving actions. It delivers constant "nag" warnings and requires disengagement when the driver performs a brief but necessary safety check, such as looking at a side mirror, checking over the shoulder for a lane change, or briefly glancing at the car's screen to adjust climate/radio. Safety Implication: This defect forces the driver to prematurely disengage FSD in complex traffic situations to avoid a warning/lockout, which is counter-productive to safety. I am effectively penalized for