Ford is facing fresh scrutiny after acknowledging that hundreds of thousands of its latest electric and hybrid models may not stay put when drivers think they are safely parked. The company has launched a sweeping safety campaign that affects more than a quarter of a million vehicles in the United States, all tied to a defect in the electronic park system that can allow a car or truck to roll away unexpectedly.
At the heart of the recall is a small but critical component inside the parking mechanism that can bind or fail, preventing the system from fully engaging even when the dashboard says the vehicle is in park. I see this as more than a one-off glitch: it is a stress test of how quickly a major automaker can respond when software-driven drivetrains collide with old-fashioned expectations about what “park” should mean.
What Ford is recalling and why the numbers do not quite match
Ford has told regulators it is recalling more than 270,000 electric and hybrid vehicles in the United States because of a defect in the parking function that can let vehicles move after drivers believe they have secured them. Other filings and summaries describe the campaign as covering “over 270,000” vehicles, “270,000” plus, “272,000” and even “nearly 273,000” vehicles. Those discrepancies reflect the way automakers and regulators count affected vehicles as campaigns evolve, but they all point to the same core reality: a very large population of cars and trucks built in the last few model years needs attention for the same safety risk.
In practical terms, I read those figures as a range rather than a contradiction. The company’s own language about “272,000-Plus” vehicles suggests the final tally will likely land somewhere between the initial engineering estimate and the upper bound of “nearly 273,000.” For owners, the exact count matters less than the pattern: Ford is acknowledging a systemic issue across a broad slice of its electrified lineup, not a narrow batch of misbuilt parts.
The specific models and years caught up in the campaign
The recall zeroes in on some of Ford’s most important new products, including certain F‑150 Lightning BEV pickup trucks, Mustang Mach-E crossovers and Maverick hybrid pickups. The affected F‑150 Lightning battery electric vehicles span model years 2022 through 2026, the Mustang Mach‑E cars cover a similar window, and the Maverick pickups are flagged in model years 2025 to 2026. Together, they represent the core of Ford’s push into battery electric and hybrid drivetrains, which makes any safety issue on this scale a strategic headache as well as a technical one.
Owners of the compact Maverick in particular have been trading notes about the recall code and what it means for their daily driving. One enthusiast forum focused on the truck has been dissecting the campaign identified as “25C69,” with posters sharing that the Ford action covers 2025 and 2026 Mavericks and advising each other to use wheel chocks until repairs are complete. When I see owners resorting to old-school blocks of rubber or wood to secure a brand-new hybrid truck, it underlines how jarring it is for drivers to learn that the most basic function of their vehicle, staying still in park, cannot be taken for granted.
Inside the defect: how a tiny bind can cause a big rollaway
At the center of the problem is the integrated park module, or IPM, which controls how the transmission locks the driveline when a driver selects park. Technical descriptions of the defect describe Binding of the IPM pawl against the IPM slider component, a mechanical interference that can keep the slider from moving fully into the park position. In plain language, a small internal part can stick, which means the system might think it has locked the wheels when in fact the driveline is still free to move if gravity or a nudge gives the vehicle a push.
That kind of intermittent failure is particularly insidious because it does not always show up in a predictable way. Drivers may park dozens of times without incident, then suddenly experience a rollaway on a steep driveway or in a crowded parking lot. Engineering summaries warn that if the pawl does not seat correctly, the vehicle can move even though the shifter or on‑screen indicator shows park, increasing the risk of property damage or injury. When I look at the language in the defect reports, it is clear regulators view this as more than a nuisance; it is a fundamental breakdown of the promise that selecting park will immobilize the vehicle.
How Ford plans to fix the rollaway risk
Ford’s remedy hinges on updating the software that controls the integrated park module and, where necessary, replacing hardware that shows signs of binding. Technical write‑ups describe the campaign as a mix of code changes and mechanical inspection, with some owners likely to receive an over‑the‑air update while others will need a dealer visit. One analysis of the campaign notes that in some vehicles “it is just a software update,” a nod to how much of the modern parking function is governed by code rather than a purely mechanical linkage, a point echoed in coverage of how Dec campaigns increasingly rely on digital fixes.
Owners are being told that repairs will be provided at no cost, but that parts and software packages may not be ready immediately. One detailed breakdown of the campaign explains that updated components and programming for the “Ford Recalls 272,000-Plus Vehicles for Rollaway Risk” effort are expected to be available sometime in February, which means some owners will be living with interim precautions for weeks. I see that lag as one of the unavoidable frictions of large recalls in the software era: identifying the bug is only the first step, and validating a fix across multiple model years and configurations can take longer than frustrated drivers might expect.
What regulators and safety filings reveal about the hazard
Federal safety filings describe the rollaway risk in stark terms, warning that a loss of park function can let a vehicle move unexpectedly and “making an accident more likely.” In one summary, Ford Recalls 272,000 U.S. Vehicles Over Park Function Defect are tied directly to this failure mode, with the company acknowledging that the defect can occur without warning. That kind of language is not routine; it reflects a conclusion that the defect materially increases the risk of crashes, not just minor inconveniences.
Regulators have also assigned a specific campaign number to the issue, with documentation pointing to recall code 25C69 for the affected electric and hybrid vehicles. In one detailed account, the recall is described as covering “nearly 273,000 vehicles” with a faulty parking function, and the campaign number is presented as the key identifier owners should look for in official notices. When I read through those filings, what stands out is how much emphasis is placed on the possibility of rollaway even when drivers follow all normal procedures, a scenario that regulators treat as especially serious because it undermines basic driver expectations.
Owner anxiety and real‑world workarounds
For drivers, the recall is not an abstract engineering problem but a daily question of whether their vehicle will stay put where they leave it. On owner forums, some Maverick drivers say they are parking only on level ground or turning their wheels sharply toward curbs to limit the distance a truck could roll. One poster in a Maverick community described planning to call Ford directly to double‑check their vehicle’s status and mentioned throwing a wheel chock in front of the truck “for the time being,” a vivid illustration of how a modern recall can push owners back to analog safety habits.
Elsewhere, enthusiasts and mechanics are parsing the technical language of the defect, with one widely shared explanation focusing on the IPM pawl and slider interaction and debating whether the design leaves too little margin for wear or contamination. I find that owner‑driven analysis telling: it shows a community that is technically literate enough to understand that a parking function in an electric or hybrid vehicle is no longer just a lever and a cable, but a blend of software logic and mechanical parts that can fail in new ways. The anxiety is not just about this recall, it is about whether other unseen modules might harbor similar surprises.
Ford’s broader recall streak and what it signals about EV complexity
This is not the first time in recent years that Ford has had to pull back large numbers of vehicles for safety fixes, and the pattern has raised questions about quality control in the rush to electrify. One analysis of the current campaign notes that the “Ford Recalls Over 270,000 Vehicles That Could Roll Away After Parking” episode comes on top of other recent campaigns involving brake function issues and software glitches. Another breakdown of the current action points out that Ford is recalling over 270,000 electric and hybrid vehicles across the United States while also dealing with separate recalls for brake function issues, a reminder that the company is juggling multiple safety fronts at once.
I see a through‑line here that goes beyond any single defect. As automakers pack more functions into software and rely on modules like the integrated park system to coordinate complex drivetrains, the number of potential failure points multiplies. The fact that one campaign can be described as “Plus Vehicles for Rollaway Risk” while another targets brake behavior underscores how intertwined these systems are. For Ford, the challenge is not only to fix each defect but to convince buyers that its quality processes can keep up with the complexity of modern electric and hybrid platforms.
What owners should do now and how to verify if a vehicle is affected
For anyone driving an F‑150 Lightning, Mustang Mach‑E or Maverick hybrid built in the last few years, the first step is to check whether the vehicle identification number is included in the recall. Ford and regulators are directing owners to online tools where they can enter a VIN and see if their specific vehicle is part of the campaign, a process highlighted in guidance that explains how the rollaway risk affects the company’s latest electric and hybrid models and how to verify VINs on official sites. I would also advise owners to watch for mailed notices that reference recall code 25C69 or language about a park function defect, since those letters will spell out the exact steps for scheduling repairs.
Until repairs are completed, safety experts recommend using the parking brake every time the vehicle is parked, turning wheels toward a curb on slopes and avoiding leaving vehicles unattended on steep grades. Coverage of the campaign aimed at general audiences has stressed that the recall involves “more than 270,000 electric and hybrid vehicles” and that owners should take the risk seriously even if they have not yet experienced any issues. From my perspective, the inconvenience of extra precautions is a small price to pay compared with the potential consequences of a truck or crossover rolling into traffic or down a driveway.
The stakes for Ford’s reputation in the EV transition
Ford has staked a significant part of its future on the success of the F‑150 Lightning, Mustang Mach‑E and Maverick hybrid, positioning them as proof that the company can lead in electrification while preserving the practicality and familiarity of its best‑known nameplates. When those same vehicles are suddenly associated with a risk of rolling away after parking, it cuts against the narrative of seamless progress. One detailed account of the campaign framed it as part of a pattern in which Ford is recalling over 270,000 EVs and hybrids in the United States while also grappling with other safety issues, a storyline that can erode consumer confidence if it persists.
At the same time, I think it is important to recognize that large recalls are becoming a fact of life across the industry as vehicles become more software‑defined. The current campaign, described variously as covering “over 272,000 U.S. Vehicles Over Park Function Defect” and “nearly 273,000 vehicles over rollaway risk,” will not be the last time a major automaker has to admit that a digital control system did not behave as intended. The real test for Ford will be how transparently it communicates with owners, how quickly it rolls out reliable fixes and whether it can demonstrate that lessons from this defect are feeding back into better designs for the next wave of electric and hybrid models.
More from MorningOverview