NHTSA Intensifies Investigation Into Ford’s BlueCruise After Fatal Crashes

In early 2025, federal safety regulators escalated their investigation into Ford’s hands-free driving technology following multiple serious crashes involving vehicles equipped with BlueCruise. The focus of this inquiry centers on 2021–2024 Ford Mustang Mach-E models, many of which are marketed with advanced driver-assist capabilities intended to reduce fatigue and improve highway safety. Instead, recent incidents suggest that the system may fail in critical situations, placing both drivers and passengers at risk. For California motorists who were promised cutting-edge safety and convenience, the findings raise urgent concerns about whether the technology is truly ready for real-world use on busy highways.

The investigation highlights a larger and growing issue within the automotive industry: as automakers rapidly compete to push semi-autonomous driving systems to market, real-world performance may lag behind consumer expectations. While hands-free systems like BlueCruise are often positioned as major selling points for electric vehicles, early evidence suggests that they may create new risks rather than eliminate them. California’s dense freeways, high-speed interchanges, and unpredictable stop-and-go traffic only compound the potential danger when automated systems fail to detect stationary vehicles.

The Issue: BlueCruise May Fail to Detect Stopped Vehicles

According to findings disclosed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, BlueCruise may fail to recognize stopped or disabled vehicles on the roadway when activated at higher speeds. This issue appears to stem from intentional programming decisions made to prevent false-positive detections of objects in the roadway. While this may reduce unnecessary braking in normal driving conditions, it also means that BlueCruise may not react quickly—or at all—when encountering actual hazards. The failure to detect stationary vehicles has been linked to at least two fatal crashes where drivers relied on the system, believing it would respond appropriately.

NHTSA reported that Ford designed Adaptive Cruise Control and BlueCruise to ignore stationary objects at approach speeds above 62 mph because early testing produced too many false alerts. This tradeoff creates a dangerous scenario: the system may interpret real hazards as ignorable anomalies, leaving drivers vulnerable when every millisecond counts. Additionally, the system’s performance appears to degrade significantly in low-visibility conditions, including nighttime driving and poorly lit roadways. In a state like California, where highway travel frequently occurs at high speeds and after dark, these limitations pose serious safety concerns for both drivers and surrounding vehicles.

The issue raises fundamental questions about whether consumers were adequately warned about the limitations of BlueCruise. Many buyers were led to believe that Ford’s technology offered a reliable hands-free driving experience, yet the underlying software may not be equipped to handle common highway scenarios. As more evidence emerges, this problem may represent not just a technical failure, but a potential lapse in consumer transparency and safety responsibility.

NHTSA Demands Internal Documentation From Ford

The NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation recently escalated its inquiry by issuing a formal request for detailed internal documentation from Ford. This includes a comprehensive list of all vehicles equipped with BlueCruise, internal engineering documents detailing how the system was designed and tested, logs of software updates and performance changes over time, and detailed reports relating to known fatal crashes involving the technology. Federal regulators are seeking clarification on when Ford first became aware of detection limitations and whether the company delayed issuing warnings or corrective actions to consumers.

This elevated stage of investigation, known as an engineering analysis, is typically initiated only when evidence suggests a systemic failure rather than isolated incidents. It is one of the final steps before federal regulators may mandate a full-scale recall, software overhaul, or formal notice advising consumers to discontinue use of the system. Ford has been given a deadline of August 6th to respond to the information request, and the outcome of its response could shape the future of semi-autonomous vehicle regulation across the United States.

For California drivers, the stakes are especially high. Our state is home to one of the largest populations of electric vehicles in the country, and many Mustang Mach-E owners rely on BlueCruise for long-distance driving between major cities. If Ford fails to comply fully or if the investigation reveals intentional withholding of safety information, affected drivers may have grounds to pursue legal action under California Lemon Law provisions.

Why This Matters to California Drivers

California’s roadways are uniquely challenging, with long highway corridors, dense commuter traffic, and frequent changes in speed conditions. These environments create constant opportunities for sudden stops, disabled vehicles, lane blockages, and multi-car pileups—scenarios where driver assistance systems must react with precision. When BlueCruise is unable to detect hazards at high speeds, the risk of severe injury or death increases substantially. Drivers may assume the system is actively monitoring their surroundings, when in reality it may be disengaging at the very moment intervention is needed most.

California’s consumer base is also among the most tech-forward in the nation, meaning adoption rates for semi-autonomous features are higher than average. Many residents purchased the Mustang Mach-E specifically for its hands-free capabilities, believing it to be a safer alternative to manual driving. As this investigation unfolds, those same consumers are now learning that their vehicles may rely heavily on software that does not meet the standards expected of critical safety systems. These concerns impact families, commuters, rideshare drivers, business travelers, and anyone who assumed Ford had thoroughly vetted the technology before releasing it to the public.

Additionally, the state’s strong legal protections for consumers make California one of the first places where legal claims may emerge if Ford fails to provide adequate repair options. Should the NHTSA ultimately conclude that BlueCruise poses a safety risk, owners who continue to experience issues after repairs or software updates may be entitled to compensation under state law. Until then, drivers are left in a difficult position: continue using a system that may misinterpret hazards, or avoid a major feature they paid a premium to receive.

Could This Lead to a Ford Lemon Law Case?

If Ford is unable to permanently resolve the issues surrounding BlueCruise—even after software updates, patches, or recall actions—affected consumers may qualify for relief under California’s Lemon Law. Unlike traditional vehicle defects involving mechanical components such as transmissions or engines, software defects can be harder to diagnose and easier for manufacturers to dismiss as user error. Yet modern vehicles rely heavily on software to operate critical systems, meaning technological flaws can be just as dangerous as physical ones.

A vehicle may qualify as a lemon if repeated repairs fail to correct the issue, if the vehicle remains unsafe to operate, or if the defect substantially reduces the vehicle’s functionality or value. For Mustang Mach-E owners, this could include repeated system failures, failed software updates, malfunctioning sensors, warnings or lockouts while driving, or crashes that occurred while BlueCruise was active. Even delays in providing a fix could justify legal action, particularly if the vehicle remains unsafe to use for extended periods.

With multiple fatalities already linked to the system, the legal implications may expand beyond consumer protection into broader questions of corporate negligence. If internal documents reveal that Ford knew of these risks before releasing BlueCruise, it could open the door to litigation beyond standard Lemon Law recovery. While the investigation is ongoing, affected California drivers should begin documenting all system failures, service visits, repair attempts, and communications with dealerships.

How The Barry Law Firm Can Help

At The Barry Law Firm, we specialize in helping California consumers take legal action against manufacturers when their vehicles fail to meet quality and safety standards. If your Ford Mustang Mach-E has been in the shop repeatedly for mechanical or safety issues — or if a recall repair hasn’t fixed the problem — you may be entitled to a refund, replacement, or cash compensation under California’s Lemon Law.

Lemon Law Expertise – We specialize in California Lemon Law cases and know how to hold manufacturers accountable.

No Upfront Costs – The California Lemon Law requires the manufacturer to pay our fees. That means, at The Barry Law Firm, we will never charge you, no matter the outcome of your case.

Proven Success – We have helped thousands of consumers obtain favorable settlements for their defective vehicles.

Personalized Attention – We handle all legal paperwork and negotiations so you don’t have to deal with the stress.

If Ford’s repairs have failed to solve your vehicle’s problems, you may have a Ford Lemon Law BlueCruise defect case. Contact us today to explore your legal options.

Closing

The ongoing investigation into Ford’s BlueCruise technology should serve as a serious warning that autonomous-style features may not always function as promised. While drivers are encouraged to adopt innovative safety systems, they should not be placed in harm’s way due to software limitations that manufacturers failed to disclose. When a system designed to prevent collisions instead contributes to them, consumer trust is broken—and accountability becomes essential.

California has some of the strongest consumer protection laws in the country, giving drivers a legal pathway to demand compensation when automakers fail to ensure vehicle safety. If Ford cannot provide a reliable fix or continues to release software updates that do not resolve core issues, affected Mustang Mach-E owners may be eligible for legal remedies, including refunds, replacements, or financial recovery.

At The Barry Law Firm, our mission is to protect California drivers from unsafe vehicles and hold manufacturers responsible for the harm caused by defective technology. If your Mustang Mach-E has been affected by BlueCruise performance issues, now is the time to document everything, understand your rights, and take action. Your safety—and the safety of those who share the road with you—deserves more than unproven promises.