NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Service Brakes, Electric complaints
45 reportsClear category filter33,000 miles · Jul 9, 2011
Service Brakes, Electric
WHEN BRAKING QUICKLY USUALLY ON ROUGH SURFACES, WET ROADS, SLOPES BRAKES TEMPORARILY FAIL AS IF NO CONTROL OVER THE CAR GIVING ME AN ADRENALINE RUSH. I HAVE BEEN DRIVING LIKE THIS FOR 4 YEARS THINKING IS THE CHARACTERISTIC OF PRIUS. JUNE 30TH 2011, I STEERED INTO THE PARKING LOT AND WAS PARKING ON THE FIRST SPOT AT THE RIGHT IM…
Read full complaint
WHEN BRAKING QUICKLY USUALLY ON ROUGH SURFACES, WET ROADS, SLOPES BRAKES TEMPORARILY FAIL AS IF NO CONTROL OVER THE CAR GIVING ME AN ADRENALINE RUSH. I HAVE BEEN DRIVING LIKE THIS FOR 4 YEARS THINKING IS THE CHARACTERISTIC OF PRIUS. JUNE 30TH 2011, I STEERED INTO THE PARKING LOT AND WAS PARKING ON THE FIRST SPOT AT THE RIGHT IMMEDIATELY AFTER ENTRY TO PARKING LOT AT THE SPEED OF 5 MPH. APPROXIMATELY HALF WAY TO CURB I WITHDREW MY FOOT OFF THE GAS PEDAL AND PUT ON THE BRAKES SLOWLY. I WAS EXPECTING THE CAR TO HALT PRIOR TO THE CURB LINE AS USUAL. BUT IT DID NOT STOP ON THE CONTRARY IT ACCELERATED AND WENT OVER THE CURB AND RIGHT ON THE FENCE. THE FENCE WAS APPROXIMATELY 2 FEET FROM CURB; BEFORE IT WENT ON FENCE I LOOKED AT MY FEET AND MADE SURE IT WAS ON THE BRAKES AS COULD NOT BELIEVE WHAT WAS HAPPENING TO THE CAR AND YES I AM 100% SURE IT WAS ON BRAKES. I ALSO APPLIED PARKING BRAKES AND PUT CAR IN NEUTRAL AND SHUT OFF THE POWER, WHEN IT STOPPED OVER THE FENCE. I HAVE REPORTED THIS TO DEALER AS THE CAR HAD BEEN SERVICED 4 WEEKS PRIOR TO THIS INCIDENT AT 32,431 MILES. THE DEALER DID HEALTH CHECK SCAN TWICE TAKING 6 HOURS FOR EACH SCAN. AFTER FIRST SCAN I WAS TOLD THE CAR HAD FRONT SPEED SENSORS CODES AND A LOW OR ABNORMAL HIGH BATTERY VOLTAGE. AND ADVISED TO DETECT SENSORS IN DETAILS AND REPLACE THEM AT NEXT APPOINTMENT. SECOND DAY AFTER THE MANAGER DID ANOTHER HEALTH CHECK FOR 6 HOURS, I DON'T KNOW WHY ANOTHER SCAN; AND REPORTED CODES FOR LOW BATTERY AND SPEED SENSORS AND ECU. NONE HAVE POTENTIAL TO CAUSE CUSTOMER CONCERN. THEY FINALLY BLAMED THE FLOOR MAT WHICH WAS DEFINITELY NOT THE PROBLEM. SURPRISINGLY WHEN I ASKED HOW DID THEY TAKE CARE OF THE CODES? IF SENSORS NEED TO BE REPLACED, THEY TOLD ME THE CODES ARE GONE NOW. THERE WERE NO DETAILS PROVIDED INSPITE OF ME ASKING SEVERAL TIMES WHY THE CAR MOVES AFTER APPLYING BRAKES. BEING A DOCTOR I AM CONCERNED WITH SAFETY AND PREVENTION MORE THAN ANYTHING. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10411580
66,000 miles · Oct 19, 2010
Service Brakes, ElectricCrash
FOR THE SECOND TIME IN THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS, THE BRAKING SYSTEM ON MY 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS COMPLETELY FAILED TO FUNCTION, DESPITE THE PEDAL BEING FULLY ENGAGED, AND I ROLLED INTO THE CAR AHEAD OF ME AT LOW SPEED. THE FIRST INCIDENT TOOK PLACE IN STOP AND GO TRAFFIC ON THE FREEWAY, THE SECOND WHILE APPROACHING AN INTERSECTION, AG…
Read full complaint
FOR THE SECOND TIME IN THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS, THE BRAKING SYSTEM ON MY 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS COMPLETELY FAILED TO FUNCTION, DESPITE THE PEDAL BEING FULLY ENGAGED, AND I ROLLED INTO THE CAR AHEAD OF ME AT LOW SPEED. THE FIRST INCIDENT TOOK PLACE IN STOP AND GO TRAFFIC ON THE FREEWAY, THE SECOND WHILE APPROACHING AN INTERSECTION, AGAIN, IN HEAVY TRAFFIC. ON BOTH OCCASIONS MY FRONT BUMPER WAS SERIOUSLY MANGLED - COSTING ME SEVERAL THOUSAND DOLLARS TO REPAIR AND INCREASING MY INSURANCE RATES CONSIDERABLY - WHILE THE OTHER VEHICLE SUFFERED LITTLE TO NO DAMAGE. MY NECK IS EXTREMELY STIFF AND I NO LONGER FEEL SAFE DRIVING MY CAR. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10361230
30,921 miles · Sep 22, 2010
Service Brakes, ElectricCrash
IN NOVEMBER OF 2007, I WAS DRIVING MY WIFE'S 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS TO TAKE THE FAMILY TO LUNCH. I APPROACHED THE INTERSECTION, I WAS ON THE CEL PHONE, AND THE BRAKES FAILED TO WORK AND I CRASHED INTO A TRUCK WHO WAS OUT IN THE INTERSECTION, CAUSING DAMAGE TO THE FRONT END OF THE PRIUS. MY WIFE HAD BEEN COMPLAINING FOR MONTHS THAT …
Read full complaint
IN NOVEMBER OF 2007, I WAS DRIVING MY WIFE'S 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS TO TAKE THE FAMILY TO LUNCH. I APPROACHED THE INTERSECTION, I WAS ON THE CEL PHONE, AND THE BRAKES FAILED TO WORK AND I CRASHED INTO A TRUCK WHO WAS OUT IN THE INTERSECTION, CAUSING DAMAGE TO THE FRONT END OF THE PRIUS. MY WIFE HAD BEEN COMPLAINING FOR MONTHS THAT THE PRIUS HAD BRAKE FAILURE INCIDENTS ONCE A MONTH. I WOULD TEST DRIVE THE CAR, AND COULD NOT GET THE BRAKES TO FAIL. THAT IS UNTIL THE INCIDENT MENTIONED ABOVE HAPPENED. I IMMEDIATELY DROVE THE CAR TO THE TOYOTA DEALER. I INFORMED THEM THAT THE BRAKES FAILED. I INFORMED THEM THAT THEY WOULD NEED TO DRIVE THE CAR EVERY DAY FOR A MONTH BEFORE THEY COULD GET THE BRAKES TO FAIL. THEY KEPT THE CAR FOR A MONTH, BUT DID NOT TEST IT AS I RECOMMENDED......AND INFORMED ME THAT THEY COULD NOT SEE ANY PROBLEM, FORCING ME TO PAY OUT OF POCKET FOR THE DAMAGES TO THE CAR $1,566.57....AS WELL AS FOR THE $1,440.38 RENTAL CAR BILL. I IMMEDIATELY PICKED UP THE CAR AND DROVE IT TO ANOTHER MANUFACTURERS DEALERSHIP AND TRADED IT IN ON HONDA ACCORD. THERE WAS NO WAY I WAS GOING TO RISK MY FAMILIES LIVES, DRIVING THAT CAR ANOTHER DAY. STATE FARM CLAIM NUMBER #[XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR
NHTSA ODI #10356903
Mileage unknown · May 25, 2010
Electronic Stability Control (esc)Service Brakes, ElectricTraction Control System
WHEN I GO OVER A BUMP OR UNEVEN SURFACE OR GRATE OR SLIPPERY SURFACE WHILE BRAKING IN MY 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS, THE ABS (ANTILOCK BRAKE SYSTEM) AND/OR VEHICLE STABILITY CONTROL/TRACTION CONTROL ACTIVATES. THE PROBLEM IS THAT WHEN THESE SYSTEMS DO SO, IT FEELS LIKE I LOSE ALL BRAKING POWER AND IT SEEMS AS THOUGH THE CAR ACCELERATES.…
Read full complaint
WHEN I GO OVER A BUMP OR UNEVEN SURFACE OR GRATE OR SLIPPERY SURFACE WHILE BRAKING IN MY 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS, THE ABS (ANTILOCK BRAKE SYSTEM) AND/OR VEHICLE STABILITY CONTROL/TRACTION CONTROL ACTIVATES. THE PROBLEM IS THAT WHEN THESE SYSTEMS DO SO, IT FEELS LIKE I LOSE ALL BRAKING POWER AND IT SEEMS AS THOUGH THE CAR ACCELERATES. IT IS MOST APPARENT WHEN IT IS WET OUT, BUT I'VE HAD THIS HAPPEN EVEN IN DRY CONDITIONS. TOYOTA DEALERSHIP SAYS THAT THIS IS NORMAL OPERATION FOR THE ABS, BUT THEY SEEM TO BE CORRECTING THIS SAME PROBLEM FOR 2010 PRIUSES THROUGH A SOFTWARE CHANGE--BUT NOT ANY OTHER YEAR MODELS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10332248
Mileage unknown · May 22, 2010
Service Brakes, Electric
WHENEVER THE BRAKES ARE BEING APPLIED AT THE TIME I GO OVER RAILROAD TRACKS OR ROUGH ROAD SUCH AS POTHOLES, THE BRAKES FEELS LIKE THEY DISENGAGE FOR A SHORT TIME ON MY 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS (PURCHASED NEW IN 2006). SOMETIMES THE ANTI-LOCK BRAKE LIGHT COMES ON MOMENTARILY BUT NOT ALWAYS. THIS HAS BEEN OCCURRING SINCE I BOUGHT THE CA…
Read full complaint
WHENEVER THE BRAKES ARE BEING APPLIED AT THE TIME I GO OVER RAILROAD TRACKS OR ROUGH ROAD SUCH AS POTHOLES, THE BRAKES FEELS LIKE THEY DISENGAGE FOR A SHORT TIME ON MY 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS (PURCHASED NEW IN 2006). SOMETIMES THE ANTI-LOCK BRAKE LIGHT COMES ON MOMENTARILY BUT NOT ALWAYS. THIS HAS BEEN OCCURRING SINCE I BOUGHT THE CAR IN 2006. I REPORTED IT TO MY TOYOTA CAR DEALER'S SERVICE DEPARTMENT AND WAS TOLD "THE ANTI-LOCK BRAKES ARE SUPPOSED TO DO THAT." NOT IN ANY OF MY OTHER CARS THAT HAVE ANTI LOCK BRAKES. TOO BAD TOYOTA JUST CANT TELL THE TRUTH EVER. THIS IS ABNORMAL BRAKING BEHAVIOR. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10331689
500 miles · May 16, 2010
Service Brakes, ElectricTraction Control System
WHENEVER BRAKE IS BEING APPLIED AT THE TIME I GO OVER RAILROAD TRACKS OR ROUGH ROAD SUCH AS POTHOLES, THE ANTI-LOCK BRAKE LIGHT COMES ON AND IT FEELS LIKE THE BRAKES DISENGAGE FOR A SHORT TIME ON MY 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS PURCHASED NEW IN 2006.. MY HUSBAND'S SUBURU FORESTER DOES NOT GIVE THIS UNSETTLING FEELING, AS IF LOSING CONTROL…
Read full complaint
WHENEVER BRAKE IS BEING APPLIED AT THE TIME I GO OVER RAILROAD TRACKS OR ROUGH ROAD SUCH AS POTHOLES, THE ANTI-LOCK BRAKE LIGHT COMES ON AND IT FEELS LIKE THE BRAKES DISENGAGE FOR A SHORT TIME ON MY 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS PURCHASED NEW IN 2006.. MY HUSBAND'S SUBURU FORESTER DOES NOT GIVE THIS UNSETTLING FEELING, AS IF LOSING CONTROL, WHEN IN ANTI-LOCK BRAKING MODE. THIS HAS BEEN OCCURRING SINCE I BOUGHT THE CAR, ON AN OCCASIONAL BASIS. I REPORTED IT TO MY TOYOTA CAR DEALER'S SERVICE DEPARTMENT BEFORE MY WARRANTY WAS UP AND WAS TOLD "THE ANTI-LOCK BRAKES ARE SUPPOSED TO DO THAT." I SUSPECT IT MAY BE RELATED TO THE REGENERATION OF THE ELECTRIC BATTERY WHILE BRAKING SINCE THIS IS A DIFFERENCE FROM OTHER VEHICLES. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10330718
28,432 miles · May 11, 2010
Service Brakes, ElectricCrash
2006 TOYOTA PRIUS BRAKE FAILURE WHEN EXITING FREEWAY (101) ONTO OFF RAMP AT RENGSDORFF AVE., IN MOUNTAIN VIEW. ROADWAY WAS SLIGHTLY MOIST FROM LIGHT MORNING DRIZZLE AND ACCUMULATED OILS ON ROAD BUT OTHERWISE NOTHING UNUSUAL ABOUT ROAD CONDITIONS... EXITED FREEWAY AT APPROXIMATELY 30-35 MPH AND APPLIED BRAKES BUT BRAKES DID NOT E…
Read full complaint
2006 TOYOTA PRIUS BRAKE FAILURE WHEN EXITING FREEWAY (101) ONTO OFF RAMP AT RENGSDORFF AVE., IN MOUNTAIN VIEW. ROADWAY WAS SLIGHTLY MOIST FROM LIGHT MORNING DRIZZLE AND ACCUMULATED OILS ON ROAD BUT OTHERWISE NOTHING UNUSUAL ABOUT ROAD CONDITIONS... EXITED FREEWAY AT APPROXIMATELY 30-35 MPH AND APPLIED BRAKES BUT BRAKES DID NOT ENGAGE AND CAR SKIDDED OFF THE OFF RAMP INTO A SWALE... CAR BECAME STUCK IN SWALE AND SUFFERED BODY DAMAGE TO LEFT SIDE OF CAR...A TOW TRUCK HAD TO BE CALLED TO DRAG IT OUT OF THE SWALE...THE BRAKE PROBLEM WAS REPORTED TO DEALER WHO DID NOT ACKNOWLEDGE THE PROBLEM AND STONEWALLED ME...ALSO REPORTED BRAKE PROBLEM TO TOYOTA CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS (CARLOS A. GARCIA) IN TORRANCE, CA AND HE WOULD NOT ACKNOWLEDGE THE EXISTENCE OF A BRAKE PROBLEM IN THE 2006 PRIUS. TOTAL COST OF REPAIR, RENTAL CAR, TOWING , ETC. WAS APPROXIMATELY $5,400.00. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10329828
78,500 miles · Mar 11, 2010
Service Brakes, Electric
BRAKES FAILED TEMPORARILY AND MOMENTARILY WHEN BRAKING OVER POTHOLES WHILE APPROACHING AN INTERSTATE ON-RAMP. THIS IS NOT AT ALL THE FIRST TIME THIS HAPPENED. WHEN BRAKING WHILE GOING OVER RAILROAD TRACKS, ESPECIALLY DOUBLE SETS OF TRACKS, IT HAS BEEN COMMON THAT IT WOULD FEEL AS IF I WAS SAILING OVER THE TRACKS -- DEFINITELY …
Read full complaint
BRAKES FAILED TEMPORARILY AND MOMENTARILY WHEN BRAKING OVER POTHOLES WHILE APPROACHING AN INTERSTATE ON-RAMP. THIS IS NOT AT ALL THE FIRST TIME THIS HAPPENED. WHEN BRAKING WHILE GOING OVER RAILROAD TRACKS, ESPECIALLY DOUBLE SETS OF TRACKS, IT HAS BEEN COMMON THAT IT WOULD FEEL AS IF I WAS SAILING OVER THE TRACKS -- DEFINITELY NOT SLOWING DOWN (EVEN THOUGH I HAD MY FOOT ON THE BRAKES) BUT MAYBE EVEN SPEEDING UP. THAT TOO WAS THE FEELING I HAD, ALBEIT MOMENTARILY, LAST WEEK WHEN I WAS BRAKING OVER POTHOLES. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10319098
57,300 miles · Mar 2, 2010
Parking BrakeService Brakes, Electric
INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6) TO:NHTSA.WEBMASTER@DOT.GOV FROM:[XXX] SUBJECT:2006 PRIUS BRAKES COMMENTS: I HAVE A 2006 PRIUS AND HAVE HAD INTERMITTENT BRAKE PROBLEMS(I BOUGHT THE CAR NEW FROM THE TOYOTA DEALER IN 2007). THE BRAKES DO NOT ALWAYS ENGAGE IMMEDIATE…
Read full complaint
INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6) TO:NHTSA.WEBMASTER@DOT.GOV FROM:[XXX] SUBJECT:2006 PRIUS BRAKES COMMENTS: I HAVE A 2006 PRIUS AND HAVE HAD INTERMITTENT BRAKE PROBLEMS(I BOUGHT THE CAR NEW FROM THE TOYOTA DEALER IN 2007). THE BRAKES DO NOT ALWAYS ENGAGE IMMEDIATELY WHEN PRESSING THE BRAKE PEDAL. IT FEELS AS IF THE BRAKES ARE SLIPPING BEFORE ACTUALLY STOPPING THE CAR. IN LIGHT OF THE RECENT TOYOTA BRAKE RECALLS, I NOW HAVE CONCERNS THAT MY CAR MAY ALSO HAVE BRAKES THAT MAY FAIL. [XXX] *TR
NHTSA ODI #10315899
20,000 miles · Feb 16, 2010
Exterior LightingService Brakes, Electric
MY 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS LOSES BRAKING WHEN TRYING TO BRAKE ON UNEVEN SURFACES. THE DASH WILL LIGHT UP THE ICON WHICH DISPLAYS UNEVEN GROUND AND WHEN I APPLY BRAKES THERE IS A MOMENTARILY LAPSE WHEN THE BRAKE PEDAL DOES NOT RESPOND. ALSO MY LEFT HEADLIGHT AND LEFT TAILLIGHT GO ON AND OFF PERIODICALLY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10311068
Official recalls
6Nov 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
3DP22005 · 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.
Illustration