Lucid recall query RQ24002
High Voltage Coolant Heater Delamination. NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation opened this recall query about the defroster/defogger/hvac system on 2 model years (2022–2023). Opened Feb 8, 2024, closed May 11, 2026 after 2.3 years without a recall. closed
What NHTSA says
Source: Office of Defects Investigation, as filedOn January 11, 2024, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received Recall 24V-011 that identified a safety defect in the High Voltage Coolant Heater (HVCH) installed in certain Model Year (MY) 2022-2023 Lucid Air vehicles manufactured prior to July 2022. The HVCH may experience an internal delamination failure, which poses a risk of the vehicle losing defrost capability. If the HVCH fails, coolant cannot be heated, and the windshield cannot be defrosted. Loss of adequate windshield defrost capability could lead to restricted driver field of vision and an increased risk of a crash. The remedy outlined in this recall is a software update that identifies any HVCH failure when it occurs, which then provides a notification on the glass cockpit panel about the lack of defrost capability and advises the owner to contact Lucid for an HVCH replacement. Lucid will then replace the HVCH at no cost to the owner. On July 27th, 2023, Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC filed Recall 23V-518 which affects Jaguar Land Rover vehicles equipped with the same HVCH as the Lucid Vehicles that were supplied by the same supplier (Webasto AG). Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC’s remedy is to replace the HVCH in the affected vehicles. ODI was concerned that by only providing a notification to drivers that their windshield defroster is not working, Lucid puts the driver in a situation where they could experience the failure during the same drive cycle as they receive the notification. In this scenario, the driver is not aware they have a failed HVCH until they are operating the vehicle and need the defrost function prior to being able to have the vehicle serviced. ODI opened Recall Query (RQ24002) on February 8, 2024, to assess the adequacy, including the safety consequences, of the remedy described in Lucid’s Recall 24V-011. ODI received Lucid’s Information Request Response (IRR) to this investigation on April 29, 2024. To date, ODI has not received any complaints regarding the recall remedy outlined in 24V-011. In reviewing Lucid’s IRR data, the percentage of failures after the recall remedy has been implemented on the vehicles is 0.14%. Of the failures identified by Lucid, none of them described a loss of visibility out the front window. There was one claim of property damage allegedly due to the recall remedy. ODI's review of information related to this claim does not indicate a need for further action under this investigation. During the investigation, Lucid clarified that upon the driver receiving the notification their defrost was unavailable, the dashboard message alerts them to use caution if their view is obstructed and to contact customer care. Upon contacting customer care regarding the dashboard message, a Lucid service member will create a service appointment to have the HVCH replaced. In instances where the consumer had expressed they do not feel comfortable taking the vehicle into the service center themselves, the service center has offered for the vehicle to be towed. ODI also met with Jaguar Land Rover on November 20, 2024 to review their recall (23V-518) and their reasoning for replacing the HVCH. Jaguar Land Rover informed ODI that their affected vehicle systems were incapable of detecting an HVCH failure and are unable to warn the driver that the HVCH was starting to fail. This differs from Lucid, which was able to implement a software update to detect and identify a failure to the driver. After analyzing the data submitted in Lucid’s IRR response and reviewing Jaguar Land Rover’s reasoning for its recall remedy, ODI is closing RQ24002 without action. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The Agency reserves the right to take additional action if warranted by future circumstances.
A Recall Query is a look at a recall that already exists — whether its remedy works, whether it reached every vehicle it should have, whether the manufacturer met its obligations. The summary is the agency’s own text from its investigation file, unedited; the resumes carrying the full reasoning are linked below.
The paperwork NHTSA filed
Source: every document on this action, at nhtsa.gov- Opening resume — ODI’s own summary of why it opened this — the subject, what prompted it, and the vehicles in scope.
- Closing resume — ODI’s own summary of why it closed this, and what it concluded.
| Document | Code | Filed | At NHTSA |
|---|---|---|---|
| Opening resume | INOA | 2024 | |
| Closing resume | INCLA | 2024 | |
| Information request to the manufacturer | INIM | 2024 | |
| Manufacturer's response — data | INRD | 2024 | 2 files 12 |
| Filed document | INOV | 2024 | |
| Confidential business information notice | INCBC | 2024 | |
| Correspondence | INOT | 2024 | 2 files 12 |
| Filed document | INCV | 2024 | |
| Filed document | INOR | 2024 |
These are NHTSA’s own files, served from the agency’s site — the resumes are what ODI wrote when it opened and closed the action, and the rest is the correspondence behind them, including what the manufacturer sent when the agency asked. They are linked, not copied: where a document names the people who wrote in, that redaction is the agency’s to make and its copy is the one you should read.
What owners had already reported
Source: complaints on file the day it openedWhen NHTSA opened this on Feb 8, 2024, owners had filed 56 complaints with the agency about the model years above, of which 1 named the visibility/wiper NHTSA went on to investigate. Owner complaints are the agency’s main early signal: ODI screens them, and a Preliminary Evaluation is usually where a pattern in them ends up.
This is what the complaint file held on that date, not a claim about which reports prompted the investigation — NHTSA’s complaint records carry no investigation number, so nobody can make that link from the data alone. The opening resume linked above names the reports ODI itself cited. Complaint records on this site begin with 2016.
What this means for an owner
Source: and what happens nextAn investigation is not a finding that a defect exists, and it puts no duty on anyone. NHTSA opens a Preliminary Evaluation when complaints and other reports suggest a condition worth asking the manufacturer about; it upgrades to an Engineering Analysis when the answers warrant testing; it closes either when it recommends a recall, when the manufacturer recalls on its own, or when no defect trend is found. The agency’s own goals are about four months for a petition, eight for a Preliminary Evaluation or a Recall Query and eighteen for an Engineering Analysis; many run longer.
This one is closed. A recall query ends with NHTSA’s finding on the recall it examined — the remedy stands, is widened, or a new campaign follows; the file names the recall it concerned and NHTSA’s closing resume carries the reasoning.
Model years it names
Source: as NHTSA filed themA vehicle page’s investigation list carries the same action; a name here is the scope NHTSA opened, not a list of affected VINs.
Common questions
Source: NHTSA Office of Defects InvestigationIs RQ24002 a recall?
No. A recall query is NHTSA asking questions, not a recall. A safety recall carries an NHTSA campaign number and a duty to repair for free; this one closed without one. Whether one particular vehicle has an open recall is a VIN question at nhtsa.gov/recalls.
Is RQ24002 still open?
No. It closed on May 11, 2026 without a recall.
Which vehicles does RQ24002 cover?
NHTSA opened it on 2 model years: 2023 Lucid Air, 2022 Lucid Air. That is the scope of the inquiry, not a list of affected vehicles; a recall, if one follows, defines its own population by VIN.