← 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
Mileage unknown · Jul 24, 2015
Electrical System

I WAS DRIVING MY HUSBAND TO WORK WHEN I NOTICED THE INSTRUMENT PANEL WAS COMPLETELY DARK. TRIED TURNING THE CAR OFF AND THEN ON AGAIN WITH NO EFFECT -- PANEL WAS STILL DARK. IT'S PARTICULARLY WORRISOME THAT I HAD NO SPEEDOMETER TO TELL HOW FAST I WAS GOING, NOR WOULD ANY OF THE OTHER INDICATOR LIGHTS COME ON. WHEN I TRIED TO TUR…

Read full complaint

I WAS DRIVING MY HUSBAND TO WORK WHEN I NOTICED THE INSTRUMENT PANEL WAS COMPLETELY DARK. TRIED TURNING THE CAR OFF AND THEN ON AGAIN WITH NO EFFECT -- PANEL WAS STILL DARK. IT'S PARTICULARLY WORRISOME THAT I HAD NO SPEEDOMETER TO TELL HOW FAST I WAS GOING, NOR WOULD ANY OF THE OTHER INDICATOR LIGHTS COME ON. WHEN I TRIED TO TURN THE CAR OFF A SECOND TIME, IT WOULDN'T POWER DOWN, AND I COULDN'T EXTRACT THE KEY. I COULDN'T EVEN LOCK THE CAR SO I COULD LEAVE IT THERE TO SEEK AID. IN DOING RESEARCH, I FOUND THAT THIS IS A KNOWN FAULT WITH THE COMBINATION METER AND TOYOTA KNOWS THIS IS A PROBLEM AND ISSUED A WARRANTY EXTENSION. HOWEVER, THEIR WARRANTY ONLY COVERED CARS CURRENTLY EXPERIENCING THE PROBLEM WHEN THE LETTER WENT OUT AND DURING A SPECIFIED DATE RANGE, IRREGARDLESS OF MILEAGE. THEY WOULD NOT HAVE REPLACED THE PART DURING THE WARRANTY EXTENSION BECAUSE I HAD NOT YET EXPERIENCED THE PROBLEM, AND NOW THEY REFUSE TO REPLACE THE DEFECTIVE PART BECAUSE MY EXPERIENCE HAPPENED 4 MONTHS AFTER THEIR ARBITRARY CUT-OFF DATE. A FAULTY PART IS A FAULTY PART AND SHOULD BE REPLACED WHEN THEY KNOW IT'S A PROBLEM. THIS IS A SERIOUS SAFETY ISSUE THAT SHOULD NOT HAVE A TIME LIMIT. THE CAR IS NOT SAFE TO DRIVE IF YOU DON'T KNOW HOW FAST YOU ARE DRIVING, HOW MUCH GAS YOU HAVE, ETC. AND YOU CAN'T SHUT IT DOWN OR LOCK IT EITHER....UPDATED 08/25/15 *BF UPDATED 12/3/2015 *JS

NHTSA ODI #10743390

106,000 miles · Jul 16, 2015
Electrical System

MY HEADLIGHTS KEEP GOING OFF WHILE DRIVING. I HAVE TO TURN THEM OFF THEN ON AGAIN TO GET THEM TO WORK. SOMETIMES ONE, SOMETIMES BOTH, NOT ALWAYS AT THE SAME MOMENT. YOU KNOW ABOUT THIS! NHTSA: I AM GOING TO HOLD YOU RESPONSIBLE IF I AM INJURED!! ISSUE A RECALL NOW!! NHTSA ACTION NUMBER : PE09019

NHTSA ODI #10734462

177,343 miles · May 9, 2015
Electrical SystemFuel/propulsion SystemUnknown Or Other

PARKED CAR AT NIGHT IN COLORADO IN FEBRUARY, 2015. OUTSIDE TEMPERATURE WAS APPROX 25 DEGREES FARENHEIT. WE ATE DINNER AT A RESTAURANT, CAME OUT AND STARTED THE 2006 PRIUS. INSTRUMENT CLUSTER PANEL SHOWEING THE FUEL GAUGE, ODOMETER, SHIFT POSITION AND SPEEDOMETER FAILED TO COME ON. TURNED CAR OFF AND ON NUMEROUS TIMES - NO IN…

Read full complaint

PARKED CAR AT NIGHT IN COLORADO IN FEBRUARY, 2015. OUTSIDE TEMPERATURE WAS APPROX 25 DEGREES FARENHEIT. WE ATE DINNER AT A RESTAURANT, CAME OUT AND STARTED THE 2006 PRIUS. INSTRUMENT CLUSTER PANEL SHOWEING THE FUEL GAUGE, ODOMETER, SHIFT POSITION AND SPEEDOMETER FAILED TO COME ON. TURNED CAR OFF AND ON NUMEROUS TIMES - NO INSTRUMENT CLUSTER PANEL LIGHTS. THE FOLLOWING MORNING, THE INSTRUMENT CLUSTER PANEL WORKED FINE. THIS HAS HAPPENED OCCASIONALLY SINCE THE FIRST INCIDENT IN FEBRUARY. THIS IS A SAFETY CONCERN; ONE IS UNABLE TO TELL WHICH GEAR THE VEHICLE IS IN, THE SPEED OF THE VEHICLE, OR HOW MUCH FUEL THE VEHICLE HAS. AFTER CONTACTING TOYOTA, THEY TOLD ME THE EXTENDED WARRANTY HAD EXPIRED IN DECEMBER 2014. AS A SAFETY DEFECT, TOYOTA SHOULD STILL BE COVERING A KNOWN PROBLEM.

NHTSA ODI #10715490

Mileage unknown · Mar 25, 2015
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

THE RIGHT HEADLIGHT TURNED OFF WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS IN USE AND NOW THE FOG LIGHTS AREN'T WORKING. SOMETIMES IT WOULD TURN ON AND SOMETIMES IT WOULDN'T WORK AT ALL. YOU JUST DON'T KNOW WHEN IT WILL HAPPEN. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10701534

246,000 miles · Feb 18, 2015
Electrical SystemVehicle Speed Control

COMBINATION METER FAILED LEAVING THE VEHICLE WITHOUT INSTRUMENT CLUSTER INFORMATION. THERE IS A MANUFACTURER WARRANTY EXTENSION WHICH DOES NOT COVER VEHICLES ON THE ROAD OVER 9 YEARS. THIS REPRESENTS A HAZARD TO THE PUBLIC WHICH HAS A DOCUMENTED SOLUTION AND REPLACEMENT COMPONENTS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10684156

93,000 miles · Jan 19, 2015
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

MY 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS HEADLIGHT GOES OFF WHEN DRIVING. IT FLICKERS FIRST AND THEN GOES OFF. SOMETIMES ONE LIGHT GOES OFF AND SOMETIMES BOTH OF THEM. WHEN I TURN THE LIGHT OFF AND TURN IT BACK ON HEADLIGHTS WORK AGAIN. BUT AFTER A WHILE THEY TURN OFF AGAIN. THEY STAY ON STEADY AFTER I DRIVE FOR MORE THAN AN HOUR IN LONG TRIPS AND …

Read full complaint

MY 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS HEADLIGHT GOES OFF WHEN DRIVING. IT FLICKERS FIRST AND THEN GOES OFF. SOMETIMES ONE LIGHT GOES OFF AND SOMETIMES BOTH OF THEM. WHEN I TURN THE LIGHT OFF AND TURN IT BACK ON HEADLIGHTS WORK AGAIN. BUT AFTER A WHILE THEY TURN OFF AGAIN. THEY STAY ON STEADY AFTER I DRIVE FOR MORE THAN AN HOUR IN LONG TRIPS AND AFTER TURNING IT OFF AND THEN ON AGAIN SEVERAL TIMES. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10676509

59,000 miles · Jan 19, 2015
Electrical System

I PURCHASED A NEW 12V BATTERY AT ABOUT 30K MILES. AT ABOUT 59K MILES THE 12V WAS DISCHARGING AT RANDOM TIMES. AT FIRST I THOUGHT IT WAS BECAUSE I WAS LEAVING LIGHTS ON, BUT IT BEGAN HAPPENING MORE FREQUENTLY. I DID SOME RESEARCH AND LEARNED THAT WHEN THE KEY IS IN SMART MODE AND IT IS WITHIN 10 FEET OF THE CAR IT CAN DISCHARGE…

Read full complaint

I PURCHASED A NEW 12V BATTERY AT ABOUT 30K MILES. AT ABOUT 59K MILES THE 12V WAS DISCHARGING AT RANDOM TIMES. AT FIRST I THOUGHT IT WAS BECAUSE I WAS LEAVING LIGHTS ON, BUT IT BEGAN HAPPENING MORE FREQUENTLY. I DID SOME RESEARCH AND LEARNED THAT WHEN THE KEY IS IN SMART MODE AND IT IS WITHIN 10 FEET OF THE CAR IT CAN DISCHARGE THE 12V. I TURNED OFF THE SMART KEY BUT THE 12V DISCHARGED AGAIN A FEW MORE TIMES UNTIL I COULD NO LONGER GET A CHARGE WHEN I JUMPED IT. I HAD IT TOWED TO A LOCAL MECHANIC WHO INSTALLED A NEW 12V AND 2 FUSES ($500!!), BUT THERE WERE 4 OR 5 WARNING LIGHTS THAT COULDN'T BE RESET SO I DROVE IT TO THE TOYOTA DEALER. FOR SOME REASON THE TOYOTA SERVICE REP ASKED IF I HAD ALL THE RECALLS SERVICED. I WAS TOLD I COULD NOT DRIVE THE CAR BECAUSE IT NEEDED A NEW ELECTRONIC CONVERTER UNIT ($5800!!!) AND THERE WAS A REAL DANGER THE CAR WOULD DIE WHILE I WAS DRIVING. HOWEVER, THE MILEAGE IS ONLY 62000! I CALLED ANOTHER SHOP THAT IS HYBRID CERTIFIED AND THEIR EXPERT SAID HE SEES THE ECU GOING AT 100,000 BUT NOT AT LOW MILES. ALL HYBRID OWNERS ARE AWARE OF THE POTENTIAL RISK OF NEEDING TO REPLACE THE HYBRID BATTERY TOWARD THE END OF THE LIFE OF THE VEHICLE, BUT THAT IS NOTHING COMPARED TO THE MAJOR EXPENSE AND POTENTIAL DANGER OF THE ECU FAILING. WHY WAS I NOT TOLD ABOUT THIS? I WONDER WHY TOYOTA'S FIRST QUESTION WAS TO ASK IF I HAD ALL THE SERVICE RECALLS, IS THERE A RECALL COMING ON THE ECU? *TR

NHTSA ODI #10676492

126,000 miles · Sep 22, 2014
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

ON JULY 20,2014, I NOTICED MY PASSENGER SIDE HEADLIGHT IS OUT. I STARTED THE CAR AND PUT THE LIGHT ON, IT CAME ON FINE.. WHILE DRIVING ON HIGH WAY AT NIGHT ALL THE SUDDEN THE LIGHT WENT OUT AGAIN PASSENGER SIDE. I PULLED IT ON THE SIDE AND INSPECT DRIVER SIDE LIGHT WAS WORKING FINE BUT THE PASSENGER SIDE WAS OUT. I TURN THE L…

Read full complaint

ON JULY 20,2014, I NOTICED MY PASSENGER SIDE HEADLIGHT IS OUT. I STARTED THE CAR AND PUT THE LIGHT ON, IT CAME ON FINE.. WHILE DRIVING ON HIGH WAY AT NIGHT ALL THE SUDDEN THE LIGHT WENT OUT AGAIN PASSENGER SIDE. I PULLED IT ON THE SIDE AND INSPECT DRIVER SIDE LIGHT WAS WORKING FINE BUT THE PASSENGER SIDE WAS OUT. I TURN THE LIGHT OFF AND ON AGAIN IT CAME BACK ON. AT THIS TIME I AM SCRATCHING MY HEAD THAT WHAT IS GOING ON. I TAKE MY CAR TO THE MECHANIC HE TELLS ME THE BULB IS FUSE. IT COST ME $300. TO CHANGE THE BULB. AFTER FEW DAYS AFTER THE BULB GOES OUT AGAIN. I TAKE IT BACK TO THE MECHANIC HE CHECKS EVERY THING IS FINE, TELL ME THE BULB WENT OUT AGAIN. SCRATCHING MY HEAD AGAIN "BULB WENT OUT AGAIN AFTER FEW WEEKS" I WENT TO AMAZON AND BOUGHT ANOTHER BULB.. AND IT WENT OUT AGAIN. I WAS PULLED OVER SEPTEMBER 20, 2014 BUY COPS TO FIX MY HEADLIGHT. HEADLIGHT ARE STILL GOING OUT AND I HAVE TO KEEP BUYING THE HEADLIGHT BULB. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10638197

80,000 miles · Sep 2, 2014
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

MY WIFE AND I PURCHASED A USED 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. AFTER ABOUT 6 MONTHS ONE HEADLIGHT WOULD GO OUT. WE COULD CYCLE THE SWITCH AND THE HEADLIGHT WOULD WORK AGAIN. AFTER REPLACING THE BULB WITH A ORIGINAL BULB. BOTH HEADLIGHT HAVE GONE OUT. I TOOK THE VEHICLE TO OUR LOCAL TOYOTA DEALERSHIP. THEY QUOTED A REPAIR OF $3800. I BEGAN LO…

Read full complaint

MY WIFE AND I PURCHASED A USED 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. AFTER ABOUT 6 MONTHS ONE HEADLIGHT WOULD GO OUT. WE COULD CYCLE THE SWITCH AND THE HEADLIGHT WOULD WORK AGAIN. AFTER REPLACING THE BULB WITH A ORIGINAL BULB. BOTH HEADLIGHT HAVE GONE OUT. I TOOK THE VEHICLE TO OUR LOCAL TOYOTA DEALERSHIP. THEY QUOTED A REPAIR OF $3800. I BEGAN LOOKING FOR A LEES EXPENSIVE SHOP TO DO THE REPAIRS, WHEN THE OWNER OF A SHOP[ INFORMED ME THAT TOYOTA HAD SETTLED A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT CONCERNING THE HID ( HIGH INTENSITY DISPLAY) UNITS. THAT SETTLEMENT HAS NOW PASSED THE DATE TO SUBMIT A CLAIM. ALL CLAIMS HAD TO BE SUBMITTED BY MAY 30TH 2011. WE HAD NOT PURCHASED OUR VEHICLE AT THAT TIME. WHY HAS THERE NOT BEEN A RECALL DONE ON THESE VEHICLES? OBVIOUSLY TOYOTA IS AWARE THAT THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH IN THE SYSTEM OR THEY WOULD NOT OF SETTLED THE CLASS ACTION SUIT. WE NOW HAVE A VEHICLE THAT WE PAID $15000 FOR THAT CAN NOT BE DRIVEN AT NIGHT OR WHEN IT IS RAINING OUT, BECAUSE THE FAULTY HEADLIGHT INSTALLED BY THE MANUFACTURE. HOW CAN THE GOVERNMENT ALLOW A MAJOR VEHICLE MANUFACTURE TO ALLOW THESE CARS TO STAY ON THE ROAD, AND RISK SERIOUS INJURY? *TR

NHTSA ODI #10630168

60,000 miles · Aug 20, 2014
Electrical SystemSeatsCrashFireInjury

ON 05/22/2009, MY HUSBAND AND HIS [XXX] HAD A CAR ACCIDENT. MY HUSBAND'S CAR WAS HIT FROM BEHIND WHEN HE WAS DRIVING A TOYOTA PRIUS WITH HIS FRIEND SITTING IN THE FRONT PASSAGE SEAT. THE BACKS OF THE CHAIRS OF THE DRIVER SEAT AND FRONT PASSAGE SEAT WERE MOVE AND BROKEN.THE SEAT BACK SHAFT DAMAGE FAILURE. MY HUSBAND AND HIS FRIEN…

Read full complaint

ON 05/22/2009, MY HUSBAND AND HIS [XXX] HAD A CAR ACCIDENT. MY HUSBAND'S CAR WAS HIT FROM BEHIND WHEN HE WAS DRIVING A TOYOTA PRIUS WITH HIS FRIEND SITTING IN THE FRONT PASSAGE SEAT. THE BACKS OF THE CHAIRS OF THE DRIVER SEAT AND FRONT PASSAGE SEAT WERE MOVE AND BROKEN.THE SEAT BACK SHAFT DAMAGE FAILURE. MY HUSBAND AND HIS FRIEND BOTH GOT HURT, AND MY HUSBAND WAS HOSPITALIZED FOR 6 DAYS. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

NHTSA ODI #10626606

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.