← 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

Exterior Lighting complaints

941 reports
Clear category filter
40,000 miles · Oct 29, 2009
Exterior Lighting

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE HEADLIGHTS FAILED WHILE DRIVING. THE HEADLIGHTS WERE REPLACED AT AN EXPENSE OF $300.00. THE REPAIR DID NOT REMEDY THE FAILURE. HE HAD TO HAVE THE COMPONENT REPLACED AGAIN. THE MANUFACTURER STATED THAT THE HEADLIGHTS DID NOT HAVE A RECALL OR WARRANTY. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 40,00…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE HEADLIGHTS FAILED WHILE DRIVING. THE HEADLIGHTS WERE REPLACED AT AN EXPENSE OF $300.00. THE REPAIR DID NOT REMEDY THE FAILURE. HE HAD TO HAVE THE COMPONENT REPLACED AGAIN. THE MANUFACTURER STATED THAT THE HEADLIGHTS DID NOT HAVE A RECALL OR WARRANTY. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 40,000, THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 42,968.

NHTSA ODI #10290228

67,023 miles · Oct 27, 2009
Exterior Lighting

I WAS DRIVING HOME FROM WORK AND IT WAS RAINING AND ONE OF MY HEADLIGHTS WENT OUT. I ALMOST HIT A ROAD RAIL BECAUSE IT WAS REAL DARK AND RAINING. THAT WAS THE FIRST INCIDENT. THE NEXT DAY I WAS DRIVING AND ONE WENT OUT AND THEN THE SECOND ONE WENT OUT TEN MINUTES LATER. I CALLED TOYOTA AND BROUGHT THE CAR IN DURING TH…

Read full complaint

I WAS DRIVING HOME FROM WORK AND IT WAS RAINING AND ONE OF MY HEADLIGHTS WENT OUT. I ALMOST HIT A ROAD RAIL BECAUSE IT WAS REAL DARK AND RAINING. THAT WAS THE FIRST INCIDENT. THE NEXT DAY I WAS DRIVING AND ONE WENT OUT AND THEN THE SECOND ONE WENT OUT TEN MINUTES LATER. I CALLED TOYOTA AND BROUGHT THE CAR IN DURING THE DAYLIGHT. THEY SAID THE HID BULBS GET HOT AND BURN OUT OVER TIME. IT COST ME 281 DOLLARS. A WEEK LATER SAME PROBLEM WITH THE RIGHT LIGHT. HOWEVER THIS TIME I ALMOST KILLED MY WIFE AND I AS A CAR WAS JUST BEGINNING TO PASS ME AND I LOST VISION ON THE RIGHT SIDE. GUYS THIS IS SERIOUS STUFF. I'M AFRAID TO DRIVE THIS CAR AT NIGHT. I AM TAKING IT IN TOMORROW DURING THE DAY TO HAVE THE SECOND LIGHT REPLACED. THE SERVICE REP WAS VERY NONCHALANT WHEN I ASKED ABOUT THE FACT THAT TWO LIGHTS BLEW OUT WITHIN A WEEK, THEY ARE HIDING SOMETHING. YOU COULD TELL BY HIS NON-ACTION. I ASKED HIM IF THIS HAPPENS OFTEN AND HE SAID NO. WELL I HAVE FOUND OUT THAT IS NOT TRUE AND IT HAPPENS OFTEN. DOES SOMEONE HAVE TO BE KILLED TO GET THE GOVERNMENT TO LOOK INTO THIS. I INTEND TO WRITE MY CONGRESSMAN AND SENATOR ABOUT THIS AND SEND THEM INFORMATION I HAVE GATHERED. PLEASE HELP US BEFORE WE GET KILLED IN THIS CAR. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10290054

10,000 miles · Oct 27, 2009
Exterior Lighting

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING THE HEAD-LIGHTS INTERMITTENTLY FAIL. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER MULTIPLE TIMES. DURING THE FIRST INSPECTION THE HEAD-LIGHTS WERE REPLACED. AT THE SECOND INSPECTION, THE TECHNICIAN CONCLUDED THAT A REMEDY WAS NOT AVAILABLE TO REMEDY THE FAILURE. THE CURRENT MILEA…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING THE HEAD-LIGHTS INTERMITTENTLY FAIL. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER MULTIPLE TIMES. DURING THE FIRST INSPECTION THE HEAD-LIGHTS WERE REPLACED. AT THE SECOND INSPECTION, THE TECHNICIAN CONCLUDED THAT A REMEDY WAS NOT AVAILABLE TO REMEDY THE FAILURE. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 10,000. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 74000. THE VEHICLE IDENTIFICATION NUMBER WAS UNAVAILABLE.

NHTSA ODI #10289978

70,000 miles · Oct 26, 2009
Exterior LightingInjury

THE HEADLIGHTS AND TAIL LIGHTS ON MY 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS HAVE BEEN UNEXPECTEDLY SHUT OFF WHILE DRIVING OVER THE PAST 4 MONTHS. IT STARTED WITH THE DRIVERS SIDE ONLY AND THEN MOVED TO BOTH LIGHTS AND NOW I'VE BEEN TOLD MY TAIL LIGHT FLICKERS ALSO. I CAN CORRECT THE PROBLEM TEMPORARILY BY TURNING THE LIGHTS SWITCH OFF AND THEN ON …

Read full complaint

THE HEADLIGHTS AND TAIL LIGHTS ON MY 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS HAVE BEEN UNEXPECTEDLY SHUT OFF WHILE DRIVING OVER THE PAST 4 MONTHS. IT STARTED WITH THE DRIVERS SIDE ONLY AND THEN MOVED TO BOTH LIGHTS AND NOW I'VE BEEN TOLD MY TAIL LIGHT FLICKERS ALSO. I CAN CORRECT THE PROBLEM TEMPORARILY BY TURNING THE LIGHTS SWITCH OFF AND THEN ON AGAIN, BUT IF I MAKE ANY TURNS THEY FAIL AGAIN. THIS PAST SATURDAY NIGHT (10/24/09) AT 10 PM WHILE ON A WINDING COUNTRY ROAD I WAS VEERING RIGHT AT ABOUT 35 MILES PER HOUR WHEN MY LIGHTS SHUT OFF COMPLETELY AND I HEARD A SMACK ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF MY VEHICLE. I FLIPPED MY LIGHTS BACK ON IMMEDIATELY AND STOPPED AT THE SAME TIME. I GOT OUT OF MY VEHICLE AND FOUND A WOMAN STANDING ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. SHE SAID SHE WAS FINE, BUT MY PASSENGER SIDE MIRROR HIT HER ELBOW/ARM. SHE SAID SHE WAS NOT REALLY INJURED AND DIDN'T WANT TO CALL AUTHORITIES OR CONTACT MY INSURANCE COMPANY. SHE ASKED WHY I TURNED MY LIGHTS OFF WHEN I ROUNDED THE CORNER. I TOLD HER I DIDN'T, I HAD A SHORT IN MY LIGHTING SYSTEM. SHE SAID I WON'T PRESS CHARGES, BUT YOU NEED TO GET THOSE LIGHTS FIXED. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10289841

46,453 miles · Oct 25, 2009
Exterior Lighting

WE PURCHASED A NEW 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. IN MARCH OF 2008 BOTH HEADLIGHT BULBS WERE REPLACED BY MAITA TOYOTA IN SACRAMENTO CA, BECAUSE THE HEAD LIGHTS WOULD TURN OFF WITHOUT NOTICE. THE DEALER PAID FOR THE SERVICE, AS THE PARTS WERE NOT COVERED BY WARRANTY, HOWEVER THE NEARLY $1000 REPAIR BILL WAS WHAT PROMPTED ME TO REQUEST THE DE…

Read full complaint

WE PURCHASED A NEW 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. IN MARCH OF 2008 BOTH HEADLIGHT BULBS WERE REPLACED BY MAITA TOYOTA IN SACRAMENTO CA, BECAUSE THE HEAD LIGHTS WOULD TURN OFF WITHOUT NOTICE. THE DEALER PAID FOR THE SERVICE, AS THE PARTS WERE NOT COVERED BY WARRANTY, HOWEVER THE NEARLY $1000 REPAIR BILL WAS WHAT PROMPTED ME TO REQUEST THE DEALER TO PAY FOR THE REPAIR. TODAY I PAID $280 TO MAITA TOYOTA TO REPLACE THE DRIVER SIDE HEADLIGHT BULB AGAIN, THIS IS 18 MONTHS AFTER THE LAST TIME IT WAS REPLACED. TOYOTA CLAIMS THESE HID BULBS WILL LAST 3 TIMES LONGER THAN STANDARD BULBS, YET I'VE HAD 3 REPLACED IN THE PAST 18 MONTHS. I HAVE OLD BULB FROM TODAYS REPAIR. I CONSIDER THIS A SAFETY ISSUE AS IT AFFECTS THE HEADLIGHTS, AND RESULTS IN THE HEADLIGHTS GOING OUT WITHOUT NOTICE. AT NIGHT THIS COULD BE EXTREMELY DANGEROUS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10289706

32,577 miles · Oct 23, 2009
Exterior Lighting

RIGHT HEADLIGHT INTERMITTENTLY INOPERATIVE. TURNING HEADLIGHTS OFF AND BACK ON IS TEMPORARY SOLUTION. TOYOTA DEALER REPLACED BULB, BUT OBVIOUSLY THE BULB IS NOT THE PROBLEM SINCE IT'S NOT BURNED OUT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10289512

70,000 miles · Oct 23, 2009
Exterior Lighting

HID HEADLAMPS SELF-EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING, REQUIRING POWER SWITCH TO BE CYCLED ON AND OFF TO RESTART. THE CONSEQUENCES ARE REDUCED VISIBILITY AND THE POSSIBILITY OF DRIVING WITH NO HEADLIGHTS AT NIGHT. HID HEADLAMPS ARE WELL UNDER THEIR DESIGN LIFE EXPECTANCY AND SHOULD NOT BE FAILING. REPLACEMENT IS EXPENSIVE AND TIME-CONSUMI…

Read full complaint

HID HEADLAMPS SELF-EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING, REQUIRING POWER SWITCH TO BE CYCLED ON AND OFF TO RESTART. THE CONSEQUENCES ARE REDUCED VISIBILITY AND THE POSSIBILITY OF DRIVING WITH NO HEADLIGHTS AT NIGHT. HID HEADLAMPS ARE WELL UNDER THEIR DESIGN LIFE EXPECTANCY AND SHOULD NOT BE FAILING. REPLACEMENT IS EXPENSIVE AND TIME-CONSUMING AND ACCORDING TO OTHER OWNERS, THE FIX IS ONLY TEMPORARY. BEEN PULLED OVER SEVERAL TIMES DUE TO DEFECTIVE HEADLIGHTS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10289479

39,000 miles · Oct 23, 2009
Exterior Lighting

AFTER ABOUT 7 MONTHS, I STARTED HAVING THE PASSENGER FRONT LIGHT OF MY CAR INTERMITTENTLY GO OFF AND ON. IF I RESTARTED THE CAR, IT WOULD GO ON TO BEGIN WITH, AND THEN GO OFF SOMETIME WHILE I WAS DRIVING. WHEN I WOULD TAKE IT IN TO THE SHOP, USUALLY I HAD TO WAIT A WHILE AND THE CAR WOULD BE TURNED OFF AND WHEN THE SERVI…

Read full complaint

AFTER ABOUT 7 MONTHS, I STARTED HAVING THE PASSENGER FRONT LIGHT OF MY CAR INTERMITTENTLY GO OFF AND ON. IF I RESTARTED THE CAR, IT WOULD GO ON TO BEGIN WITH, AND THEN GO OFF SOMETIME WHILE I WAS DRIVING. WHEN I WOULD TAKE IT IN TO THE SHOP, USUALLY I HAD TO WAIT A WHILE AND THE CAR WOULD BE TURNED OFF AND WHEN THE SERVICE AGENT WOULD COME OVER THE LIGHT WOULD BE ON AND THEY COULDN'T DO ANYTHING. AFTER THREE FIX IT TICKETS FROM THE POLICE, THEY FINALLY FIXED IT UNDER WARRANTY. BUT NOT LONG AFTER THEY FIXED IT, THE DRIVERS SIDE STARTED DOING THE SAME THING. I WENT TO THE DEALER AND SAID THAT THERE MUST BE SOME PROBLEM WITH THE LIGHTS AND ASKED IF THIS WAS A KNOWN ISSUE AND THEY SAID NO. THEY SAID THEY WOULDN'T COVER IT UNDER THE EXTENDED WARRANTY. WHEN I GOT HOME I LOOKED ON THE INTERNET AND SAW IT IS A KNOWN ISSUE. I CALLED THEM BACK AND THEY SAID THEY WEREN'T ALLOWED TO TELL ME IT WAS A PROBLEM AND THEY DIDN'T TELL ME THAT I SHOULD CALL THE NATIONAL TOYOTA CUSTOMER CARE. THEN A WEEK LATER I GOT ANOTHER FIX IT TICKET FROM THE POLICE. THE PROBLEM PERSISTS TILL TODAY. I AM VERY NERVOUS AT NIGHT TO DRIVE WITH ONLY ONE HEADLIGHT. THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP IN MARINA DEL REY DID NOTHING . *TR

NHTSA ODI #10289437

Mileage unknown · Oct 22, 2009
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

MY HEADLIGHTS CONTINUE TO FAIL, INCREASING NUMBER OF TIMES, I REPORTED IT WHEN THE CAR WAS UNDER WARRANTY THEY COULD NOT FIX IT. 20 TIMES WHILE DRIVING HOME FROM THE ER WITH MY GRANDCHILD AT NIGHT LAST NIGHT BOTH LIGHTS WENT OUT. HOW IS THIS NOT A RECALLABLE SAFETY ISSUE? THE DEALERS JUST CHARGE YOU TO REPLACE LIGHT BULBS WHICH …

Read full complaint

MY HEADLIGHTS CONTINUE TO FAIL, INCREASING NUMBER OF TIMES, I REPORTED IT WHEN THE CAR WAS UNDER WARRANTY THEY COULD NOT FIX IT. 20 TIMES WHILE DRIVING HOME FROM THE ER WITH MY GRANDCHILD AT NIGHT LAST NIGHT BOTH LIGHTS WENT OUT. HOW IS THIS NOT A RECALLABLE SAFETY ISSUE? THE DEALERS JUST CHARGE YOU TO REPLACE LIGHT BULBS WHICH DOES NOT SOLVE THE PROBLEM, SO THEN IT IS NOT LISTED AS A COMPLAINT TO THEM. THIS PROBLEM IS GETTING WORST. ARE YOU TELLING POLICE IN MY AREA NOT TO STOP PRIUSES BECAUSE IT IS NOT A SAFETY ISSUE WHEN THEY SEE US DRIVING WITHOUT A LIGHT OR NO HEADLIGHTS. CAN I SEND THIS COMPLAINT TO ANYONE ELSE ABOVE YOUR AGENCY? YOUR FORM DOES NOT ACCEPT MY VIN NUMBER . *TR

NHTSA ODI #10289419

Mileage unknown · Oct 20, 2009
Exterior Lighting

I AM VERY DISAPPOINTED IN YOUR DECISION NOT TO RECALL THE TOYOTA PRIUS HEADLIGHT PROBLEM. TO START WITH BOTH LIGHTS ON MY VEHICLE GO OUT AND ALSO ONE LIGHT GOES OUT JUST DRIVING FOR NO REASON. I HAVE TAKEN IT TO THE DEALER AND THEY CHANGED THE HEADLIGHT WHICH DID NOT FIX THE PROBLEM , SO I TOOK IT TO ANOTHER DEALER WHO SAID IT…

Read full complaint

I AM VERY DISAPPOINTED IN YOUR DECISION NOT TO RECALL THE TOYOTA PRIUS HEADLIGHT PROBLEM. TO START WITH BOTH LIGHTS ON MY VEHICLE GO OUT AND ALSO ONE LIGHT GOES OUT JUST DRIVING FOR NO REASON. I HAVE TAKEN IT TO THE DEALER AND THEY CHANGED THE HEADLIGHT WHICH DID NOT FIX THE PROBLEM , SO I TOOK IT TO ANOTHER DEALER WHO SAID IT UNFIX-ABLE EVEN THOUGH MY CAR WAS UNDER WARRANTY. SO BASICALLY YOU HAVE GIVEN THEM PERMISSION TO HAVE A CAR THAT LIGHTS DO NOT REMAIN ON AND CANNOT BE FIXED. THIS HAS BEEN AN ONGOING PROBLEM SINCE I GOT THE CAR. HAS TOYOTA PAID OFF SOMEONE? THERE ARE OTHER SAFETY ISSUES ALSO IN THE DESIGN OF THIS CAR AND TOYOTA HAS NO MOTIVATION TO FIX THEM BECAUSE THEY ARE ALLOWED TO LIE ABOUT GAS MILEAGE, NOT TELL YOU ABOUT IF YOU HAVE A KEY BREAK THAT YOUR CAR HAS TO BE SPECIAL TOWED, SO IF YOUR PARKED WHERE A FLATBED CANNOT GET YOU YOUR IN TROUBLE. ALSO ALL THEY HAD TO DO WAS KEEP THE CODE ON FILE LIKE WITH REGULAR KEYS BUT THEY REFUSE TO KEEP THE CODE OR EVEN GIVE IT TO THE OWNER SO A KEY CAN BE MADE. THUS IT COST A THOUSAND DOLLARS TO GET A NEW KEY. THE DATE OF THE HEADLIGHT PROBLEM IS ONGOING ABOUT ONCE A WEEK LATELY. RECENT TIME IS NOTED BELOW. I ENTERED VIN IT WOULD NOT TAKE IT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10289179

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.