IllustrationDT*: THE CONTACT STATED THE AIR BAG LIGHT ILLUMINATED INTERMITTENTLY AND A FEW WEEKS LATER, THE PASSENGER AIR BAG LIGHT ILLUMINATED. THE DEALER ATTEMPTED A REPAIR HOWEVER, THE PROBLEM RECURRED.
2005 Ford Focus
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 2005 Ford Focus do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 864.5.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Focus years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
All reported categories
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
740–25K
6725–50K
7350–75K
5175–100K
50100–150K
29150K+
344 reports with mileage · 97 unknown
NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.
What to inspect
Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.
- Electrical System. Review the 113 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Air Bags. Review the 51 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Latches/locks/linkages. Review the 50 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
43 crash reports9 fire reports32 injury reports
Air Bags complaints
51 reportsI WAS HIT ON MY PASSENGER SIDE (T-BONED) BY ANOTHER CAR. NONE OF MY AIRBAGS DEPLOYED (SIDE OR FRONTAL). I WAS HIT HARD ENOUGH THAT THE IMPACT ITSELF KNOCKED ME OUT. THE FRAME OF MY CAR WAS BENT AND IT WAS TOTALLED. *NM
2005 FORD FOCUS AIRBAG SYSTEM INOPERATIVE AT AROUND 23,000 MILES AND 1.5 YEARS OF SERVICE. DEALERSHIP ADVISED WIRING HARNESS SEVERED BY RODENT. NOT COVERED BY FORD WARRANTY REMAINS UNCORRECTED. *NM
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING 25MPH, THE VEHICLE WAS INVOLVED IN A FRONT END COLLISION AND THE AIRBAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. THERE WAS BRAKING UPON IMPACT. THE CONTACT WAS WEARING A SEATBELT AND MINOR INJURIES WERE SUSTAINED. THERE WAS MODERATE DAMAGE TO THE FRONT END OF THE VEHICLE. THE POLICE WERE ON THE SCENE AND A REP…
Read full complaint
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING 25MPH, THE VEHICLE WAS INVOLVED IN A FRONT END COLLISION AND THE AIRBAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. THERE WAS BRAKING UPON IMPACT. THE CONTACT WAS WEARING A SEATBELT AND MINOR INJURIES WERE SUSTAINED. THERE WAS MODERATE DAMAGE TO THE FRONT END OF THE VEHICLE. THE POLICE WERE ON THE SCENE AND A REPORT WAS TAKEN. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT INSPECTED FOR THE AIRBAG FAILURE.
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE TRAVELING 55 MPH OVER A SLIGHT RISE IN THE ROAD, THE DRIVER SIDE CURTAIN AIRBAG DEPLOYED. THERE HAD BEEN NO PRIOR ACCIDENT. THE VEHICLE WAS DRIVEN TO THE DEALERSHIP, WHERE IT WAS DETERMINED THE COLLISION SENSOR HAD BEEN ACTIVATED.
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING 30MPH, THE VEHICLE WAS INVOLVED IN A CRASH AND THE FRONT AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. THE CONTACT'S VEHICLE HIT ANOTHER VEHICLE IN THE SIDE. THE FRONT END OF THE CONTACT'S VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED IN THE ACCIDENT. THE CONTACT SUFFERED MINOR INJURIES ALONG WITH WHIPLASH. THE POLICE WERE AT THE …
Read full complaint
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING 30MPH, THE VEHICLE WAS INVOLVED IN A CRASH AND THE FRONT AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. THE CONTACT'S VEHICLE HIT ANOTHER VEHICLE IN THE SIDE. THE FRONT END OF THE CONTACT'S VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED IN THE ACCIDENT. THE CONTACT SUFFERED MINOR INJURIES ALONG WITH WHIPLASH. THE POLICE WERE AT THE SCENE AND PROVIDED A WRITTEN REPORT. THE INSURANCE COMPANY INSPECTED THE VEHICLE AND DEEMED IT TOTALED. THERE WAS ADDITIONAL PROPERTY DAMAGE TO THE OTHER VEHICLE.
CONSUMER 2005 FOCUS AIR BAGS FAILED DURING FRONTAL COLLISION. *TS ***NAR*** THE CONSUMER STATED HE AND HIS FAMILY WERE INJURED, BUT DID NOT STATE HOW MANY. *JB
FORD FOCUS HAS LESS THAN 7800 MILES ON IT, AND YESTERDAY MORNING AT 5:30 AM WHILE CONSUMER'S HUSBAND WAS DRIVING TO WORK ON SOUTH BOUND ON I-75 AT 75 MPH THE DRIVER'S SIDE AIR BAG DEPLOYED FOR NO APPARENT REASON. *AK THANKFULLY HE WAS NOT INJURED HOWEVER, SINCE HE WAS NEARLY THE ONLY VEHICLE ON THE ROAD AT THE TIME THIS I…
Read full complaint
FORD FOCUS HAS LESS THAN 7800 MILES ON IT, AND YESTERDAY MORNING AT 5:30 AM WHILE CONSUMER'S HUSBAND WAS DRIVING TO WORK ON SOUTH BOUND ON I-75 AT 75 MPH THE DRIVER'S SIDE AIR BAG DEPLOYED FOR NO APPARENT REASON. *AK THANKFULLY HE WAS NOT INJURED HOWEVER, SINCE HE WAS NEARLY THE ONLY VEHICLE ON THE ROAD AT THE TIME THIS IS CAUSE FOR GREAT CONCERN. HE IMMEDIATELY CALLED PAT MILLIKEN FORD WHERE WE LEASED THE VEHICLE AND THEY ASKED HIM TO BRING IT IN THAT EVENING FOR REPAIR. THIS AFTERNOON (1-25-06) WE GET A CALL FROM THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT THAT WE NEED TO FILE AN INSURANCE CLAIM BECUASE THERE IS A SMALL DENT UNDER THE VEHICLE WHICH POSSIBLY HIT THE SENSOR AND CAUSED THE AIRBAG TO DEPLOY. THEY INFORMED US THAT AN ADJUSTER WOULD HAVE TO COME OUT AND LOOK AT IT. THIS HAS TO BE A MANUFACTURING DEFECT. THERE IS NO WAY THAT IF SOMETHING HIT THE SENSOR UNDER THE CAR THE SIDE AIRBAG SHOULD DEPLOY. I HAVE AN 8-MONTH OLD CHILD WHO'S CAR SEAT IS LOCATED BEHIND THE DRIVERS SIDE, I CAN ONLY THANK GOD SHE WAS NOT IN THE VEHICLE AT THE TIME. WHILE YOU PREPARE YOURSELF FOR THE BAGS TO DEPLOY WHEN INVOLVED IN AN ACCIDENT YOU NEVER EXPECT THEM TO DEPLOY WHILE DRIVING DOWN A HIGHWAY. I DON'T KNOW WHERE TO BEGIN FILING A CLAIM BUT I WILL START WITH YOU AND WILL NOT END UNTIL I GET SOME RESULTS. I NEVER WANT TO SEE THIS HAPPEN TO ANYONE ELSE. THANKFULLY THERE WAS NO ONE ELSE ON THE ROAD AT THE TIME, MY HUSBAND COULD HAVE BEEN SERIOUSLY INJURED OR WORSE, CAUSED AN ACCIDENT HIMSELF WHEN THIS INCIDENT OCCURED. PAT MILLIKEN FORD TOLD US THAT THERE HAVE BEEN AT LEAST 3 OTHER FORD FOCUS'S BROUGHT IN FOR THE SAME IDENTICAL REASON. CLEARLY THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG THAT NEEDS TO BE LOOKED INTO FOR THE SAFETY OF EVERYONE WHO OWNS A FORD FOCUS.
I WAS INVOLVED IN A REAR END COLLISION NEAR MY HOME. THE STREET WAS WET, AND WHEN I DETERMINED THAT I WAS NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO STOP, I APPLIED FULL BRAKING. MY VEHICLE DOES HAVE ABS, BUT MY WHEELS FULLY LOCKED. I REAR ENDED A 1994 FULL SIZE CAR AT APPROXIMATELY 25 TO 30 MPH. MY CHIEF COMPLAINT IS THAT THE AIR BAG DID NOT DEPL…
Read full complaint
I WAS INVOLVED IN A REAR END COLLISION NEAR MY HOME. THE STREET WAS WET, AND WHEN I DETERMINED THAT I WAS NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO STOP, I APPLIED FULL BRAKING. MY VEHICLE DOES HAVE ABS, BUT MY WHEELS FULLY LOCKED. I REAR ENDED A 1994 FULL SIZE CAR AT APPROXIMATELY 25 TO 30 MPH. MY CHIEF COMPLAINT IS THAT THE AIR BAG DID NOT DEPLOY, AND THAT THE ABS BRAKING WAS ESSENTIALLY NON-EFFECTIVE. THIS ACCIDENT WAS MY FAULT, HOWEVER, I DID EXPECT THE SAFETY EQUIPMENT ON MY VEHICLE TO WORK. THE VEHICLE IS CURRENTLY BEING INSPECTED FOR REPAIR. *JB
HOOD LATCH WAS NOT ATTACHED PROPERLY TO BODY. CAUSED HOOD TO BRAKE FREE AND FLY UP UPSTRUCKING VISION AND CAUSING A WRECK. NO AIR BAGS DEPLORED AND CRUSE CONTROL STUCK ON. NEW VEHICLE VIN # DID NOT MATCH VEHICLE DESCRIPTION.
Official recalls
105V030000 · Latches/locks/linkages:doors:latch
Feb 1, 2005
CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES WITH FOUR OR FIVE DOORS AND ORIGINALLY SOLD IN OR CURRENTLY REGISTERED IN CONNECTICUT, DELAWARE, ILLINOIS, INDIANA, IOWA, MAINE, MARYLAND, MASSACHUSETTS, MICHIGAN, MINNESOTA, MISSOURI, NEW HAMPSHIRE, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, OHIO, PENNSYLVANIA, RHODE ISLAND, VERMONT, WEST VIRGINIA, WISCONSIN, AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, A BUILD-UP OF CORROSION AT THE PAWL PIVOT AREA OF THE REAR DOOR LATCH CAN CAUSE A BINDING CONDITION OF THE PAWL THAT MAY AFFECT PROPER ENGAGEMENT OF THE PAWL INTO THE CATCH. THE OCCUPANT MAY EXPERIENCE DIFFICULTY OPENING OR CLOSING A REAR DOOR, AND EVENTUALLY THE REAR DOOR MAY NOT LATCH PROPERLY.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IF NOT LATCHED PROPERLY, THE DOOR MAY OPEN WHILE THE VEHICLE IS IN MOTION. IF AN OCCUPANT FELL OUT OF THE VEHICLE, PERSONAL INJURIES COULD OCCUR.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL HAVE A LOWER ROCKER SEAL ADDED TO THE DOOR AND HAVE THE REAR DOOR LATCHES EVALUATED FREE OF CHARGE. A LATCH THAT PASSES THE EVALUATION WILL BE LUBRICATED TO PREVENT FUTURE CORROSION. A LATCH THAT DOES NOT PASS THE EVALUATION WILL BE REPLACED. IN ADDITION, A STICKER WILL BE AFFIXED TO THE REAR DOORS ADVISING THE OWNERS TO USE THE RECOMMENDED LUBRICANT. THE RECALL BEGAN ON MARCH 9, 2005. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-392-3673.
Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗
NHTSA investigations
1AQ10001 · Fleet Vehicle Recall Completion Audit
Opened Nov 18, 2010 · Closed Dec 28, 2015
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Unknown Or Other
On November 18, 2010, NHTSA's Recall Management Division (RMD) opened an audit query (AQ10-001) to investigate recall remedy completion by rental car companies on safety recall campaigns.It was expected to provide the agency an indication of how completely and how quickly rental car fleets perform necessary recall-related remedies on the vehicles owned and then rented/leased for use on the roadways.RMD queried three (3) major motor vehicle manufacturers (Ford, Chrysler, and General Motors) and requested data regarding completion figures for fifteen (15) discreet safety recalls.Analysis of this data demonstrated that rental car recalls completion was neither complete nor consistent.The rental car companies representing the largest market share in the industry were then queried as to their respective policies for the rental, lease, and sale of vehicles with open recalls.The data and responses from the manufacturers and the rental car companies can be found in the document repository by accessing the ?Associated Documents link above.In December 2015, Congress enacted the Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act.One section of the Act prohibits rental car companies from renting, leasing, or selling motor vehicles subject to open safety recalls.With the passage of the FAST Act and its prohibition, there is no continuing need for the agency to investigate rental car recall completions.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The agency reserves the right to open any future investigations, including audits of individual recalls, or groups of recalls, or rental car companies, to examine more closely safety recalls performance and completion issues in this area.