← New search

2006 Toyota Prius

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most Prius years

Owner complaints for the 2006 Toyota Prius are substantially higher than the model-year median of 164.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

1,253 reports with mileage · 186 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.

  • Exterior Lighting. Review the 941 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Electrical System. Review the 152 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 94 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

82 crash reports5 fire reports38 injury reports

Electrical System complaints

152 reports
Clear category filter
55,000 miles · Feb 9, 2010
Electrical SystemService Brakes, Hydraulic

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 35 MPH THE VEHICLE LOST COMPLETE POWER, SHUT OFF AND SHE HAD NO CONTROL OVER THE VEHICLE; HOWEVER, SHE WAS ABLE TO RESTART IT WITHIN FIVE MINUTES. SHE TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER AND WAS TOLD THAT THE VEHICLE NEEDED A NEW BATTERY WHICH SHE PURCHASED AND INST…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 35 MPH THE VEHICLE LOST COMPLETE POWER, SHUT OFF AND SHE HAD NO CONTROL OVER THE VEHICLE; HOWEVER, SHE WAS ABLE TO RESTART IT WITHIN FIVE MINUTES. SHE TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER AND WAS TOLD THAT THE VEHICLE NEEDED A NEW BATTERY WHICH SHE PURCHASED AND INSTALLED. TWO WEEKS LATER, THE FAILURE OCCURRED AGAIN. SHE TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A SECOND DEALER WHO PERFORMED A DIAGNOSTICS TEST WHICH A CODE PRODUCED CITED THAT A BRAKE PROBLEM OCCURRED. SHE CALLED THE MANUFACTURER AND A REPRESENTATIVE STATED THAT THEY WOULD NOTIFY HER. ON 3 OCCASIONS, WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS PARKED, THE LIGHTS WOULD FLASH ON AND OFF THEN THE HORN WOULD HONK FOR ABOUT A MINUTE. THE VEHICLE HAD NOT BEEN REPAIRED TO-DATE. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 57,000. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 55,000.

NHTSA ODI #10307890

30,000 miles · Feb 9, 2010
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

TOYOTA PRIUS EXTERIOR LIGHTS SHUT DOWN. THIS HAPPENS ALL OF THE TIME THE CAR IS DRIVEN. HID HEADLIGHTS TURN OFF WITHOUT THE DRIVER KNOWING AND THEN KEEPS ON DRIVING UNTIL THEY ARE STRUCK OR HIT SOMETHING. OTHER CARS MAY NOT SEE THIS. THIS HAS OCCURRED OVER 5000 TIMES... *TR

NHTSA ODI #10307765

50,000 miles · Feb 7, 2010
Electrical System

I OWN A 2006 PRIUS WITH THE HIGH-INTENSITY-DISCHARGE (HID) LAMP OPTION AND HAVE MADE AN ONLINE REPORT TO YOU PREVIOUSLY WITH NO REPLY. WHEN I ASKED THE LOCAL TOYOTA DEALER THEY SAID THEY HAD NO RECALL OR SAFETY ISSUE BULLETINS REGARDING THE ISSUE. I HAD A FRIEND ASK ANOTHER FRIEND WHO IS A NORTHEAST TOYOTA DEALER IF HE HAD HEARD…

Read full complaint

I OWN A 2006 PRIUS WITH THE HIGH-INTENSITY-DISCHARGE (HID) LAMP OPTION AND HAVE MADE AN ONLINE REPORT TO YOU PREVIOUSLY WITH NO REPLY. WHEN I ASKED THE LOCAL TOYOTA DEALER THEY SAID THEY HAD NO RECALL OR SAFETY ISSUE BULLETINS REGARDING THE ISSUE. I HAD A FRIEND ASK ANOTHER FRIEND WHO IS A NORTHEAST TOYOTA DEALER IF HE HAD HEARD ANYTHING ABOUT THE ISSUE. HE SENT TOYOTA DOCUMENT TITLED "2006 TO 2009 MODEL YEAR TOYOTA HID HEADLIGHT CUSTOMER SUPPORT PROGRAM." LAST WEEK TOYOTA SENT ME THE SAME DOCUMENT. THE DOCUMENT PLACES THE BLAME ON THE HID HEAD LAMPS, RECOMMENDS TURNING THE LIGHTS OFF DURING DAY TIME OPERATION, ETC. I AM HIGHLY SUSPICIOUS OF THEIR DOCUMENT AND BELIEVE THERE IS A MORE SERIOUS AND POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS ELECTRICAL PROBLEM INVOLVING THE HEAD LAMPS, ETC. ON A NUMBER OF OCCASIONS THE LIGHTING SYSTEM SHUT DOWN COMPLETELY (BOTH HEAD LAMPS MIND YOU- NOT ONE) IF THE CAR WAS SHUT-OFF AND AGAIN POWERED UP THE SYSTEM RESTARTED AND THE LIGHTS WOULD COME BACK ON. TOYOTA CLAIMS IT IS A LAMP ISSUE. I DON'T BELIEVE IT AND THINK THERE IS MORE SERIOUS ELECTRICAL PROBLEM. IT HAS HAPPENED TO BOTH MY WIFE AND I AND IN BOTH CASES WE WERE PLACED IN DANGEROUS SITUATIONS ON THE ROAD. WHEN IT HAPPENED TO ME I HEARD A DISTINCT CLICK AND ALL THE LIGHTS WENT OUT. I HAPPENED TO BE ON THE INTERSTATE AND TOOK THE FIRST EXIT WHICH TO MY DISMAY WAS NOT LIT AND I WAS TOTALLY IN THE DARK. I HAD TO OPEN THE DOOR TO SEE THE WHITE LINE MARKING THE EDGE OF THE ROAD AND DRIVE OFF THE SHOULDER. FORTUNATELY THERE WAS NO TRAFFIC TAKING THE SAME EXIT OR THERE COULD HAVE BEEN AN ACCIDENT. A CAR DID TAKE THE SAME EXIT AT ABOUT 65 MPH MINUTES AFTER I GOT OFF THE SHOULDER. I CAN ONLY IMAGINE THE OUTCOME HAD I NOT BEEN ABLE TO QUICKLY FIND THE WHITE LINE MARKING THE SHOULDER. THIS HAS HAPPENED TWICE, AND TOYOTA CLAIMS IT IS HOW THE BULB ACT WHEN THEY ARE AT THE END OF THEIR LIFE. IF IT HAS JUST BEEN ONE OF THE LAMPS AND THE REST OF THE SYSTEM DIDN'T SHUT DOWN THEIR VERSION MIGHT BE BELIEVABLE *TW

NHTSA ODI #10307139

85,000 miles · Jan 11, 2010
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

2006 TOYOTA PRIUS HEADLIGHTS GO OUT RANDOMLY CREATING AN UNSAFE CONDITION WHEN DRIVING AT NIGHT. THE HEADLIGHT(S) WILL COME ON AFTER TURNING OFF THE SWITCH. THIS HAS BEEN A RECURRING PROBLEM SINCE THE VEHICLE WAS ONE YEAR OLD. IN ONE INSTANCE, BOTH HEADLIGHTS WENT OUT WHICH REQUIRED AND EMERGENCY STOP. BOTH HEADLIGHT HAVE BE…

Read full complaint

2006 TOYOTA PRIUS HEADLIGHTS GO OUT RANDOMLY CREATING AN UNSAFE CONDITION WHEN DRIVING AT NIGHT. THE HEADLIGHT(S) WILL COME ON AFTER TURNING OFF THE SWITCH. THIS HAS BEEN A RECURRING PROBLEM SINCE THE VEHICLE WAS ONE YEAR OLD. IN ONE INSTANCE, BOTH HEADLIGHTS WENT OUT WHICH REQUIRED AND EMERGENCY STOP. BOTH HEADLIGHT HAVE BEEN PREVIOUSLY REPLACED UNDER WARRANTY. THE PROBLEM IN NOW OCCURRING MOST TIMES THE VEHICLE IS OPERATED AT NIGHT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10298997

36,410 miles · Dec 10, 2009
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

PASSENGER SIDE HEAD LIGHT GOES OUT RANDOMLY. WHEN THE LIGHTS ARE TURNED OFF AND THEN BACK ON IT WILL WORK FOR "SOME" PERIOD OF TIME, COULD BE SECONDS OR DAYS. CAR HAS BEEN TAKEN TO THE DEALERSHIP MULTIPLE TIMES FOR DIAGNOSTICS AND ALLEGED REPAIRS YET THE PROBLEM CONTINUES. DEALER HAS REPLACED BULBS & REPLACED SOME MODULE WITH…

Read full complaint

PASSENGER SIDE HEAD LIGHT GOES OUT RANDOMLY. WHEN THE LIGHTS ARE TURNED OFF AND THEN BACK ON IT WILL WORK FOR "SOME" PERIOD OF TIME, COULD BE SECONDS OR DAYS. CAR HAS BEEN TAKEN TO THE DEALERSHIP MULTIPLE TIMES FOR DIAGNOSTICS AND ALLEGED REPAIRS YET THE PROBLEM CONTINUES. DEALER HAS REPLACED BULBS & REPLACED SOME MODULE WITHIN THE CIRCUITRY. CONTINUES TO FAIL. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10295211

60,000 miles · Dec 2, 2009
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

ABOUT A YEAR A GO MY PASSENGER SIDE HEADLIGHT STARTED TURNING ON AND OFF RANDOMLY ON MY 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. I TOOK MY CAR TO TOYOTA OF BERKELEY I-80 JUNCTION SERVICE CENTER TO FIX THE PROBLEM. I WAS TOLD THAT TOYOTA WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO DO A FULL DIAGNOSTIC ON MY CAR AT THE COST OF $125 TO SEE WHAT THE PROBLEM WAS BUT SINC…

Read full complaint

ABOUT A YEAR A GO MY PASSENGER SIDE HEADLIGHT STARTED TURNING ON AND OFF RANDOMLY ON MY 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. I TOOK MY CAR TO TOYOTA OF BERKELEY I-80 JUNCTION SERVICE CENTER TO FIX THE PROBLEM. I WAS TOLD THAT TOYOTA WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO DO A FULL DIAGNOSTIC ON MY CAR AT THE COST OF $125 TO SEE WHAT THE PROBLEM WAS BUT SINCE MY LIGHT WAS ON AT THAT TIME THEY DID NOT THINK THEY COULD DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM. MY PASSENGER SIDE HEADLIGHT HAD BEEN RANDOMLY TURNING OFF WHILE I WAS DRIVING AND IN ORDER TO GET MY LIGHT TO TURN BACK ON I WOULD HAVE TO STOP MY CAR, TURN MY LIGHTS OFF, THEN TURN THEM BACK ON, AND OCCASIONALLY THIS WOULD CORRECT THE PROBLEM. RECENTLY MY HEADLIGHT WENT OUT COMPLETELY AND I TOOK MY CAR TO TOYOTA OF DUBLIN SERVICE CENTER TO HAVE ONE OF MY HEADLIGHTS REPLACED. I WAS THEN SHOCKED TO LEARN THAT MY CAR HAD HID LIGHTS THAT COST $400 PER BULB PLUS LABOR TO REPLACE. MY FRONT BUMPER NEEDED TO BE REMOVED IN ORDER TO GET TO THE LIGHTS THEREFORE IT WAS NOT A SIMPLE JOB AND WOULD TAKE A FEW HOURS TO COMPLETE. HEARING THIS APPALLED ME! WHEN I PURCHASED THE CAR AND THE EXTENDED WARRANTY I WAS NEVER TOLD ANYTHING ABOUT REPLACING THE LIGHTS AND HOW MUCH IT WOULD COST. THIS IS A RIDICULOUS CHARGE FOR LIGHTS THAT DO NOT LAST THREE YEARS. I BELIEVE THAT THERE IS MORE WRONG WITH THIS CAR THAN JUST A LIGHT THAT NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. I FEEL THAT THE FAULTY LIGHTS IN THE 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS ARE A SAFETY HAZARD AND NEED TO BE RECALLED. I AM A SINGLE MOTHER WITH TWO YOUNG CHILDREN. I DO NOT FEEL SAFE DRIVING MY CAR WITH MY CHILDREN, NOR DO I FEEL GOOD ABOUT SELLING MY CAR TO AN UNKNOWING BUYER, AND I DO NOT HAVE THE MONEY TO KEEP PAYING REPAIR BILLS IN THE AMOUNT OF $1000 OR MORE TO REPLACE HEADLIGHTS! I AM ASKING FOR AN IMMEDIATE RECALL OF THE 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS SO THIS SAFETY HAZARD CAN BE CORRECTED. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10294264

37,000 miles · Nov 29, 2009
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

ISSUE: 2006 PRIUS WITH HID HEADLIGHTS WORK INTERMITTENTLY 1. EVENTS: NO SPECIFIC EVENTS LEADING UP TO THE EVENT OTHER THAN REGULAR DRIVING AND USAGE OF THE HEADLIGHTS 2. FAILURE: THE PASSENGER-SIDE HEADLIGHT GOES OUT EVERY TIME I DRIVE THE CAR NOW AND REDUCES NIGHT TIME VISIBILITY. 3. CORRECTIVE ACTION: I REPLACED THE LIGHT B…

Read full complaint

ISSUE: 2006 PRIUS WITH HID HEADLIGHTS WORK INTERMITTENTLY 1. EVENTS: NO SPECIFIC EVENTS LEADING UP TO THE EVENT OTHER THAN REGULAR DRIVING AND USAGE OF THE HEADLIGHTS 2. FAILURE: THE PASSENGER-SIDE HEADLIGHT GOES OUT EVERY TIME I DRIVE THE CAR NOW AND REDUCES NIGHT TIME VISIBILITY. 3. CORRECTIVE ACTION: I REPLACED THE LIGHT BULB, BUT THE ISSUE STILL REMAINS THE SAME. FROM RESEARCH ONLINE, IT APPEARS THAT THIS IS A COMMON ISSUE WITH PRIUS MODELS BETWEEN THE YEARS 2004-2007 AND IS LINKED TO DEFECTS IN THE CONTROL UNITS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10293807

1,000 miles · Nov 20, 2009
Electrical SystemTraction Control System

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHEN THE ROADWAYS WERE SLIPPER THE VEHICLE WOULD LOSE TRACTION, AND THE ENGINE WOULD STALL. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER, AND A TECHNICIAN STATED THAT ONLY THE 2010 MODELS HAD A SWITCH THAT WOULD DISENGAGE FOR THE TRACTION CONTROL. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 60,000.…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHEN THE ROADWAYS WERE SLIPPER THE VEHICLE WOULD LOSE TRACTION, AND THE ENGINE WOULD STALL. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER, AND A TECHNICIAN STATED THAT ONLY THE 2010 MODELS HAD A SWITCH THAT WOULD DISENGAGE FOR THE TRACTION CONTROL. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 60,000. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 1,000. UPDATED 12/17/09. *LJ UPDATED 12/21/09

NHTSA ODI #10293014

59,000 miles · Nov 9, 2009
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

I HAVE 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. I BOUGHT THE CAR NEW. WHEN IT WAS ABOUT 2 YEARS OLD, ONE TAILLIGHT WENT OUT. WHEN YOU TAPPED ON THE LIGHT, IT WOULD COME BACK ON. WHEN IT CAME BACK ON IT STAYED ON UNTIL I WAS TRAVELING TO CHICAGO AT NIGHT AND I NOTICED THAT PEOPLE WERE PASSING ME AND POINTING TO THE BACK OF MY CAR. I PULLED OFF TH…

Read full complaint

I HAVE 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. I BOUGHT THE CAR NEW. WHEN IT WAS ABOUT 2 YEARS OLD, ONE TAILLIGHT WENT OUT. WHEN YOU TAPPED ON THE LIGHT, IT WOULD COME BACK ON. WHEN IT CAME BACK ON IT STAYED ON UNTIL I WAS TRAVELING TO CHICAGO AT NIGHT AND I NOTICED THAT PEOPLE WERE PASSING ME AND POINTING TO THE BACK OF MY CAR. I PULLED OFF THE NEXT EXIT, AND BOTH OF MY TAILLIGHTS WERE OUT. MY SON REPLACED BOTH OF THEM WHEN I GOT TO CHICAGO AND THEY HAVE NOT GONE OUT TO DATE. THEN, WHEN THE CAR WAS ABOUT 3 YEARS OLD, SOMEONE TOLD ME THAT I HAD A HEADLIGHT OUT. I REPLACED THE HEADLIGHT. THREE MONTHS LATER. I GOT IN MY CAR ONE EVENING IN TOWN AND DID NOT NOTICE (BECAUSE THE STREET LIGHTS WERE BRIGHT) THAT I HAD NO HEADLIGHTS. I HAVE SINCE FOUND OUT THAT THIS IS A PROBLEM WITH MANY PRIUS AND AVALON MODELS. THIS IS A SERIOUS SAFETY HAZARD. I AM THANKFUL THAT I WAS NOT 2 HOURS OUT OF CHICAGO AT NIGHT THIS TIME! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10291510

40,000 miles · Nov 9, 2009
Electrical System

2006 TOYOTA PRIUS HID HEADLIGHT(S) ARE UNEXPECTEDLY SHUTTING OFF WHILE DRIVING. LIGHTS COME BACK ON WHEN LIGHTS ARE TURNED OFF AND BACK ON OR IF CAR IS TURNED OFF AND BACK ON. THIS PROBLEM HAS BEEN REPORTED OVER 400 TIMES TO NHTSA ALREADY ACCORDING TO THE TOYOTA PRIUS CHAT FORUM. PROBLEM HAS BEEN OCCURRING FOR OVER A YEAR NOW…

Read full complaint

2006 TOYOTA PRIUS HID HEADLIGHT(S) ARE UNEXPECTEDLY SHUTTING OFF WHILE DRIVING. LIGHTS COME BACK ON WHEN LIGHTS ARE TURNED OFF AND BACK ON OR IF CAR IS TURNED OFF AND BACK ON. THIS PROBLEM HAS BEEN REPORTED OVER 400 TIMES TO NHTSA ALREADY ACCORDING TO THE TOYOTA PRIUS CHAT FORUM. PROBLEM HAS BEEN OCCURRING FOR OVER A YEAR NOW. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10291475

Official recalls

6

12V536000 · Engine And Engine Cooling; Hybrid Propulsion System: Inverter

Nov 14, 2012

Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.

Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Hybrid Propulsion System: Inverter

Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.

Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.

Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.

Engine And Engine Cooling

Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.

Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.

Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.

12V537000 · Steering; Steering:gear Box:shaft Sector

Nov 14, 2012

Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.

Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Steering:gear Box:shaft Sector

Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.

Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.

Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.

Steering

Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.

Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.

Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.

10V036000 · Equipment:other:labels

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.

09V388000 · Vehicle Speed Control:accelerator Pedal

Oct 5, 2009

TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2004-2010 PASSENGER VEHICLES. THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL CAN GET STUCK IN THE WIDE OPEN POSITION DUE TO ITS BEING TRAPPED BY AN UNSECURED OR INCOMPATIBLE DRIVER'S FLOOR MAT.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: A STUCK OPEN ACCELERATOR PEDAL MAY RESULT IN VERY HIGH VEHICLE SPEEDS AND MAKE IT DIFFICULT TO STOP THE VEHICLE, WHICH COULD CAUSE A CRASH, SERIOUS INJURY OR DEATH.

Remedy: TOYOTA FILED AN AMENDED DEFECT REPORT ON NOVEMBER 25, 2009, STATING THAT DEALERS WILL MODIFY THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL AND, ON CERTAIN VEHICLES, ALTER THE SHAPE OF THE FLOOR SURFACE UNDER THE PEDAL. THESE CHANGES ADDRESS THE RISK OF PEDAL ENTRAPMENT DUE TO INTERFERENCE WITH THE FLOOR MAT. REDESIGNED ACCELERATOR PEDALS WILL BECOME AVAILABLE BEGINNING IN APRIL 2010 AND DEALERS WILL REPLACE ANY MODIFIED PEDAL WITH THE NEW PEDAL IF DESIRED. ALSO, DEALERS WILL REPLACE ANY GENUINE TOYOTA OR LEXUS ALL-WEATHER FLOOR MATS WITH REDESIGNED ALL-WEATHER MATS, OR REPURCHASE THE PREVIOUS MATS FROM OWNERS WHO DO NOT WANT THE NEW ONES. ADDITIONALLY, SOFTWARE MODIFICATIONS WILL BE INSTALLED ON CAMRY, AVALON AND LEXUS ES 350, IS 350 AND IS 250 MODELS THAT WILL ENSURE THAT THE BRAKE OVERRIDES THE ACCELERATOR IN THE EVENT BOTH BRAKE AND ACCELERATOR PEDALS ARE APPLIED. TOYOTA WILL BEGIN MAILING LETTERS TO OWNERS ON DECEMBER 31, 2009. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331, LEXUS AT 1-800-255-3987.

06V188000 · Steering:electric Power Assist System

May 31, 2006

THE INTERMEDIATE SHAFT AND SLIDING YOKE IN THE ELECTRIC POWER STEERING SYSTEM CAN CRACK WHEN LARGE FORCES ARE APPLIED AND THE CONNECTION MAY SEPARATE OR THE SLEEVE MAY FRACTURE.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: THIS COULD RESULT IN A LOSS OF STEERING CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE.

Remedy: TOYOTA WILL REPLACE THE STEERING INTERMEDIATE SHAFT AND INSPECT THE SLIDING YOKE AND REPLACE IT IF NECESSARY. THE RECALL BEGAN ON JUNE 9, 2006. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331.

06V096000 · Air Bags

Apr 3, 2006

ON CERTAIN VEHICLES, DUE TO IMPROPER ASSEMBLY OF THE AIR BAG INFLATOR, WHICH IS USED IN THE SIDE AIR BAG, THE CURTAIN SHIELD AIR BAG, AND THE KNEE AIR BAG ASSEMBLY, SOME INFLATORS WERE PRODUCED WITH AN INSUFFICIENT AMOUNT OF THE HEATING AGENTS NECESSARY FOR PROPER AIR BAG DEPLOYMENT. IN THIS CONDITION, THE EXPANSION FORCE OF THE GAS MAY BE INSUFFICIENT TO PROPERLY INFLATE THE AIR BAG WHEN THE SRS SYSTEM IS ACTIVATED DURING A CRASH.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: THIS MAY INCREASE THE RISK OF INJURY TO THE OCCUPANT IN THE INVOLVED SEATING POSITION IN THE EVENT OF A CRASH.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE SPECIFIC SRS AIR BAG. THE RECALL BEGAN ON APRIL 6, 2006. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-888-270-9371, SCION AT 1-866-548-1851, 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

3

DP22005 · Pedestrian Alert Sounds

Opened Jan 27, 2023 · Closed Aug 7, 2023

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Electrical System:propulsion System

NHTSA received a petition on or about July 18, 2022, requesting that Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 141 be applied to all electric and hybrid vehicles operating in the United States. The petition can be reviewed at NHTSA.gov under ODI Number 11486072. FMVSS 141 establishes performance requirements for pedestrian alert sounds for motor vehicles. The standard applies to hybrid and electric vehicles that have a gross vehicle weight rating of 4,536 KG or less or are defined as low-speed vehicles. The standard became fully applicable to all such vehicles manufactured on or after March 1, 2021.On January 27, 2023, NHTSA opened Defect Petition (DP) 22-005 to evaluate the subject matter described in the petition. On June 24, 2023 and as supplemented on June 25, 2023, the petitioner notified NHTSA he was withdrawing his petition. The petitioner indicated that, based on his review of data, there is no justification for asserting potential benefits that could be derived from actions sought by my petition. Based on the petitioner's withdrawal, DP22-005 is closed. Closure of this DP does not represent a determination by NHTSA regarding the subject matter of the petition.

DP13001 · Intermediate Steering Shaft Separation

Opened Feb 21, 2013 · Closed Apr 8, 2020

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Steering; Steering:column; Steering:linkages

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, 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. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606

Additional source detail variants (3)

Steering:column

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, 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. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606

Steering:linkages

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, 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. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606

Steering

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, 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. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606

PE09019 · Headlight Failure

Opened Apr 17, 2009 · Closed Aug 27, 2009

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Exterior Lighting; Exterior Lighting:headlights

ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION AFTER RECEIVING REPORTS THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS WOULD GO OUT, OR EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH HIGH INTENSITY DISCHARGE (HID) HEADLAMPS THAT OPERATE ON INDEPENDENT LAMPS AND ECU'S (ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNITS) FOR EACH HEADLIGHT, MEANING THAT EACH HEADLIGHT RUNS INDEPENDENTLY OF THE OTHER, AND A FAILURE IN ONE LAMP OR ECU DOES NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN A FAILURE OF THE OTHER.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, A RANDOM SAMPLE OF FORTY CONSUMERS WAS CONTACTED BY ODI IN A TELEPHONE SURVEY TO VERIFY THEIR EXPERIENCES.THE CONSUMERS STATED IN COMPLAINTS TO TOYOTA THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS FAILED AT THE SAME TIME.ODI DISCOVERED THROUGH TALKING WITH THESE COMPLAINANTS THAT IN FACT ONE HEADLIGHT WOULD BEGIN TO FLICKER AND THEN CUT OFF.THE OTHER HEADLIGHT WOULD STILL BE OPERATIONAL.IN A FEW CASES WHERE NO ACTION WAS TAKEN, SOME COMPLAINANTS STATED THAT AFTER A FEW MONTHS BOTH HEADLAMPS WOULD BEGIN TO FAIL RESULTING IN NO HEADLIGHTS; HOWEVER NONE REPORTED THAT BOTH LAMPS FAILED SIMULTANEOUSLY.COMPLAINANTS ALSO STATED THAT THEY COULD TOGGLE THE HEADLAMP SWITCH ON AND OFF TO TEMPORARILY RESTORE LIGHTING WHEN THIS CONDITION OCCURRED, EVEN IN CASES WERE BOTH HEADLAMPS WERE EXTINGUISHED.THE RESULTS OF THIS SURVEY ARE LARGELY CONSISTENT WITH ODI'S ASSESSMENT OF THE REPORTS AND WARRANTY DATA.TOYOTA SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER THAT, GENERALLY SPEAKING, ONLY ONE LAMP FAILED AT A TIME, AND THAT TOGGLING THE SWITCH RESTORED THE LAMP.TOYOTA REQUESTED A MEETING WITH ODI AND ON AUGUST 6, 2009, PRESENTED THEIR ASSESSMENT OF HEADLAMP FAILURE.TOYOTA CONFIRMED THAT A HEADLAMP COULD EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING DUE TO A BULB FAILURE, AND THAT IT COULD BE TEMPORARILY RESTORED BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH ON AND OFF, AND THAT SIMULTANEOUS FAILURE OF BOTH HEADLAMPS WAS RARE AND UNLIKELY.TOYOTA ALSO BRIEFLY DISCUSSED THEIR INTENTION TO CONDUCT A CUSTOMER SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO ADDRESS CONSUMER DISSATISFACTION WITH HID BULB FAILURES.SINCE THERE IS STILL ONE HEADLIGHT OPERATING WHEN THE OTHER ONE CUTS OFF, THERE IS STILL LIGHTING AVAILABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR FACILITY.THUS, A SAFETY DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Exterior Lighting:headlights

ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION AFTER RECEIVING REPORTS THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS WOULD GO OUT, OR EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH HIGH INTENSITY DISCHARGE (HID) HEADLAMPS THAT OPERATE ON INDEPENDENT LAMPS AND ECU'S (ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNITS) FOR EACH HEADLIGHT, MEANING THAT EACH HEADLIGHT RUNS INDEPENDENTLY OF THE OTHER, AND A FAILURE IN ONE LAMP OR ECU DOES NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN A FAILURE OF THE OTHER.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, A RANDOM SAMPLE OF FORTY CONSUMERS WAS CONTACTED BY ODI IN A TELEPHONE SURVEY TO VERIFY THEIR EXPERIENCES.THE CONSUMERS STATED IN COMPLAINTS TO TOYOTA THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS FAILED AT THE SAME TIME.ODI DISCOVERED THROUGH TALKING WITH THESE COMPLAINANTS THAT IN FACT ONE HEADLIGHT WOULD BEGIN TO FLICKER AND THEN CUT OFF.THE OTHER HEADLIGHT WOULD STILL BE OPERATIONAL.IN A FEW CASES WHERE NO ACTION WAS TAKEN, SOME COMPLAINANTS STATED THAT AFTER A FEW MONTHS BOTH HEADLAMPS WOULD BEGIN TO FAIL RESULTING IN NO HEADLIGHTS; HOWEVER NONE REPORTED THAT BOTH LAMPS FAILED SIMULTANEOUSLY.COMPLAINANTS ALSO STATED THAT THEY COULD TOGGLE THE HEADLAMP SWITCH ON AND OFF TO TEMPORARILY RESTORE LIGHTING WHEN THIS CONDITION OCCURRED, EVEN IN CASES WERE BOTH HEADLAMPS WERE EXTINGUISHED.THE RESULTS OF THIS SURVEY ARE LARGELY CONSISTENT WITH ODI'S ASSESSMENT OF THE REPORTS AND WARRANTY DATA.TOYOTA SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER THAT, GENERALLY SPEAKING, ONLY ONE LAMP FAILED AT A TIME, AND THAT TOGGLING THE SWITCH RESTORED THE LAMP.TOYOTA REQUESTED A MEETING WITH ODI AND ON AUGUST 6, 2009, PRESENTED THEIR ASSESSMENT OF HEADLAMP FAILURE.TOYOTA CONFIRMED THAT A HEADLAMP COULD EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING DUE TO A BULB FAILURE, AND THAT IT COULD BE TEMPORARILY RESTORED BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH ON AND OFF, AND THAT SIMULTANEOUS FAILURE OF BOTH HEADLAMPS WAS RARE AND UNLIKELY.TOYOTA ALSO BRIEFLY DISCUSSED THEIR INTENTION TO CONDUCT A CUSTOMER SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO ADDRESS CONSUMER DISSATISFACTION WITH HID BULB FAILURES.SINCE THERE IS STILL ONE HEADLIGHT OPERATING WHEN THE OTHER ONE CUTS OFF, THERE IS STILL LIGHTING AVAILABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR FACILITY.THUS, A SAFETY DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.

Exterior Lighting

ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION AFTER RECEIVING REPORTS THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS WOULD GO OUT, OR EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH HIGH INTENSITY DISCHARGE (HID) HEADLAMPS THAT OPERATE ON INDEPENDENT LAMPS AND ECU'S (ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNITS) FOR EACH HEADLIGHT, MEANING THAT EACH HEADLIGHT RUNS INDEPENDENTLY OF THE OTHER, AND A FAILURE IN ONE LAMP OR ECU DOES NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN A FAILURE OF THE OTHER.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, A RANDOM SAMPLE OF FORTY CONSUMERS WAS CONTACTED BY ODI IN A TELEPHONE SURVEY TO VERIFY THEIR EXPERIENCES.THE CONSUMERS STATED IN COMPLAINTS TO TOYOTA THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS FAILED AT THE SAME TIME.ODI DISCOVERED THROUGH TALKING WITH THESE COMPLAINANTS THAT IN FACT ONE HEADLIGHT WOULD BEGIN TO FLICKER AND THEN CUT OFF.THE OTHER HEADLIGHT WOULD STILL BE OPERATIONAL.IN A FEW CASES WHERE NO ACTION WAS TAKEN, SOME COMPLAINANTS STATED THAT AFTER A FEW MONTHS BOTH HEADLAMPS WOULD BEGIN TO FAIL RESULTING IN NO HEADLIGHTS; HOWEVER NONE REPORTED THAT BOTH LAMPS FAILED SIMULTANEOUSLY.COMPLAINANTS ALSO STATED THAT THEY COULD TOGGLE THE HEADLAMP SWITCH ON AND OFF TO TEMPORARILY RESTORE LIGHTING WHEN THIS CONDITION OCCURRED, EVEN IN CASES WERE BOTH HEADLAMPS WERE EXTINGUISHED.THE RESULTS OF THIS SURVEY ARE LARGELY CONSISTENT WITH ODI'S ASSESSMENT OF THE REPORTS AND WARRANTY DATA.TOYOTA SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER THAT, GENERALLY SPEAKING, ONLY ONE LAMP FAILED AT A TIME, AND THAT TOGGLING THE SWITCH RESTORED THE LAMP.TOYOTA REQUESTED A MEETING WITH ODI AND ON AUGUST 6, 2009, PRESENTED THEIR ASSESSMENT OF HEADLAMP FAILURE.TOYOTA CONFIRMED THAT A HEADLAMP COULD EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING DUE TO A BULB FAILURE, AND THAT IT COULD BE TEMPORARILY RESTORED BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH ON AND OFF, AND THAT SIMULTANEOUS FAILURE OF BOTH HEADLAMPS WAS RARE AND UNLIKELY.TOYOTA ALSO BRIEFLY DISCUSSED THEIR INTENTION TO CONDUCT A CUSTOMER SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO ADDRESS CONSUMER DISSATISFACTION WITH HID BULB FAILURES.SINCE THERE IS STILL ONE HEADLIGHT OPERATING WHEN THE OTHER ONE CUTS OFF, THERE IS STILL LIGHTING AVAILABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR FACILITY.THUS, A SAFETY DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.