← New search

2007 Toyota Prius

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most Prius years

Owner complaints for the 2007 Toyota Prius are substantially higher than the model-year median of 164.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

1,721 reports with mileage · 282 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 1,060 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Electrical System. Review the 248 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Structure. Review the 184 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

124 crash reports9 fire reports53 injury reports

Electrical System complaints

248 reports
Clear category filter
62,289 miles · Nov 6, 2010
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

THE HEADLIGHTS ON MY TOYOTA PRIUS FAILED. CAME ON SOME TIMES THEN AFTER TURNING ON AND OFF. THE WIRE HARNESS TO THE BULB OF THE HEADLIGHT SEEM BURNT, AND AFTER READING HUNDREDS OF COMPLAINT JUST LIKE THIS, TOYOTA HAS A PROBLEM-I HAVE A PROBLEM -HUNDREDS OF DOLLARS TO REPLACE HEADLIGHT BULBS IS INSANE AND NOT THE ONLY ISSUE HERE.…

Read full complaint

THE HEADLIGHTS ON MY TOYOTA PRIUS FAILED. CAME ON SOME TIMES THEN AFTER TURNING ON AND OFF. THE WIRE HARNESS TO THE BULB OF THE HEADLIGHT SEEM BURNT, AND AFTER READING HUNDREDS OF COMPLAINT JUST LIKE THIS, TOYOTA HAS A PROBLEM-I HAVE A PROBLEM -HUNDREDS OF DOLLARS TO REPLACE HEADLIGHT BULBS IS INSANE AND NOT THE ONLY ISSUE HERE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10364263

75,000 miles · Oct 27, 2010
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

FOR SOME TIME I HAVE BEEN TELLING THE DEALER THAT I HAVE BEEN INFORMED THAT ONE OF MY HEADLIGHTS IS OUT BUT WHEN THEY LOOK AT IT AT A LATER TIME THEY ARE WORKING. I SUSPECT THAT THEY HAVE BEEN DOING THIS FOR A LONG TIME. NOW IT APPEARS THAT THERE IS A PROGRESSION. BOTH HEADLIGHTS UNEXPECTEDLY TURNED OFF PLUNGING ME INTO TOTAL…

Read full complaint

FOR SOME TIME I HAVE BEEN TELLING THE DEALER THAT I HAVE BEEN INFORMED THAT ONE OF MY HEADLIGHTS IS OUT BUT WHEN THEY LOOK AT IT AT A LATER TIME THEY ARE WORKING. I SUSPECT THAT THEY HAVE BEEN DOING THIS FOR A LONG TIME. NOW IT APPEARS THAT THERE IS A PROGRESSION. BOTH HEADLIGHTS UNEXPECTEDLY TURNED OFF PLUNGING ME INTO TOTAL DARKNESS WHILE DRIVING AT 70 MILES PER HOUR ON AN INTERSTATE HIGHWAY AT 5:00 IN THE MORNING. I FOUND MYSELF HURTLING ALONG IN TOTAL DARKNESS. I TURNED THE LIGHT SWITCH TO THE OFF POSITION AND TURNED IT BACK ON AND THE LIGHTS CAME ON AGAIN BUT THEY WENT OFF AGAIN A FEW MILES LATER AND I WENT THROUGH THE SAME PROCESS TO GET THEM TO COME ON. THE SITUATION HAPPENED AT LEAST 5-6 MORE TIMES BEFORE I REACHED MY DESTINATION.

NHTSA ODI #10363317

55,000 miles · Oct 21, 2010
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

THE PASSENGER SIDE HID HEADLIGHT ON OUR 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS GOES ON AND OFF WHILE DRIVING. TOYOTA HAS SENT US A LETTER ADVISING US THAT THEY ARE AWARE OF THE PROBLEM AND ARE WILLING TO REPAIR THE PROBLEM BY OFFERING US THE BULB AT HALF PRICE, APPROXIMATELY $150. HOWEVER, AFTER DOING SOME RESEARCH I HAVE READ THAT THE BULB MAY NO…

Read full complaint

THE PASSENGER SIDE HID HEADLIGHT ON OUR 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS GOES ON AND OFF WHILE DRIVING. TOYOTA HAS SENT US A LETTER ADVISING US THAT THEY ARE AWARE OF THE PROBLEM AND ARE WILLING TO REPAIR THE PROBLEM BY OFFERING US THE BULB AT HALF PRICE, APPROXIMATELY $150. HOWEVER, AFTER DOING SOME RESEARCH I HAVE READ THAT THE BULB MAY NOT BE THE PROBLEM AND REPAIRS COULD TOTAL $2000. SINCE THE PROBLEM OCCURS WITHOUT WARNING I AM CONCERNED THAT AT SOME POINT THE OTHER HEADLIGHT COULD FAIL AND CAUSE TOTAL LOSS OF VISION AT NIGHT RESULTING IN AN ACCIDENT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10361639

58,500 miles · Sep 9, 2010
Electrical System

HEADLIGHTS GO OFF FOR NO REASON. WE HAVE A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS WITH 58K MILES ON IT. OVER THE PAST FEW WEEKS, WE'VE NOTICED THE HEAD LAMPS GOING OFF AND COMING BACK ON. THIS IS HAPPENING ON BOTH SIDES INTERMITTENTLY. MY WIFE WAS DRIVING TO WORK IN THE DARK THE OTHER MORNING AND BOTH HEADLIGHTS WENT OUT AT ONCE. SHE WAS ABLE TO TUR…

Read full complaint

HEADLIGHTS GO OFF FOR NO REASON. WE HAVE A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS WITH 58K MILES ON IT. OVER THE PAST FEW WEEKS, WE'VE NOTICED THE HEAD LAMPS GOING OFF AND COMING BACK ON. THIS IS HAPPENING ON BOTH SIDES INTERMITTENTLY. MY WIFE WAS DRIVING TO WORK IN THE DARK THE OTHER MORNING AND BOTH HEADLIGHTS WENT OUT AT ONCE. SHE WAS ABLE TO TURN OFF THE LIGHT AND TURN THEM BACK ON TO RESTORE HER ROAD VISION. THEY STAYED ON FOR A FEW MINUTES AND THEN THE LEFT ONE WENT OUT SHORTLY AFTERWARDS. THE CAR IS NOW AT COURTESY TOYOTA IN BRANDON, FL AND I'M BEING TOLD THE "BALLASTS" AND THE HEAD LIGHT BULBS NEED REPLACING. THIS REPAIR IS COSTING US OVER 400.00. TOYOTA CLAIMS IT IS NOT COVERED BY WARRANTY AND THERE ARE NO EXISTING RECALLS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10354728

57,775 miles · Aug 26, 2010
Electrical SystemEngine And Engine CoolingFuel System, Other

WAS DRIVING AT 30MPH IN RESIDENTIAL AREA. NO PRIOR WARNINGS OF FAILURE. 1. CAR TURNED OFF - NOT THE POWER BUT THE ABILITY TO DRIVE OR PUT IN GEAR OR RUN. CAR WAS NON-DRIVABLE OR MOVABLE IN ANY WAY FOR NEXT 3 HOURS. 2. NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE, PROBLEM UNKNOWN AS THE CAR WORKS PERFECTLY. 3. DEALER SAID THEY HAD NO EXPLANATION T…

Read full complaint

WAS DRIVING AT 30MPH IN RESIDENTIAL AREA. NO PRIOR WARNINGS OF FAILURE. 1. CAR TURNED OFF - NOT THE POWER BUT THE ABILITY TO DRIVE OR PUT IN GEAR OR RUN. CAR WAS NON-DRIVABLE OR MOVABLE IN ANY WAY FOR NEXT 3 HOURS. 2. NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE, PROBLEM UNKNOWN AS THE CAR WORKS PERFECTLY. 3. DEALER SAID THEY HAD NO EXPLANATION TOYOTA PRIUS 2007 STALLED AND WOULD NOT START - HAD CAR TOWED TO DEALER AND PROBLEM DISAPPEARED AFTER 12 HOURS. THEY HAD NO EXPLANATION. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10352016

450,000 miles · Aug 23, 2010
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

MY 2007 PRIUS STARTED HAVING RIGHT HEADLIGHT FAILURE WHEN I WOULD DRIVE ON A ROUGH ROAD IT WOULD TURN OFF THEN BACK ON SOME 6 MONTHS AGO. MY HUSBAND CHECKED THE WIRING AND IT CAME BACK ON. THE CAR HAD 45000 MILES ON IT AT THIS TIME. ABOUT 3 WEEKS AGO BOTH OF THEM STARTED TURNING ON AND OFF AND 2 NIGHTS AGO WHILE DRIVING HOME I H…

Read full complaint

MY 2007 PRIUS STARTED HAVING RIGHT HEADLIGHT FAILURE WHEN I WOULD DRIVE ON A ROUGH ROAD IT WOULD TURN OFF THEN BACK ON SOME 6 MONTHS AGO. MY HUSBAND CHECKED THE WIRING AND IT CAME BACK ON. THE CAR HAD 45000 MILES ON IT AT THIS TIME. ABOUT 3 WEEKS AGO BOTH OF THEM STARTED TURNING ON AND OFF AND 2 NIGHTS AGO WHILE DRIVING HOME I HAD TO TURN THEM ON AND OFF 22 TIMES AND THEY WOULD COME BACK ON AND THEN GET DIM AND THEN TURN OFF. I TOOK IT TO THEM AT THE DEALERSHIP AND THEY STATED THE LEFT LIGHT WAS BAD AND THE LIGHT AND BALLAST WERE REPLACED FOR THE TUNE OF 614 DOLLARS. THEY DID NOTHING FOR THE RIGHT LIGHT. I CALLED AND OPENED A CASE WITH TOYOTA WHO WILL NOT PAY FOR AY OF IT. THIS SHOULD BE IN A RECALL! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10351237

35,000 miles · Aug 9, 2010
Electrical System

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WITHOUT WARNING ALL OF THE WARNING LIGHTS COME ON INCLUDING THE BRAKE LIGHT COMES AND THE VEHICLE STALLED. THE DEALER WAS NOT ABLE TO DETERMINE WHAT CAUSED THE FAILURE TO OCCUR. TOYOTA STATED THAT THEY WILL HAVE THE VEHICLE TOWED IN ORDER TO PERFORM AN INSPECTION. …

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WITHOUT WARNING ALL OF THE WARNING LIGHTS COME ON INCLUDING THE BRAKE LIGHT COMES AND THE VEHICLE STALLED. THE DEALER WAS NOT ABLE TO DETERMINE WHAT CAUSED THE FAILURE TO OCCUR. TOYOTA STATED THAT THEY WILL HAVE THE VEHICLE TOWED IN ORDER TO PERFORM AN INSPECTION. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 35000. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 38000.

NHTSA ODI #10348182

18,000 miles · Jul 14, 2010
Electrical SystemService Brakes, HydraulicVehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT ATTEMPTED TO PARK THE VEHICLE INTO THE RESIDENCE GARAGE, DRIVING AT APPROXIMATELY 2 MPH. SUDDENLY, THERE WAS AN UNINTENDED ACCELERATION. THE BRAKES WERE ENGAGED AND THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO ACCELERATE CAUSING THE VEHICLE TO CRASH INTO A CLOSET IN THE GARAGE. THE CONTACT SUF…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT ATTEMPTED TO PARK THE VEHICLE INTO THE RESIDENCE GARAGE, DRIVING AT APPROXIMATELY 2 MPH. SUDDENLY, THERE WAS AN UNINTENDED ACCELERATION. THE BRAKES WERE ENGAGED AND THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO ACCELERATE CAUSING THE VEHICLE TO CRASH INTO A CLOSET IN THE GARAGE. THE CONTACT SUFFERED INJURY TO THE NECK AREA. THE VEHICLE FRONT BUMPER SUSTAINED DAMAGES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER WHERE THE TECHNICIAN WAS UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE FAILURE. THE IDENTICAL FAILURES OCCURRED ON TWO SEPARATE OCCASIONS WITH NO INJURIES. IN ADDITION, THE CONTACT EXPERIENCED MALFUNCTIONS WITH THE AUTOMATIC IGNITION SWITCH, WINDSHIELD WIPERS, AND THE FRONT DRIVER AND PASSENGER SIDE AUTOMATIC WINDOW MECHANISM. THE FAILURES OCCURRED SPORADICALLY. THE VEHICLE HAD NOT BEEN REPAIRED AT THE TIME OF THE COMPLAINT. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 18,000. THE VIN WAS UNAVAILABLE.

NHTSA ODI #10343225

80,000 miles · Jul 14, 2010
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THE HEADLIGHTS WOULD INTERMITTENTLY FAIL WITHOUT WARNING AND WOULD OFTEN FLICKER FROM ON TO OFF REPEATEDLY. THE HEADLIGHTS WERE REPLACED BY THE CONTACT YET THE FAILURE PERSISTED. THE CONTACT STATED THE HEADLIGHT WAS REPLACED THREE TIMES WITHIN ONE YEAR. THE MANUFACTURE…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THE HEADLIGHTS WOULD INTERMITTENTLY FAIL WITHOUT WARNING AND WOULD OFTEN FLICKER FROM ON TO OFF REPEATEDLY. THE HEADLIGHTS WERE REPLACED BY THE CONTACT YET THE FAILURE PERSISTED. THE CONTACT STATED THE HEADLIGHT WAS REPLACED THREE TIMES WITHIN ONE YEAR. THE MANUFACTURER ADVISED THERE WAS NOT A RECALL FOR THE FAILURE AND DISREGARDED THE FAILURE AS A SAFETY ISSUE. THE MANUFACTURER WOULD NOT PROVIDE ANY ASSISTANCE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 80,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 108,000. UPDATED 10/21/10.*LJ THE CONSUMER ALSO STATED THE BRAKE AND TAILLIGHTS FAILED AS WELL. UPDATED 10/25/10 UPDATED 11/15/10 * BF THE CONSUMER STATED SHE WILL BE CONTACTING TOYOTA AGAIN, AS THE HEADLIGHTS ARE NOT PERFORMING AS THEY SHOULD. WHILE ON HER WAY HOME, THE HEADLIGHTS STARTED BLINKING ON AND OFF, UNTIL FINALLY THEY WENT COMPLETELY WENT OUT. UPDATED 11/26/10. *JB UPDATED 01/06/11 *BF UPDATED 03/02/11

NHTSA ODI #10343187

69,000 miles · Jul 13, 2010
Electrical SystemEngine And Engine Cooling

2007 PRIUS (69K MILES). DRIVING ON HIGHWAY, ALL CAUTION LIGHTS CAME ON. TOWED TO DEALER AND DIAGNOSED WITH A 12-VOLT BATTERY ISSUE. $280 TO REPLACE THE BATTER. THREE WEEKS LATER, SAME CAUTIONS LIGHTS. GOT MOST TO CLEAR WITH A RESTART WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE "MASTER CAUTION" AND THE "ENGINE CHECK" LIGHTS. DEALER SHOWED CO…

Read full complaint

2007 PRIUS (69K MILES). DRIVING ON HIGHWAY, ALL CAUTION LIGHTS CAME ON. TOWED TO DEALER AND DIAGNOSED WITH A 12-VOLT BATTERY ISSUE. $280 TO REPLACE THE BATTER. THREE WEEKS LATER, SAME CAUTIONS LIGHTS. GOT MOST TO CLEAR WITH A RESTART WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE "MASTER CAUTION" AND THE "ENGINE CHECK" LIGHTS. DEALER SHOWED CODE OF "P0A93" AND STATED INVERTER COOLANT PUMP NEEDED TO BE REPLACED FOR ANOTHER $486. CHECK ONLINE SHOWS TOYOTA KNOWS ABOUT THE PRE-2006 ISSUES AND THAT MANY 2007 AND BEYOND OWNERS ARE RUNNING INTO THE SAME ISSUE AT VARIOUS MILES. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10342966

Official recalls

4

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.

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.