2023 Lucid Air

The vehicle manufacturer (Lucid USA, Inc.) is refusing to perform federally mandated safety recall remedies under 49 U.S.C. § 30120 for open safety recalls SR-24-04-0 (NHTSA 24V-495) and SR-26-06-0 (NHTSA 26V540). Vehicle VIN [XXX] holds an official State of Arizona Restored Title. The vehicle is currently immobilized due to a physical Webasto High-Voltage Coolant Heater (HVCH) failure resulting in an Auxiliary Power Supply (APS) fault, falling under Campaign 24V-495. Furthermore, Lucid is withholding the software deployment for Campaign 26V540 (eFuse fire risk, software build 2.10.0+), which carries an explicit NHTSA advisory to park outside away from structures. Lucid refuses to execute these zero-cost safety fixes or allow diagnostic access unless I pay an out-of-pocket $40,000+ proprietary recertification inspection fee. I offered in writing to pay 100% out-of-pocket for towing and a replacement Telematics Control Unit (TCU) to restore network communication, but Lucid has refused to provide a remedy path. Federal law contains no salvage-title exemption allowing OEMs to withhold safety recall remedies or tie them to compulsory paid services. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

While travelling to California on a personal trip my vehicle displayed a "Battery System Fault" warning message on the driver's display and advised me to stop the vehicle in a safe location within 120 seconds. After pulling off the highway onto the shoulder of an exit ramp and stopping the vehicle it would not longer shift into drive and displayed a "Vehicle Not Driveable" warning message. -I was told by the manufacturer that the AC compressor had failed, causing damage to other components and leading to a loss of high voltage isolation. -The vehicle gave my 120 seconds to reach a safe location before the vehicle lost drive power. I was travelling on a very busy highway and could have been stranded in heavy traffic, posing a danger to myself and other motorists. Before the failure I was also experiencing very weak cooling performance from the air conditioning related to the AC compressor failing. Outside temperatures were around 95-100 degrees Fahrenheit, and temperatures in the cabin began to each uncomfortable levels. The lack of cooling could pose health risks to susceptible individuals. -The vehicle was inspected and repaired by the manufacturer, who confirmed the failure. -The failed and/or damaged components were inspected and repaired by the manufacturer. -The first symptoms I encountered involved abnormally slow DC fast charging and odd noises coming from the AC system. About 45-60 minutes before the failure I also had very little to no cooling from the air conditioning. Once the failure occurred the vehicle displayed the "Battery System Fault" warning message and instructed me to pull of the road ASAP.

My 2023 Lucid Air Touring experienced a rearview camera/display failure while reversing, resulting in a backing collision and rear bumper damage. The main display/rearview image went blank or became unavailable during an active reverse maneuver, and the vehicle did not provide effective visual guidance or rear safety alerts before impact. This failure is consistent with NHTSA Recall 26V017 / Lucid SR-26-01-0, which concerns the rearview camera image not displaying when the vehicle is shifted into reverse, increasing the risk of a crash. Lucid denied responsibility but has not provided the underlying data, logs, timestamps, diagnostic records, software version history, OTA update records, or methodology supporting its conclusion. Lucid initially stated that the vehicle was not being operated during the reported time window, which I disputed because the vehicle was actively reversing when the display failure occurred. Lucid later acknowledged that a collision occurred but claimed no system errors were detected and that the recall update had allegedly been installed before the incident. If true, that creates an additional concern that the recall remedy may have been ineffective, incomplete, or insufficient. The absence of a recorded fault code does not prove that the rearview camera/display system functioned properly. I request that NHTSA investigate this as a potential rear visibility safety defect, FMVSS 111 issue, recall remedy failure, and inadequate manufacturer investigation. Lucid should be required to preserve and review all telemetry, event data, diagnostic logs, software records, OTA update records, camera/display/ACU logs, service history, and internal engineering analysis related to this incident.

The contact owned a 2023 Lucid Air. The contact stated that while driving at 20 MPH, the vehicle in front started to brake; therefore, the contact depressed the brake pedal. The vehicle then, instead of decreasing in speed it accelerated independently. As a result, the contact crashed into the rear of the vehicle in front. The impact then caused the vehicle crashed into the rear to crash into the vehicle in front of it. Another vehicle on the side lane was also impacted due to the crash. The contact stated that the air bags deployed. The contact stated that he sustained bruises to both legs. Medical attention was required. Another unknown occupant was injured, but no further information was available. A police report was filed.  The contact stated that the failure was not diagnosed by a dealer or independent mechanic. The vehicle was towed to an unknown body shop, and then the vehicle was towed to Ace Auto Body. The manufacturer was notified of the failure, and they informed him that they were not responsible for the failure. The contact mentioned the vehicle was deemed a total loss. The approximate failure mileage was 20,000. The VIN was invalid.

The vehicle became completely inoperable suddenly while driving on the road due to a "drive unit failure." Fortunately, I was still at an intersection when this occurred. I don't what would have happened if I was in motion, especially at higher speed on a highway. The car was towed to the nearest Lucid service center, but it remains there over 6 weeks later as they are not able to fix the problem.

On Saturday [XXX], in Chino Hills, CA (ZIP Code 91709), my 2023 Lucid Air Touring experienced a sudden unintended acceleration event. Shortly after releasing the accelerator pedal to obtain a parking pass, the vehicle unexpectedly accelerated at a high speed, resulting in a collision with the pavement and a post on the premises. This incident bears similarities to the all-weather mat recall; however, Lucid has confirmed that my vehicle's mats are not listed under the recall. The failure appears to be related to the Lucid electric propulsion system, which is available for inspection upon request. As a result of the crash, I sustained minor injuries. A police report has been filed with the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department by Deputy M. Scott (Report #[XXX], Chino Hills Station, Chino Hills, CA 91709). Lucid is currently conducting an investigation and has issued Incident Report #[XXX]. Additionally, State Farm Auto Insurance (California) has assigned an appraiser to assess the body damage. There was no warning lamps, messages or other symptoms prior to the issue appearing except for one short incident of sudden unintended acceleration experienced by my husband which has been reported to Lucid. Please let me know if further information or inspection arrangements are needed. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

The contact owns a 2023 Lucid Air. The contact stated that while the vehicle was stopped at a red light and in the "Dream" driving mode, the light turned green and the vehicle drove forward and crashed into the rear of a second vehicle. The contact indicated that the "Dream" driving mode had malfunctioned and did not detect the vehicle ahead. During the crash, the vehicle was traveling approximately 5 MPH. No injuries were reported, and no police report was taken. The cause of the failure was unknown. The manufacturer was notified of the failure, but was unwilling to share data from the vehicle related to the crash. After the incident, the contact will no longer drive the vehicle due to the safety concerns. The failure mileage was 21,000.

I am submitting this complaint regarding a severe safety defect in my 2023 Lucid Air Grand Touring (VIN: [XXX] ). On [XXX], while driving on a state highway with my family—including my [XXX] and [XXX] children—the vehicle suddenly and without warning limited its speed to 35 MPH. This created an immediate and dangerous situation on a high-speed road, significantly increasing the risk of a rear-end collision. I was unable to accelerate beyond this limit, forcing me to pull over abruptly and navigate traffic hazards. This incident could have resulted in a serious accident or injury. I immediately reported this issue to Lucid Customer Care and took the vehicle to an authorized Lucid service center. The vehicle was out of service for 25 days (February 23, 2025 – March 19, 2025) for diagnostics and repairs. Ongoing Safety Concerns & Lack of Response from Lucid Motors Since this incident, I have repeatedly contacted Lucid Motors Customer Care, but I have received no clear response regarding the cause of this dangerous failure or any assurance that this will not happen again. Furthermore: My vehicle has experienced a total of 45 days of downtime in the first 10 months of my lease due to various mechanical failures, including a heating system failure ([XXX]). Lucid has failed to provide a resolution or clear direction regarding my attempts to return the vehicle. I have lost confidence in the safety of this vehicle and am concerned that this issue may impact other Lucid Air vehicles on the road. Request for NHTSA Investigation Given the seriousness of this defect, I am requesting that NHTSA investigate this issue to determine: Whether other Lucid Air vehicles have experienced sudden speed limitation issues. If this defect poses an ongoing safety risk to drivers and passengers. Whether Lucid Motors is adequately addressing and communicating these defects to consumers. I believe this defect could pose a serious INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)