← 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

What owners actually said

1,439 reports
Mileage unknown · Feb 7, 2010
Service Brakes, Electric

YOU NEED TO LOOK AT MORE THAN JUST THE 2010 TOYOTA PRIUS IN TERMS OF BRAKING PROBLEMS. I HAVE A 2006 PRIUS WITH THE SAME ISSUE - LOSS OF BRAKING ABILITY OVER UNEVEN SURFACES. PROBLEM HAS OCCURRED SINCE PURCHASE BUT I HAVE NEVER REPORTED AS I THOUGHT IT WAS RELATED TO THE ABS/HYBRID BATTERY RELATIONSHIP. *TW

NHTSA ODI #10307213

50,000 miles · Feb 7, 2010
Electrical System

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

Read full complaint

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

NHTSA ODI #10307139

Mileage unknown · Feb 6, 2010
Electronic Stability Control (esc)

2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHEN DRIVING OVER POTHOLE OR BUMPS, ANTILOCK BREAKS ARE TRIGGERED, AND BRAKES DO NOT WORK (TEMPORARILY). I HAVE LISTENED TO THE REPORTS ON THE 2010 PRIUS AND WOULD LIKE TO REPORT THAT THE EXACT ISSUE HAS HAPPENED SEVERAL TIMES IN MY 2ND GENERATION PRIUS. THIS ISSUE IS NOT ISOLATED TO THE 3RD GENERATION MODE…

Read full complaint

2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHEN DRIVING OVER POTHOLE OR BUMPS, ANTILOCK BREAKS ARE TRIGGERED, AND BRAKES DO NOT WORK (TEMPORARILY). I HAVE LISTENED TO THE REPORTS ON THE 2010 PRIUS AND WOULD LIKE TO REPORT THAT THE EXACT ISSUE HAS HAPPENED SEVERAL TIMES IN MY 2ND GENERATION PRIUS. THIS ISSUE IS NOT ISOLATED TO THE 3RD GENERATION MODEL. *CN

NHTSA ODI #10307103

Mileage unknown · Feb 6, 2010
Service Brakes, ElectricTraction Control System

OVER THE PAST 1 1/2 YEARS I'VE TAKEN MY PRIUS TO THE TOYOTA SERVICE WITH CONCERN OVER MY BRAKING SYSTEM THREE TIMES. TWICE THE HEAD OF SERVICE MECHANICS HAS DRIVEN WITH ME SEEING NOTHING UNUSUAL, THE THIRD TIME THE SERVICE MANAGER TOOK THE CAR OUT WITH ME. THEY ALL VOWED NOTHING WAS WRONG. THE REASON I'VE BEEN SO CONCERNED WA…

Read full complaint

OVER THE PAST 1 1/2 YEARS I'VE TAKEN MY PRIUS TO THE TOYOTA SERVICE WITH CONCERN OVER MY BRAKING SYSTEM THREE TIMES. TWICE THE HEAD OF SERVICE MECHANICS HAS DRIVEN WITH ME SEEING NOTHING UNUSUAL, THE THIRD TIME THE SERVICE MANAGER TOOK THE CAR OUT WITH ME. THEY ALL VOWED NOTHING WAS WRONG. THE REASON I'VE BEEN SO CONCERNED WAS DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE BRAKING SYSTEM DIDN'T RESPOND FAST ENOUGH AND MORE OFTEN THAN NOT, WITH WET PAVEMENT OR RAINING, PRESSING THE BRAKES WITH AUTHORITY, THE CAR WILL GO INTO A SLIGHT SKID WITH THE DASH SKID LIGHT COMING ON. THIS ENTIRE SENARIO HAS CAUSED ME TO BE OVERLY CAUTIOUS WHEN BRAKING ANYTIME AND IN ANY SITUATION. IF A QUICK ACTION IS NEEDED FOR SPEEDY BRAKING I QUESTION WHAT WOULD HAPPEN. IT APPEARS THE PEOPLE AT TOYOTA HAVE JUST TRIED TO APPEASE ME NOT BELIEVING NOR UNDERSTANDING WHAT'S BEEN IN ERROR. I DON'T FEEL SO INADEQUATE NOW THAT ALL THE CURRENT INFORMATION HAS COME TO LIGHT. WAS BEGINNING TO THINK I WAS THE COMPLAINER WITHOUT CAUSE. I LOVE MY CAR - BUT AM NOW EVEN MORE HESITANT ABOUT IT'S SAFETY. MUST ADMIT, I'M FAR MORE CAREFUL THAN EVER, BEING ON THE LOOKOUT FOR POSSIBLE BRAKING SITUATIONS IN ADVANCE. *CN

NHTSA ODI #10307043

60,000 miles · Feb 6, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control

UNINTENDED ACCELERATION IN MY 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. LASTED LESS THAN 30 SECONDS. RESPONDED TO REPEATED BRAKING AND HITTING AND PULLING WITH MY FOOT ON THE GAS PEDAL. IT HAPPENED WHEN I FLOORED THE GAS PEDAL TO PASS ANOTHER VEHICLE.THE PEDAL WAS NOT STUCK TO THE FLOOR MAT. I COULD NOT REPRODUCE THE EVENT AFTER IT OCCURRED BY FLOOR…

Read full complaint

UNINTENDED ACCELERATION IN MY 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. LASTED LESS THAN 30 SECONDS. RESPONDED TO REPEATED BRAKING AND HITTING AND PULLING WITH MY FOOT ON THE GAS PEDAL. IT HAPPENED WHEN I FLOORED THE GAS PEDAL TO PASS ANOTHER VEHICLE.THE PEDAL WAS NOT STUCK TO THE FLOOR MAT. I COULD NOT REPRODUCE THE EVENT AFTER IT OCCURRED BY FLOORING THE GAS PEDAL AGAIN. *CN

NHTSA ODI #10306988

45 miles · Feb 6, 2010
Service Brakes, AirService Brakes, Hydraulic

I OWN A SECOND GENERATIONPRIUS (2006), AND IT HAS THE SAME BRAKE SYMPTOMS THAT ARE BEING DESCRIBED BY THE OWNERS OF THE 3RD GENERATION MODEL. WHEN I APPLY THE BRAKES WHILE GOING OVER A ROUGH SURFACE, THE BRAKES DO NOT ENGAGE FOR A SECOND OR TWO. THIS HAS BEEN THE CASE SINCE I PURCHASED THE CAR NEW, AND I THOUGHT IT WAS JUST A QU…

Read full complaint

I OWN A SECOND GENERATIONPRIUS (2006), AND IT HAS THE SAME BRAKE SYMPTOMS THAT ARE BEING DESCRIBED BY THE OWNERS OF THE 3RD GENERATION MODEL. WHEN I APPLY THE BRAKES WHILE GOING OVER A ROUGH SURFACE, THE BRAKES DO NOT ENGAGE FOR A SECOND OR TWO. THIS HAS BEEN THE CASE SINCE I PURCHASED THE CAR NEW, AND I THOUGHT IT WAS JUST A QUIRKY CHARACTERISTIC OF THE HYBRID, SO I HAVE LEARNED TO COMPENSATE BY GIVING MYSELF AN UNUSUALLY LARGE DISTANCE BETWEEN ME AND THE CAR AHEAD OF ME. THIS DOESN'T ALWAYS WORK, AS PEOPLE CUT IN FRONT OF ME WHEN THE GAP IS LARGE. I HAVE NOT BEEN IN AN ACCIDENT, BUT THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL NEAR-MISSES WITH ME ALMOST REAR-ENDING THE PERSON IN FRONT OF ME DUE TO THIS BRAKE PROBLEM. I HOPE THE NHTSA IS LOOKING AT ALL MODELS OF THE PRIUS FOR THIS DEFECT. IN MY FORM BELOW, I CHECKED AIR AND HYDRAULIC BRAKES BECAUSE THERE IS NOT AN OPTION FOR ANTI-LOCK BRAKES ON THE DROP DOWN BOX. *CN

NHTSA ODI #10306972

32,530 miles · Feb 6, 2010
Exterior Lighting

MY 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS HAS EXPERIENCED INTERMITTENT HID HEADLIGHT OPERATION FOR ALMOST A YEAR. THIS IS NOT SO BAD ON THE OPEN HIGHWAYS WITH OTHER CARS STILL LIGHTING UP THE ROAD, BUT IT'S DOWNRIGHT SCARY ON DARK COUNTRY ROADS. AT ALL TIMES, WHILE DRIVING AT NIGHT, THE HEADLIGHTS GET PROGRESSIVELY DIMMER TO THE POINT WHERE I CA…

Read full complaint

MY 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS HAS EXPERIENCED INTERMITTENT HID HEADLIGHT OPERATION FOR ALMOST A YEAR. THIS IS NOT SO BAD ON THE OPEN HIGHWAYS WITH OTHER CARS STILL LIGHTING UP THE ROAD, BUT IT'S DOWNRIGHT SCARY ON DARK COUNTRY ROADS. AT ALL TIMES, WHILE DRIVING AT NIGHT, THE HEADLIGHTS GET PROGRESSIVELY DIMMER TO THE POINT WHERE I CAN ACTUALLY OUTRUN MY FIELD OF VISION.....AGAIN VERY UNNERVING. MY SOLUTION HAS BEEN TO DRIVE ONE OF MY OTHER CARS WHEN POSSIBLE. I GUESS THE GOOD NEWS IS I'VE NEVER EXPERIENCED THE BRAKE & GAS PEDAL ISSUES THAT ARE ON THE NEWS.........STILL, I THINK THE HID HEADLIGHT ISSUE IS SERIOUS. I'VE NEVER BOTHERED TO COMPLAIN TO THE DEALER BECAUSE I'VE HEARD THEY WILL GIVE ME THE RUNAROUND AND CHARGE OVER $800 TO REPLACE THE BULBS & THE PROBLEM ONLY GOES AWAY FOR A FEW MONTHS AT BEST. *CN *TR

NHTSA ODI #10306901

16,500 miles · Feb 5, 2010
Exterior LightingService Brakes, ElectricTraction Control System

1. BRAKES ON MY 2006 PRIUS MOMENTARILY FAILED TO RESPOND, AFTER A 1 - 2 SEC DELAY THEY ACTIVATED. AT SAME TIME,THE TRACTION LIGHT FLASHES, BUT THE CAR IS NOT LOSING TRACTION. THIS HAPPENED 4 X, ONE ALMOST RESULTED IN A CRASH. IT IS MORE LIKELY TO HAPPEN WHEN BRAKING WHILE GOING OVER A BUMP IN THE ROAD. THERE HAVE BEEN OTHER…

Read full complaint

1. BRAKES ON MY 2006 PRIUS MOMENTARILY FAILED TO RESPOND, AFTER A 1 - 2 SEC DELAY THEY ACTIVATED. AT SAME TIME,THE TRACTION LIGHT FLASHES, BUT THE CAR IS NOT LOSING TRACTION. THIS HAPPENED 4 X, ONE ALMOST RESULTED IN A CRASH. IT IS MORE LIKELY TO HAPPEN WHEN BRAKING WHILE GOING OVER A BUMP IN THE ROAD. THERE HAVE BEEN OTHER TIMES WHEN THE TRACTION LIGHT FLASHES ON UNEXPECTEDLY, BUT EFFECT ON BRAKES IS UNKNOWN: NOT BRAKING THEN. 3 DIFFERENT TOYOTA DEALERS TOLD ME THEY COULDN'T FIND ANYTHING WRONG. AT ONE DEALER, I WENT FOR A TEST DRIVE WITH A MECHANIC. DURING THE TEST DRIVE, I WAS ABLE TO MAKE THE TRACTION LIGHT GO ON WHEN THERE WAS NO LOSS OF TRACTION. THE INVOICE STATED "TEST DROVE AND CHECKED OPERATIONS. AT THIS TIME COULD NOT DUPLICATE CUSTOMER'S CONCERNS." I WROTE ON THE INVOICE "I WAS ABLE TO MAKE THE TRACTION LIGHT GO ON WHEN THERE WAS NO LOSS OF TRACTION. I AM NOT SATISFIED THAT THE PROBLEM HAS BEEN FOUND AND REPAIRED." & ON THE SIGNATURE LINE "NOT SATISFIED, (SIGNATURE)" I WANTED THEM TO CHANGE THE COMPUTER, BUT THEY SAID IF THEY COULDN'T DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM, THEY COULDN'T CHANGE THE COMPUTER. I INSISTED THAT THEY REPLACE ONE COMPONENT, AND IF THE PROBLEM DIDN'T REOCCUR, I'D KNOW THEY FOUND THE SOLUTION. THEY BLED THE BRAKES, WHICH WAS UNLIKELY TO BE CAUSE OF THE PROBLEM. WHEN I WENT TO PICK UP MY INVOICE UP 2ND TIME, THE COPY ON WHICH I HAD WRITTEN MY COMMENTS WAS RETURNED TO ME, AND A FRESHLY PRINTED COPY- WITHOUT MY COMMENTS - WAS GIVEN TO ME & KEPT FOR THEIR RECORDS. 2. SAME CAR: HEADLIGHT GO OUT AT UNEXPECTED TIMES. 2 TOYOTA DEALERS TOLD ME THAT THE BULB WOULD COST $300, AND INSTALLATION WOULD BE WELL OVER $100 BECAUSE THEY "HAD TO TAKE OFF THE BUMPER TO CHANGE THE BULB!" I REPLACED THE BULB MYSELF (WITHOUT TAKING OFF THE BUMPER) BUT NOW, 9 MONTHS LATER, IT IS STARTING TO GO AGAIN. TOYOTA SENT A LETTER SAYING IT WAS HOW HID BULBS BURNED OUT & NOT A PBLM W/ CONTROLLER. IF TRUE, HOW IS IT THAT NEW BULB IS ALSO BURNING OUT? *TR

NHTSA ODI #10306849

78,000 miles · Feb 5, 2010
Service Brakes, Electric

I WAS DRIVING IN SLICK CONDITIONS AT ROUGHLY 15 MPH APPROACHING AN INTERSECTION TWO STOPPED CARS IN FRONT OF ME, AND WHEN I HIT MY BRAKES THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FOR THE BRAKES. I TRIED TO PUMP THE BRAKES AND STILL NO RESPONSE AFTER ABOUT 20 SECONDS MY BRAKES RETURNED. IN ORDER TO AVOID THE STOPPED AUDI IN FRONT OF ME I TURNED MY …

Read full complaint

I WAS DRIVING IN SLICK CONDITIONS AT ROUGHLY 15 MPH APPROACHING AN INTERSECTION TWO STOPPED CARS IN FRONT OF ME, AND WHEN I HIT MY BRAKES THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FOR THE BRAKES. I TRIED TO PUMP THE BRAKES AND STILL NO RESPONSE AFTER ABOUT 20 SECONDS MY BRAKES RETURNED. IN ORDER TO AVOID THE STOPPED AUDI IN FRONT OF ME I TURNED MY WHEEL TO THE RIGHT AND DROVE UP ON THE SIDEWALK, MY BRAKES RETURNED AND I WAS ABLE TO STOP THE VEHICLE WITHOUT HAVING TO GO TOO FAR ON THE SIDEWALK. THIS WAS NOT A NORMAL SLIDE FROM SLICK CONDITIONS I HAVE NO RESPONSE FROM MY BRAKES AT ALL NOT ABS PUMP AT ALL, NOTHING. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10306843

40,000 miles · Feb 5, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlFire

DRIVING 2006 PRIUS 6/27/07 ON RURAL 2 LANE HIGHWAY, CROSSED ROUGH RAIL ROAD CROSSING. WITHIN 1/4 MILE MOVED OUT TO PASS CYCLISTS AND AS I CUT BACK INTO MY LANE THE CAR SUDDENLY ACCELERATED FROM 40 TO 60 MPH IN 3 SECONDS. BURNED UP BRAKES AND STARTED CAR FIRE GETTING CAR STOPPED. TOWED TO TOYOTA IN WASAU WISC. BRAKES REPLACED …

Read full complaint

DRIVING 2006 PRIUS 6/27/07 ON RURAL 2 LANE HIGHWAY, CROSSED ROUGH RAIL ROAD CROSSING. WITHIN 1/4 MILE MOVED OUT TO PASS CYCLISTS AND AS I CUT BACK INTO MY LANE THE CAR SUDDENLY ACCELERATED FROM 40 TO 60 MPH IN 3 SECONDS. BURNED UP BRAKES AND STARTED CAR FIRE GETTING CAR STOPPED. TOWED TO TOYOTA IN WASAU WISC. BRAKES REPLACED BUT TOYOTA SAID IT(SUDDEN UNCONTROLLABLE ACCELERATION) HAD NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE. TOYOTA WOULDN'T PAY EVEN THOUGH CAR WAS UNDER WARRANTY. INSURANCE PAID. IT HAS NOT HAPPENED AGAIN BUT WE FOUND NUMEROUS INCIDENTS HAD OCCURRED BACK TO 05. WE STILL HAVE OLD BRAKE PARTS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10306839

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.