NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Vehicle Speed Control complaints
272 reportsClear category filterMileage unknown · Aug 17, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
I OWNED A TOYOTA CAMRY FOR 2 YEARS AND HAD 2 INCIDENTS WHEN THE ACCELERATOR STUCK CAUSING ME TO LOSE CONTROL OF THE CAR. AFTER THE 1ST INCIDENT I RETURNED THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER AND WAS TOLD NOTHING WAS WRONG WITH VEHICLE. THEN THE TOYOTA RECALLS BEGAN AND I CONTACTED TOYOTA AND WAS TOLD MY VEHICLE WAS NOT PART OF THE RECALL…
Read full complaint
I OWNED A TOYOTA CAMRY FOR 2 YEARS AND HAD 2 INCIDENTS WHEN THE ACCELERATOR STUCK CAUSING ME TO LOSE CONTROL OF THE CAR. AFTER THE 1ST INCIDENT I RETURNED THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER AND WAS TOLD NOTHING WAS WRONG WITH VEHICLE. THEN THE TOYOTA RECALLS BEGAN AND I CONTACTED TOYOTA AND WAS TOLD MY VEHICLE WAS NOT PART OF THE RECALL EVEN THOUGH I WAS HAVING THE SAME PROBLEMS. I REQUESTED MY VEHICLE BE CHECKED AND WAS TOLD I WOULD HAVE TO PAY FOR ALL COSTS. AFTER THE 2ND INCIDENT I AGAIN RETURNED THE VEHICLE WHERE I WAS TOLD THERE WAS NO MECHANICAL OR ELECTRONIC PROBLEMS IT WAS AN ISSUE WITH PEDAL PLACEMENT AND FLOOR MATS. I SOLD THE CAR BACK TO THE DEALER AT A CONSIDERABLE FINANCIAL LOSS. I AM VERY CONCERNED THIS VEHICLE AND OTHERS LIKE IT ARE BACK ON THE ROAD. UPDATED IVOQ 08/24/10 *TR
NHTSA ODI #10349951
64,000 miles · Aug 9, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 30 MPH THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED UP TO 80 MPH THROUGH AN INTERSECTION AND CRASHED INTO A VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED AND THREE PEOPLE INCLUDING THE CONTACT WERE INJURED. THE CONTACT SUFFERED INJURIES TO THE HEAD, NECK, AND SHOULDERS. DURING THE…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 30 MPH THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED UP TO 80 MPH THROUGH AN INTERSECTION AND CRASHED INTO A VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED AND THREE PEOPLE INCLUDING THE CONTACT WERE INJURED. THE CONTACT SUFFERED INJURIES TO THE HEAD, NECK, AND SHOULDERS. DURING THE CRASH THE CONTACT WAS DENIED MEDICAL ATTENTION BECAUSE THE OFFICERS SUSPECTED THE CONTACT WAS UNDER THE INFLUENCE. THE CONTACT COULD NOT PASS THE SOBRIETY TEST BECAUSE THE CONTACT HAD A HEAD INJURY. THE POLICE OFFICERS ARRESTED THE CONTACT. THE CONTACT'S BLOOD WORK DID NOT SHOW ANY SIGNS OF HER BEING UNDER THE INFLUENCE. THE CONTACT WAS UNABLE TO STOP THE VEHICLE WHEN THE BRAKES WERE APPLIED. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE BRAKES WERE MAKING A BUMPING SOUND WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS ACCELERATING. THE CONTACT DID NOT CALL THE MANUFACTURER REGARDING THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 64,000.
NHTSA ODI #10348231
83,000 miles · Aug 5, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
TL* THE CONTACT OWNED A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING DOWN A HILL AT 25 MPH, THE VEHICLE ABNORMALLY ACCELERATED UP TO 60 MPH. THE VEHICLE BEGAN SPINNING. THE CONTACT WAS UNABLE TO STOP THE UNINTENDED ACCELERATION. THE VEHICLE CRASHED INTO A TREE BUT PROCEEDED TO ACCELERATE. THE CONTACT THEN CRASHED INTO ANOTHER VEHICLE. THE …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNED A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING DOWN A HILL AT 25 MPH, THE VEHICLE ABNORMALLY ACCELERATED UP TO 60 MPH. THE VEHICLE BEGAN SPINNING. THE CONTACT WAS UNABLE TO STOP THE UNINTENDED ACCELERATION. THE VEHICLE CRASHED INTO A TREE BUT PROCEEDED TO ACCELERATE. THE CONTACT THEN CRASHED INTO ANOTHER VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED. THE CONTACT SUFFERED UNKNOWN INJURIES.THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A SCRAP YARD. . THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 83,000.
NHTSA ODI #10347405
78,500 miles · Jul 30, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE TRYING TO PARK THE VEHICLE WITH HER FOOT ON THE BRAKE PEDAL, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED. THE VEHICLE CRASHED INTO THE VEHICLE IN FRONT OF HER ROLLED BACKWARDS AND CRASHED INTO THE VEHICLE AGAIN. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THIS WAS THE SECOND TIME THE ACCELERATION F…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE TRYING TO PARK THE VEHICLE WITH HER FOOT ON THE BRAKE PEDAL, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED. THE VEHICLE CRASHED INTO THE VEHICLE IN FRONT OF HER ROLLED BACKWARDS AND CRASHED INTO THE VEHICLE AGAIN. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THIS WAS THE SECOND TIME THE ACCELERATION FAILURE OCCURRED. THERE WERE NO INJURIES. THE FIRST TIME THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO STOP THE VEHICLE FROM ACCELERATING. AFTER THE FIRST INCIDENT TOYOTA TOLD THE CONTACT THAT HER VEHICLE WAS NOT A PART OF THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL RECALL. TOYOTA INSPECTED THE VEHICLE, BUT WOULD NOT RESPOND TO THE CONTACTS CALLS AND EXPLAIN WHAT WAS WRONG WITH THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACT IS UNABLE TO DRIVE THE VEHICLE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 78500. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 79100.
NHTSA ODI #10346289
29,269 miles · Jul 25, 2010
Air BagsVehicle Speed ControlCrash
THE GAS PEDAL RACED TO THE FLOOR BOARD,THE AUTO RACED ACROSS AMEDIAN, WENT UP AN EMBANKMENT A CROSS AHIGHWAY CAME DOWN ON THE OTHER SLOPE, WE HIT A TREE AT AHIGH RATE OF SPEED AND THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. WE ARE LUCKY TO BE ALIVE,THE AUTO WAS A TOTAL LOSS. STATE TROOPER AND AMBULANCE WAS ON SCENE. ALLSTATE IS HANDLING CLAIM.…
Read full complaint
THE GAS PEDAL RACED TO THE FLOOR BOARD,THE AUTO RACED ACROSS AMEDIAN, WENT UP AN EMBANKMENT A CROSS AHIGHWAY CAME DOWN ON THE OTHER SLOPE, WE HIT A TREE AT AHIGH RATE OF SPEED AND THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. WE ARE LUCKY TO BE ALIVE,THE AUTO WAS A TOTAL LOSS. STATE TROOPER AND AMBULANCE WAS ON SCENE. ALLSTATE IS HANDLING CLAIM. JUST THE FACT THAT THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY SHOULD TELL YOU SOMETHING? *TR
NHTSA ODI #10345172
15,935 miles · Jul 21, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING INTO A PARKING SPACE APPROXIMATELY 4 MPH THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED AND CRASHED INTO THE PARKING LOT BARRIER. THE CONTACT SUSTAINED INJURIES TO HER BACK. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER. THE BODY DAMAGED WAS REPAIRED, BUT A DIAGNOSTIC TEST WAS NOT PERFORMED TO DET…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING INTO A PARKING SPACE APPROXIMATELY 4 MPH THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED AND CRASHED INTO THE PARKING LOT BARRIER. THE CONTACT SUSTAINED INJURIES TO HER BACK. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER. THE BODY DAMAGED WAS REPAIRED, BUT A DIAGNOSTIC TEST WAS NOT PERFORMED TO DETERMINE THE CAUSE OF FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 15,935 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 18,740.
NHTSA ODI #10344479
29,000 miles · Jul 16, 2010
Air BagsVehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
WHILE TRAVELING TO ATLANTIC CITY ON 7/6/2010,I BEGAN TO EXIT AT EXIT #7 ON THE GARDEN STATE PKWY., THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL STUCK TO THE FLOOR BOARD, I COULD NOT CONTROL THE AUTO, MY WIFE AND I TRAVELED ACROSS A FIELD , WENT UP AN EMBANKMENT ACROSS THE HIGHWAY WENT DOWN THE OTHER SIDE AND HIT A TREE AT AHIGH RATE OF SPEED BUT THE A…
Read full complaint
WHILE TRAVELING TO ATLANTIC CITY ON 7/6/2010,I BEGAN TO EXIT AT EXIT #7 ON THE GARDEN STATE PKWY., THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL STUCK TO THE FLOOR BOARD, I COULD NOT CONTROL THE AUTO, MY WIFE AND I TRAVELED ACROSS A FIELD , WENT UP AN EMBANKMENT ACROSS THE HIGHWAY WENT DOWN THE OTHER SIDE AND HIT A TREE AT AHIGH RATE OF SPEED BUT THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. CAR WAS A TOTAL LOSS, BUT WE ESCAPED WITH MINOR INJURIES. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10343691
29,618 miles · Jul 6, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
MY NAME IS [XXX] AND I AM AN ATTORNEY PRACTICING IN WHEATON, ILLINOIS (TELEPHONE NUMBER [XXX] ). ON JANUARY 11, 2010 OUR CLIENT, [XXX] , WAS INVOLVED IN A TWO-CAR MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT INVOLVING HER 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. UPON EXITING A CAR WASH, SHE PLACED HER CAR INTO DRIVE (FROM NEUTRAL) AND THE CAR IMMEDIATELY ACCELERATED ALT…
Read full complaint
MY NAME IS [XXX] AND I AM AN ATTORNEY PRACTICING IN WHEATON, ILLINOIS (TELEPHONE NUMBER [XXX] ). ON JANUARY 11, 2010 OUR CLIENT, [XXX] , WAS INVOLVED IN A TWO-CAR MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT INVOLVING HER 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. UPON EXITING A CAR WASH, SHE PLACED HER CAR INTO DRIVE (FROM NEUTRAL) AND THE CAR IMMEDIATELY ACCELERATED ALTHOUGH SHE HAD NOT DEPRESSED THE ACCELERATOR. AS THE CAR BEGAN ACCELERATING OUT OF THE PARKING LOT, SHE TRIED TO BRAKE BUT THE BRAKES WERE NONREPONSIVE. UPON EXITING THE PARKING LOT, HER CAR STRUCK A CAR IN THE ROADWAY. AS A RESULT, SHE SUFFERED A BROKEN LEG. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR
NHTSA ODI #10341645
84,702 miles · Jun 24, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING AT APPROXIMATELY 15 MPH IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA, THE VEHICLE ABNORMALLY ACCELERATED WITHOUT WARNING. THE CONTACT APPLIED THE BRAKES BUT TO NO AVAIL. THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO PICK UP SPEEDS AND JUMPED A CURB, CRASHING INTO THE LIVING ROOM OF A NEARBY HOUSE. HE SUSTAINED INJUR…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING AT APPROXIMATELY 15 MPH IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA, THE VEHICLE ABNORMALLY ACCELERATED WITHOUT WARNING. THE CONTACT APPLIED THE BRAKES BUT TO NO AVAIL. THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO PICK UP SPEEDS AND JUMPED A CURB, CRASHING INTO THE LIVING ROOM OF A NEARBY HOUSE. HE SUSTAINED INJURIES TO HIS BACK, NECK AND KNEES. THE CONTACT STATED HE HAD PREVIOUSLY EXPERIENCED THE FAILURE BUT BELIEVED IT TO BE DRIVER'S ERROR. A POLICE REPORT WAS AVAILABLE. THE CONTACT STATED HIS INSURANCE COMPANY WAS HANDLING THE INVESTIGATION OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 84,702.
NHTSA ODI #10339864
18,693 miles · Jun 21, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
ON MAY 15, 2010, A SUNNY DAY, DRY STREETS AND WARM TEMPERATURE, I HAD COME TO A COMPLETE STOP ABOUT 3 1/2 FEET BEHIND ONE CAR WAITING AT A RED LIGHT AT A VERY BUSY INTERSECTION. WITH MY FOOT SOLIDLY ON THE BRAKE MY TOYOTA CAMRY ENGINE BEGAN TO REV, AND IN JUST SECONDS, THERE WAS A "SUDDEN UNINTENDED ACCELERATION" AND MY 2005 CA…
Read full complaint
ON MAY 15, 2010, A SUNNY DAY, DRY STREETS AND WARM TEMPERATURE, I HAD COME TO A COMPLETE STOP ABOUT 3 1/2 FEET BEHIND ONE CAR WAITING AT A RED LIGHT AT A VERY BUSY INTERSECTION. WITH MY FOOT SOLIDLY ON THE BRAKE MY TOYOTA CAMRY ENGINE BEGAN TO REV, AND IN JUST SECONDS, THERE WAS A "SUDDEN UNINTENDED ACCELERATION" AND MY 2005 CAMRY CRASHED INTO THE CAR AHEAD OF ME WHICH HAD A WRAP AROUND RUBBER STRIP IN THE REAR BUMPER. THE CRASH BOUNCED MY CAR BACK OVER A FOOT AND A HALF. I WENT FROM A TOTAL STOP TO A "RUN AWAY" 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. HAD I BEEN THE FIRST CAR AT THE STOP LIGHT AND MY TOYOTA HAD ACCELERATED INTO THAT BUSY INTERSECTION, THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN A FATALITY. TWO YOUNG MEN WITNESSED THIS ACCIDENT AND CAME RUNNING TO HELP. THERE IS A POLICE REPORT. AND NO CITATIONS WERE ISSUED. I PHONED THE DEALERSHIP AND THE CAR WAS TOWED TO THEM. I WAS WEARING MY SEAT BELT BUT MY NECK WAS SNAPPED. ON JUNE 7, 2010 TOYOTA PHONED TO SAY THIS VEHICLE HAD BEEN INSPECTED AND "THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH IT" AND THAT TOYOTA IS NEITHER LIABLE OR RESPONSIBLE. NO REPAIRS WERE MADE AND THE CAR WAS RETURNED TO ME ON JUNE 9, 2010.. IRONICALLY ABOUT 3 WEEKS PRIOR TO MY "SUDDEN UNINTENDED ACCELERATION" ANOTHER RESIDENT OF OUR INDEPENDENT LIVING RETIREMENT COMMUNITY WITH AN IDENTICAL MODEL TOYOTA HAD THE SAME THING HAPPEN. HER CAR CRASHED INTO THE CEMENT WALL OF THE UNDERGROUND PARKING GARAGE AND THERE WAS EXTENSIVE DAMAGE AND SHE WAS ALSO TOLD THAT THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG WITH HER TOYOTA. I WILL NEVER BE BEHIND THE WHEEL OF THAT CAR AGAIN WHEN IT IS STARTED. IT IS DANGEROUS, AND THE TRAUMA IT HAS CAUSED WILL NOT BE GIVEN A CHANCE TO BE REPEATED. MY CAR IS SHOWROOM QUALITY WITH ONLY 18,000+ MILES. TOYOTA HAS OFFERED NOTHING TO HELP REPLACE THIS VEHICLE. I UNDERSTAND THAT BEGINNING IN 2011 TOYOTA VEHICLES WILL HAVE AN "OVERRIDE BRAKE SYSTEM" WHICH SURELY INDICATES THE COMPANY KNOWS SOMETHING IS SERIOUSLY DEFECTIVE IN THEIR ENGINEERING AND DESIGNING. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10339404
Official recalls
5Jun 2, 2016
Southeast Toyota Distributors, LLC (SET) is recalling certain 2005-2011 4Runner, Highlander, Sequoia, and Sienna, 2005-2010 Avalon and Tundra, 2006-2008 Camry Solara, 2006-2010 Highlander hybrid, 2006-2011 Rav4 and Tacoma, 2007-2010 FJ Cruiser, 2007-2011 Camry hybrid, 2009-2010 Venza, 2010-2012 Prius, 1988-1990 and 2005-2010 Camry, and 1989 and 2009-2010 Corolla vehicles equipped with aftermarket accessory seat heaters with a copper strand heating element. The electrical wiring in the seat heaters may be damaged when the seat cushion is compressed.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: If damaged, the copper strand heating element may short circuit, increasing the risk of a fire.
Remedy: SET will notify owners, and dealers will disconnect the seat heaters, free of charge, and refund the purchase price of the seat heater accessory. The recall began on July 14, 2016. Owners may contact SET customer service at 1-866-405-4226. SET number for this recall is SET16B.
Nov 9, 2011
TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2004 AVALON VEHICLES; 2004 AND 2005 CAMRY, CAMRY SOLARA, HIGHLANDER, AND SIENNA VEHICLES, 2006 HIGHLANDER HYBRID; 2004 AND 2005 LEXUS ES330 AND RX330; AND 2006 LEXUS RX400H VEHICLES MANUFACTURED FROM JUNE 1, 2004 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2005, EQUIPPED WITH THE 1MZ-FE OR 3MZ-FE ENGINE. THE AMOUNT OF ADHESIVE AGENT APPLIED BETWEEN THE OUTER RING AND THE TORSIONAL RUBBER DAMPER (INNER RING) IN THE CRANKSHAFT PULLEY MAY BE INADEQUATE. IF THE ADHESIVE IS INSUFFICIENT, THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT THE OUTER RING MAY BECOME MISALIGNED AND IT MAY NOT PROPERLY ROTATE WITH THE INNER RING, CAUSING NOISE AND/OR ILLUMINATION OF THE BATTERY DISCHARGE INDICATOR LIGHT.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IN SOME CASES, THE BELT FOR THE POWER STEERING PUMP MAY BECOME DETACHED FROM THE PULLEY WHICH COULD RESULT IN A LOSS OF POWER STEERING AND A SUDDEN INCREASE IN STEERING EFFORT, INCREASING THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: TOYOTA WILL NOTIFY OWNERS, AND DEALERS WILL CHECK THE CRANKSHAFT PULLEY TO IDENTIFY WHETHER IT WAS PRODUCED BY THE U.S. SUPPLIER. IF SO, THE DEALER WILL REPLACE THE PULLEY WITH A NEW ONE AT NO CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL IS EXPECTED TO BEGIN DURING EARLY JANUARY 2012. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331.
Feb 3, 2010
GULF STATES TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2005-2010 VEHICLES FOR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 110, "TIRE SELECTION AND RIMS." THESE VEHICLES WERE SOLD BETWEEN SEPTEMBER 1, 2005 AND JUNE 2, 2008 WITHOUT THE REQUISITE LOAD CARRYING CAPACITY MODIFICATION LABELS.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS DOES NOT MEET THE STANDARD REQUIREMENTS.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL MAIL TO CONSUMERS THE CORRECTED LABEL OR THE CUSTOMER WILL HAVE THE OPTION FOR DEALERS TO INSTALL THE LABEL FREE OF CHARGE. DEALERS WILL ALSO CORRECT THE OWNER'S MANUAL. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON MAY 27, 2010. OWNERS MAY CONTACT GULF STATES TOYOTA AT 713-580-3300.
Feb 3, 2010
SOUTHEAST TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2005-2011 PASSENGER VEHICLES FOR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 110, "TIRE SELECTION AND RIMS." THESE VEHICLES WERE SOLD WITHOUT THE REQUISITE LOAD CARRYING CAPACITY MODIFICATION LABELS.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A DRIVER MAY OVERLOAD A VEHICLE WHICH MAY INCREASE THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL MAIL TO CONSUMERS THE CORRECTED LABEL OR THE CUSTOMER WILL HAVE THE OPTION FOR DEALERS TO INSTALL THE LABEL FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON MAY 27, 2010. OWNERS MAY CONTACT SOUTHEAST TOYOTA AT 1-800-301-6859.
Dec 15, 2004
ON CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH A FRONT PASSENGER POWER SEAT, WHEN INSTALLING CERTAIN REAR-FACING INFANT CHILD SEAT BASES ONTO THE SEAT WITH AN EXCESSIVELY HIGH SEATBELT TENSION, IT MAY BE POSSIBLE TO UNSEAT A COMPONENT CALLED THE BUCKLE STATUS SWITCH FROM THE SEAT BELT BUCKLE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IF THE SWITCH BECOMES UNSEATED, THE FRONT PASSENGER OCCUPANT CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM MAY MISTAKE THE REAR-FACING CHILD RESTRAINT FOR AN UNBELTED ADULT OCCUPANT, AND MAY NOT SUPPRESS THE DEPLOYMENT OF THE FRONT PASSENGER AIRBAG.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE FRONT PASSENGER SEATBELT BUCKLE STATUS SWITCH. THIS SAFETY IMPROVEMENT CAMPAIGN (SSC 40M) BEGAN ON DECEMBER 20, 2004. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331 OR LEXUS AT 1-800-255-3987..
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
2DP06003 · Engine Surging
Opened Sep 14, 2006 · Closed Apr 3, 2007
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control; Vehicle Speed Control:accelerator Pedal
THE PETITIONER OWNS A MY 2006 TOYOTA CAMRY WITH A 4-CYLINDER ENGINE THAT WAS PURCHASED NEW IN JANUARY 2006. THE PETITIONER ALSO PREVIOUSLY OWNED A MY 2005 CAMRY. HE ALLEGES THAT BOTH VEHICLES EXHIBITED VEHICLE ENGINE SURGING, WHICH HE DESCRIBED AS A SHORT DURATION (1 TO 2 SECOND) INCREASE IN ENGINE SPEED OCCURRING WHILE THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL IS NOT DEPRESSED. IN AN INITIAL INTERVIEW, THE PETITIONER ESTIMATED THAT 6 TO 8 SURGE INCIDENTS, OF VARYING SEVERITY, OCCURRED IN THE MY 2006 VEHICLE OVER THE COURSE OF 10,000 MILES AND 7 MONTHS OF OWNERSHIP. THE PETITIONER REPORTS THAT THE BRAKE SYSTEM IS EFFECTIVE AT OVERCOMING THE SURGE. HOWEVER, HE IS CONCERNED ABOUT REPORTS FILED WITH NHTSA ALLEGING UNCONTROLLEDSURGING IN MY 2002 TO 2006 CAMRY VEHICLES BRINGING THOSE VEHICLES TO A HIGH RATE OF SPEED (IN SOME CASES, PURPORTEDLY, WITH THE BRAKES APPLIED).AFTER REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF THE AVAILABLE INFORMATION, ODI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED A VEHICLE-BASED DEFECT THAT WOULD HAVE PRODUCED THE ALLEGED ENGINE SURGE IN THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE, NOR WAS IT ABLE TO WITNESS SUCH AN EVENT WHEN ROAD TESTING THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE.EVALUATION OF A SUSPECT THROTTLE ACTUATOR REMOVED FROM THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE DID NOT REVEAL A COMPONENT PROBLEM. WARRANTY AND PARTS SALES OF THE ACTUATOR ARE UNREMARKABLE.THESE DATA DO NOT SUPPORT THE EXISTENCE OF A WIDE-SPREAD DEFECT OR ONGOING CONCERN. THE FAULT DETECTION AND REACTION STRATEGY DESCRIBED IN TOYOTA?S TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS INDICATES THAT A LOSS OF THROTTLE CONTROL DUE TO A COMPONENT OR SYSTEM FAILURE WOULD BE DETECTED WITHIN A ONE SECOND PERIODAFTER WHICH ENGINE POWER WOULD BE LIMITED. THE PETITIONER?S MY 2006 VEHICLE BRAKE SYSTEM OVERCOMES FULL ENGINE POWER AT EASILY ACHIEVABLE BRAKE PEDAL FORCES. BASED ON THE ANALYSIS CONDUCTED, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.CONSEQUENTLY, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.PLEASE SEE THE MARCH 9, 2007 FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE FOR FURTHER DETAILS.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Vehicle Speed Control:accelerator Pedal
THE PETITIONER OWNS A MY 2006 TOYOTA CAMRY WITH A 4-CYLINDER ENGINE THAT WAS PURCHASED NEW IN JANUARY 2006. THE PETITIONER ALSO PREVIOUSLY OWNED A MY 2005 CAMRY. HE ALLEGES THAT BOTH VEHICLES EXHIBITED VEHICLE ENGINE SURGING, WHICH HE DESCRIBED AS A SHORT DURATION (1 TO 2 SECOND) INCREASE IN ENGINE SPEED OCCURRING WHILE THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL IS NOT DEPRESSED. IN AN INITIAL INTERVIEW, THE PETITIONER ESTIMATED THAT 6 TO 8 SURGE INCIDENTS, OF VARYING SEVERITY, OCCURRED IN THE MY 2006 VEHICLE OVER THE COURSE OF 10,000 MILES AND 7 MONTHS OF OWNERSHIP. THE PETITIONER REPORTS THAT THE BRAKE SYSTEM IS EFFECTIVE AT OVERCOMING THE SURGE. HOWEVER, HE IS CONCERNED ABOUT REPORTS FILED WITH NHTSA ALLEGING UNCONTROLLEDSURGING IN MY 2002 TO 2006 CAMRY VEHICLES BRINGING THOSE VEHICLES TO A HIGH RATE OF SPEED (IN SOME CASES, PURPORTEDLY, WITH THE BRAKES APPLIED).AFTER REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF THE AVAILABLE INFORMATION, ODI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED A VEHICLE-BASED DEFECT THAT WOULD HAVE PRODUCED THE ALLEGED ENGINE SURGE IN THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE, NOR WAS IT ABLE TO WITNESS SUCH AN EVENT WHEN ROAD TESTING THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE.EVALUATION OF A SUSPECT THROTTLE ACTUATOR REMOVED FROM THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE DID NOT REVEAL A COMPONENT PROBLEM. WARRANTY AND PARTS SALES OF THE ACTUATOR ARE UNREMARKABLE.THESE DATA DO NOT SUPPORT THE EXISTENCE OF A WIDE-SPREAD DEFECT OR ONGOING CONCERN. THE FAULT DETECTION AND REACTION STRATEGY DESCRIBED IN TOYOTA?S TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS INDICATES THAT A LOSS OF THROTTLE CONTROL DUE TO A COMPONENT OR SYSTEM FAILURE WOULD BE DETECTED WITHIN A ONE SECOND PERIODAFTER WHICH ENGINE POWER WOULD BE LIMITED. THE PETITIONER?S MY 2006 VEHICLE BRAKE SYSTEM OVERCOMES FULL ENGINE POWER AT EASILY ACHIEVABLE BRAKE PEDAL FORCES. BASED ON THE ANALYSIS CONDUCTED, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.CONSEQUENTLY, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.PLEASE SEE THE MARCH 9, 2007 FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE FOR FURTHER DETAILS.
Vehicle Speed Control
THE PETITIONER OWNS A MY 2006 TOYOTA CAMRY WITH A 4-CYLINDER ENGINE THAT WAS PURCHASED NEW IN JANUARY 2006. THE PETITIONER ALSO PREVIOUSLY OWNED A MY 2005 CAMRY. HE ALLEGES THAT BOTH VEHICLES EXHIBITED VEHICLE ENGINE SURGING, WHICH HE DESCRIBED AS A SHORT DURATION (1 TO 2 SECOND) INCREASE IN ENGINE SPEED OCCURRING WHILE THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL IS NOT DEPRESSED. IN AN INITIAL INTERVIEW, THE PETITIONER ESTIMATED THAT 6 TO 8 SURGE INCIDENTS, OF VARYING SEVERITY, OCCURRED IN THE MY 2006 VEHICLE OVER THE COURSE OF 10,000 MILES AND 7 MONTHS OF OWNERSHIP. THE PETITIONER REPORTS THAT THE BRAKE SYSTEM IS EFFECTIVE AT OVERCOMING THE SURGE. HOWEVER, HE IS CONCERNED ABOUT REPORTS FILED WITH NHTSA ALLEGING UNCONTROLLEDSURGING IN MY 2002 TO 2006 CAMRY VEHICLES BRINGING THOSE VEHICLES TO A HIGH RATE OF SPEED (IN SOME CASES, PURPORTEDLY, WITH THE BRAKES APPLIED).AFTER REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF THE AVAILABLE INFORMATION, ODI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED A VEHICLE-BASED DEFECT THAT WOULD HAVE PRODUCED THE ALLEGED ENGINE SURGE IN THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE, NOR WAS IT ABLE TO WITNESS SUCH AN EVENT WHEN ROAD TESTING THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE.EVALUATION OF A SUSPECT THROTTLE ACTUATOR REMOVED FROM THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE DID NOT REVEAL A COMPONENT PROBLEM. WARRANTY AND PARTS SALES OF THE ACTUATOR ARE UNREMARKABLE.THESE DATA DO NOT SUPPORT THE EXISTENCE OF A WIDE-SPREAD DEFECT OR ONGOING CONCERN. THE FAULT DETECTION AND REACTION STRATEGY DESCRIBED IN TOYOTA?S TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS INDICATES THAT A LOSS OF THROTTLE CONTROL DUE TO A COMPONENT OR SYSTEM FAILURE WOULD BE DETECTED WITHIN A ONE SECOND PERIODAFTER WHICH ENGINE POWER WOULD BE LIMITED. THE PETITIONER?S MY 2006 VEHICLE BRAKE SYSTEM OVERCOMES FULL ENGINE POWER AT EASILY ACHIEVABLE BRAKE PEDAL FORCES. BASED ON THE ANALYSIS CONDUCTED, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.CONSEQUENTLY, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.PLEASE SEE THE MARCH 9, 2007 FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE FOR FURTHER DETAILS.
DP05002 · Vehicle Speed Control
Opened Aug 5, 2005 · Closed Jan 5, 2006
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control
IN A LETTER DATED JULY 8, 2005, AND AFTER EXPERIENCING TWO INCIDENTS (AND ONE CRASH) WHERE HE ALLEGES HIS MODEL YEAR (MY) 2002 CAMRY ACCELERATED WITHOUT DRIVER INPUT, MR. JORDAN ZIPRIN PETITIONED THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION?S (NHTSA) OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI) TO COMMENCE A PROCEEDING TO DETERMINE THE EXISTENCE OF A DEFECT WITHIN THE ETC SYSTEM IN MY 2002 TO 2005 TOYOTA AND LEXUS VEHICLES, OR TO REOPEN A PRIOR INVESTIGATION PRELIMINARY EVALUATION (PE) 04-021.IN A LETTER DATED AUGUST 18, 2005, MR. ZIPRIN AMENDED HIS PETITION TO INCLUDE ALLEGATIONS OF INTERRELATED BRAKE AND ACCELERATION PROBLEMS THAT ALLEGEDLY RESULT IN INAPPROPRIATE AND UNCONTROLLABLE VEHICLE ACCELERATIONS.THE 1172 VEHICLE OWNER QUESTIONNAIRE REPORTS CITED BY THE PETITIONER INVOLVE 4 LEXUS AND 15 TOYOTA MODELS DEFINING A POPULATION OF 7 MILLION VEHICLES.THE REPORTS TYPICALLY ALLEGED A DEFECT IN THE BRAKE SYSTEM, THE THROTTLE CONTROL SYSTEM, OR A COMBINATION OF BOTH SYSTEMS.IN ITS REVIEW OF THE REPORTS, ODI A) FAILED TO FIND EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE EXISTENCE OF A BRAKE RELATED DEFECT IN THE CITED MODELS, AND B) DETERMINED THAT MANY CITED PRODUCTS WERE NOT EQUIPPED WITH ETC.ACCORDINGLY, ODI RESTRICTED ITS ANALYSIS TO THE 432 PETITIONER REPORTS INVOLVING MY 2002 TO 2005 CAMRY, SOLARA, AND ES MODELS (ALL EQUIPPED WITH ETC) THAT ALLEGED AN ABNORMAL THROTTLE CONTROL EVENT (SEE THE JANUARY 3, 2006 FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE FOR FURTHER DETAILS).ABOUT 40% OF THE 432 REPORTS INVOLVE A DRIVEABILITY CONCERN WHERE THE OPERATOR INTENTIONALLY APPLIES THE THROTTLE PEDAL, IN EXPECTATION THAT THE VEHICLE WILL ACCELERATE, AND THEN EXPERIENCES A DELAY OR HESITATION IN VEHICLE RESPONSE.THESE REPORTS INVOLVE VEHICLE RESPONSE TO INTENTIONAL DRIVER COMMANDS WHICH ODI CONSIDERS UNRELATED TO THE ALLEGATIONS RAISED BY THE PETITIONER.THEREFORE, THE REPORTS DO NOT PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED.ABOUT 20% OF THE REPORTS INVOLVE INCIDENTS WHERE OPERATORS ALLEGE VEHICLE ACCELERATION WITHOUT DRIVER INPUT AND AN INABILITY OF THE BRAKE SYSTEM TO CONTROL THE VEHICLE WHEN APPLIED.NEITHER THE REPORTS, NOR THE INTERVIEWS CONDUCTED BY ODI, IDENTIFIED ANY VEHICLE-BASED CAUSE TO EXPLAIN THE INCIDENTS OR DISCLOSED EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THAT A FAILURE OF THE BRAKE OR THROTTLE CONTROL SYSTEM HAD OCCURRED.BECAUSE THESE REPORTS DO NOT INDICATE A DISTINCT SAFETY DEFECT FOR INVESTIGATION, THE REPORTS DO NOT PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED BY THE PETITIONERTHE REMAINING REPORTS (~ 40%, SIMILAR TO THE PETITIONER?S AND THOSE OF PE04-021) TYPICALLY DESCRIBE INCIDENTS WHERE A VEHICLE IS BEING MANEUVERED AT SLOW SPEED IN A CLOSE QUARTER SITUATION AT WHICH POINT THE OPERATOR ALLEGES THAT THE VEHICLE ACCELERATES WITHOUT DRIVER INPUT AND CRASHES.IN THE AFTERMATH, OPERATORS ARE UNSURE OF WHETHER THE BRAKES WERE APPLIED OR NOT, SOMETIMES STATING THERE WAS INSUFFICIENT TIME TO USE THE BRAKE; A CRASH OCCURRED AND THE OPERATOR BELIEVES AN UNCOMMANDED ACCELERATION CAUSED IT.IN SPITE OF THE EFFORT EXPENDED DURING PE04-021 AND DURING THIS ANALYSIS, ODI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED ANY VEHICLE-BASED CAUSE TO EXPLAIN THE REPORTS, OR UNCOVERED ANY EVIDENCE TO INDICATE THAT A THROTTLE CONTROL SYSTEM FAILURE OCCURRED.THEREFORE, THE REPORTS HAVE AMBIGUOUS SIGNIFICANCE AND DO NOT CONSTITUTE A BASIS ON WHICH ANY FURTHER INVESTIGATIVE ACTION IS WARRANTED.BASED ON THE ANALYSIS CONDUCTED, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT THE NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.CONSEQUENTLY, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES T
Illustration