← 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

Exterior Lighting complaints

1,060 reports
Clear category filter
42,000 miles · Mar 9, 2010
Exterior Lighting

I HAVE A 2007 PRIUS. I HAVE EXPERIENCED INTERMITTENT PROBLEMS WITH BOTH HEAD LIGHTS TURNING OFF. SOMETIMES THEY BOTH GO OUT AT THE SAME TIME. THE FIRST TIME I TOOK IT TO THE DEALERSHIP THEY SAID THEY COULD NOT RECREATE THE PROBLEM. I TOOK IT IN YESTERDAY AND ONE BULB WAS REPLACED FOR $275. I UNDERSTAND I AM NOT THE ONLY ONE WHO …

Read full complaint

I HAVE A 2007 PRIUS. I HAVE EXPERIENCED INTERMITTENT PROBLEMS WITH BOTH HEAD LIGHTS TURNING OFF. SOMETIMES THEY BOTH GO OUT AT THE SAME TIME. THE FIRST TIME I TOOK IT TO THE DEALERSHIP THEY SAID THEY COULD NOT RECREATE THE PROBLEM. I TOOK IT IN YESTERDAY AND ONE BULB WAS REPLACED FOR $275. I UNDERSTAND I AM NOT THE ONLY ONE WHO HAS HAD THIS PROBLEM. I AM CONCERNED ABOUT DRIVING AT NIGHT, BECAUSE BOTH LIGHTS HAVE GONE OFF AT SAME TIME. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10318014

35,000 miles · Mar 5, 2010
Exterior Lighting

EARLY 2009 A FRIEND TOLD ME AFTER I GOT OUT OF MY WIFE'S 2007 PRIUS THAT THE LEFT HEADLIGHT WAS OUT. I THOUGHT IT STRANGE SO I TURNED ON THE CAR & THE HEAD LIGHTS AGAIN - THIS TIME IT WORKED. AFTER THAT OCCASION I HAVE HAD THE LIGHT GO OUT ALMOST EVERY TIME I DRIVE AT NIGHT, BUT IT CAN BE TURNED BACK ON BY TURNING THE LIGHTS …

Read full complaint

EARLY 2009 A FRIEND TOLD ME AFTER I GOT OUT OF MY WIFE'S 2007 PRIUS THAT THE LEFT HEADLIGHT WAS OUT. I THOUGHT IT STRANGE SO I TURNED ON THE CAR & THE HEAD LIGHTS AGAIN - THIS TIME IT WORKED. AFTER THAT OCCASION I HAVE HAD THE LIGHT GO OUT ALMOST EVERY TIME I DRIVE AT NIGHT, BUT IT CAN BE TURNED BACK ON BY TURNING THE LIGHTS OFF/ON. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10317192

38,000 miles · Mar 4, 2010
Exterior Lighting

FOR OVER A YEAR I HAVE HAD INTERMITTENT HID HEADLIGHT ISSUES WITH ONE OR BOTH LIGHTS GOING OUT. I HAVE BROUGHT MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS TO THE DEALER AND TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC. DIAGNOSTIC TESTING IN BOTH CASES SHOW NO ERROR CODES. THIS PROBLEM OCCURS ABOUT 3-4 TIMES A MONTH AND CAN BE REMEDIED BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHTS OFF A…

Read full complaint

FOR OVER A YEAR I HAVE HAD INTERMITTENT HID HEADLIGHT ISSUES WITH ONE OR BOTH LIGHTS GOING OUT. I HAVE BROUGHT MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS TO THE DEALER AND TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC. DIAGNOSTIC TESTING IN BOTH CASES SHOW NO ERROR CODES. THIS PROBLEM OCCURS ABOUT 3-4 TIMES A MONTH AND CAN BE REMEDIED BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHTS OFF AND ON AGAIN. I WAS TOLD BY THE DEALER THAT IF THE HEADLIGHTS ARE REPLACED AT A COST OF 300 EACH IT MIGHT FIX IT. IF NOT A HID COMPUTER AT $1100 AND A NEW HEADLIGHT ASSEMBLY MAY BE NECESSARY FOR ANOTHER $1100. I FIND THIS UNACCEPTABLE AND STRONGLY FEEL THIS IS A SAFETY ISSUE THAT WARRANTS RECALL BY TOYOTA. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10316662

30,100 miles · Mar 3, 2010
Exterior Lighting

THE PASSENGER SIDE HEADLIGHT OF MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS STOPPED WORKING. I HAD MY 30,000 MILE INSPECTION AT MY LOCAL TOYOTA DEALER ABOUT 2 WEEKS AGO, AND THEY DID NOT MENTION THIS PROBLEM. IT IS A CONTINUOUS LIGHT FAILURE. I HAVE CONTACTED MY TOYOTA DEALER TO HAVE IT REPLACED, BUT THEY WANT TO CHARGE ME >$500 FOR PARTS AND …

Read full complaint

THE PASSENGER SIDE HEADLIGHT OF MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS STOPPED WORKING. I HAD MY 30,000 MILE INSPECTION AT MY LOCAL TOYOTA DEALER ABOUT 2 WEEKS AGO, AND THEY DID NOT MENTION THIS PROBLEM. IT IS A CONTINUOUS LIGHT FAILURE. I HAVE CONTACTED MY TOYOTA DEALER TO HAVE IT REPLACED, BUT THEY WANT TO CHARGE ME >$500 FOR PARTS AND LABOR.*TR

NHTSA ODI #10315987

28,000 miles · Mar 2, 2010
Exterior Lighting

THIS COMPLAINT INVOLVES A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS ON WHICH THE HEADLIGHTS WENT OUT SUDDENLY. MY WIFE AND I BOTH EXPERIENCED SINGLE HEADLIGHTS AND TAILLIGHTS GOING OFF INTERMITTENTLY IN EARLY 2009. THEN ONE NIGHT WHEN WE WERE RETURNING HOME ALL OF THE LIGHTS IN THE VEHICLE WENT OUT INCLUDING THE HEADLIGHTS. WE WERE ON A HILLY ROAD I…

Read full complaint

THIS COMPLAINT INVOLVES A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS ON WHICH THE HEADLIGHTS WENT OUT SUDDENLY. MY WIFE AND I BOTH EXPERIENCED SINGLE HEADLIGHTS AND TAILLIGHTS GOING OFF INTERMITTENTLY IN EARLY 2009. THEN ONE NIGHT WHEN WE WERE RETURNING HOME ALL OF THE LIGHTS IN THE VEHICLE WENT OUT INCLUDING THE HEADLIGHTS. WE WERE ON A HILLY ROAD IN THE FOOTHILLS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND WERE FORTUNATE NOT TO HAVE HAD AN ACCIDENT. WE TURNED OFF THE IGNITION, AND WHEN WE TURNED IT BACK ON, THE LIGHTS CAME BACK AND WE MADE IT HOME. WE TOOK OUR PRIUS IN TO JIM BARKLEY TOYOTA IN ASHEVILLE, NC WITHIN A FEW DAYS AND REPORTED THE PROBLEM. THEY CHECKED OUT THE VEHICLE, FOUND NOTHING WRONG, AND SAID THAT WAS ALL THEY COULD DO. WHEN WE TOLD THEM THAT WE COULD HAVE BEEN KILLED AND WERE STILL WORRIED THAT THE FAILURE COULD HAPPEN AGAIN, THEY SAID THAT THERE WERE 1,000 MILES OF WIRE IN THE CAR AND THEY COULDN'T CHECK IT ALL. WE WERE NOT HAPPY, BUT THEY OFFERED NO FURTHER HELP. THEN, AT ONE OF OUR SUBSEQUENT 5,000 MILE SERVICE CHECKS AT JIM BARKLEY TOYOTA, WE WERE TOLD THAT THEY HAD REPLACED OUR HEADLAMPS AT NO CHARGE TO US. SEVERAL MONTHS AFTER THIS WE RECEIVED A NOTICE (NOT A SERVICE RECALL BULLETIN) THAT HID HEADLAMP BULBS "MAY FLICKER OR INTERMITTENTLY BE INOPERABLE." THE NOTICE DIDN'T SAY THAT HEADLIGHTS GOING OUT IN THE DARK COULD BE DANGEROUS, BUT IT WOULD SEEM OBVIOUS THAT THIS WAS TRUE. I AM WRITING THIS COMPLAINT BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT TOYOTA HAD KNOWN THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH THEIR HEADLIGHTS AND SIMPLY STONEWALLED US WHEN WE FIRST REPORTED IT. I AM NOT SEEKING COMPENSATION OR REDRESS, BUT I WANT TO REPORT WHAT SEEMS TO BE ARROGANCE AND DENIAL ON THE PART OF TOYOTA. WE ARE FORTUNATE THAT WE WERE NOT INJURED OR KILLED, AND SO IS TOYOTA. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10315764

Mileage unknown · Mar 2, 2010
Electrical SystemExterior LightingService Brakes, Hydraulic

2007 TOYOTA PRIUS WITH TIRE FAILURE AND BRAKES GRABBING. *KB THE BATTERY AND HEADLIGHTS FAILED. THE CONSUMER STATED TOYOTA HAS SINCE REMOVED THIS PARTICULAR TYPE OF BULB AND ASSEMBLY FROM PRODUCTION. WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS 1 YEAR OLD THE CONSUMER WAS STOPPED BY THE POLICE AND GIVEN A WARNING FOR THE HEADLIGHT BEING OUT. HOWEVER,…

Read full complaint

2007 TOYOTA PRIUS WITH TIRE FAILURE AND BRAKES GRABBING. *KB THE BATTERY AND HEADLIGHTS FAILED. THE CONSUMER STATED TOYOTA HAS SINCE REMOVED THIS PARTICULAR TYPE OF BULB AND ASSEMBLY FROM PRODUCTION. WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS 1 YEAR OLD THE CONSUMER WAS STOPPED BY THE POLICE AND GIVEN A WARNING FOR THE HEADLIGHT BEING OUT. HOWEVER, WHEN THE CONSUMER AND HER HUSBAND EXITED THE VEHICLE, THEY ALONG WITH THE POLICE OFFICER FOUND BOTH HEADLIGHTS WERE WORKING AND HE LET THEM GO WITHOUT A CITATION. THE CONSUMER HAS SINCE DISCOVERED THAT ONE HEADLIGHT OR THE OTHER WILL JUST GO OUT ON OCCASION DURING EVERY DRIVE. THE BRIGHTNESS OF THE HEADLIGHTS BEGAN TO DIM WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS ONLY A YEAR OLD. TOYOTA RECOMMENDED USING THE HEADLIGHTS LESS AND THEY FURTHER RECOMMENDED NOT USING THE HIGHLY TOUTED FEATURE THAT ALLOWS THE LIGHTS TO AUTOMATICALLY TURN OFF AFTER THE VEHICLE HAS BEEN TURNED OFF. LAST MONTH, THE CONSUMER RECEIVED A LETTER FROM TOYOTA REGARDING INFORMATION ABOUT A PROBLEM WITH THE HID HEADLIGHTS. THE LETTER STATED THE CUSTOMER SUPPORT PROGRAM WOULD REIMBURSE FOR SOME COST RELATIVE TO THE DEFECTIVE HEADLIGHTS. HOWEVER THE LOCAL DEALER DID NOT AGREE AND THE COST FAR EXCEEDED ANYTHING MENTIONED IN THE LETTER. THE DEALER INFORMED THE CONSUMER THE COST OF INSTALLATION FOR NEW BULBS WOULD BE $245 IN LABOR FOR EACH HEADLIGHT REPLACEMENT, THAT WAS IN ADDITION TO THE EXORBITANT COST OF THE BULBS THEMSELVES. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10315409

48,000 miles · Feb 28, 2010
Exterior Lighting

2007 TOYOTA PRIUS HEADLIGHTS TURN OFF WHILE DRIVING ON DRIVER SIDE, TURN THE KNOB OFF AND ON, LIGHTS COME BACK ON. HAPPENS THREE TIMES WHILE DRIVING AT NITE OR EARLY MORNING. 53,000 MILES ON CAR. TOOK TO DEALERSHIP SAID IT IS A COMMON PROBLEM WITH PRIUS'....COST $500. COULD NOT AFFORD. WENT ONLINE AND SEE ALOT OF COMPLAINTS ABOU…

Read full complaint

2007 TOYOTA PRIUS HEADLIGHTS TURN OFF WHILE DRIVING ON DRIVER SIDE, TURN THE KNOB OFF AND ON, LIGHTS COME BACK ON. HAPPENS THREE TIMES WHILE DRIVING AT NITE OR EARLY MORNING. 53,000 MILES ON CAR. TOOK TO DEALERSHIP SAID IT IS A COMMON PROBLEM WITH PRIUS'....COST $500. COULD NOT AFFORD. WENT ONLINE AND SEE ALOT OF COMPLAINTS ABOUT THIS SAME PROBLEM.......RECALL PRIUS' FROM TOYOTA, THIS IS ANOTHER COVERUP. WE ARE VERY LUCKY WE HAVEN'T HIT ANYTHING YET, BUT DID ALMOST DRIVE OFF THE HIGHWAY AND HAD TO STOP. WE HAVE NOT REPLACED DUE TO THE COST. SITES POSTED SAY OTHER PRIUS OWNERS REPLACED BULBS ONLY TO HAVE THEM GO BACK OUT ON THEM. AND THIS HAPPENED AFTER WE REPLACED OUR 12 VOLT BATTERY WITH THE DEALERSHIP DEC 19TH, NEXT DAY, PROBLEM WITH HEADLIGHTS. DEALERSHIP SAID NOTHING TO DO WITH BATTERY OR LOSE WIRING. SERVICE MANAGER SAID AGAIN IT WAS A PROBLEM THEY ARE HAVING WITH ALL PRIUS. RECALL PLEASE !!!!!! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10314935

34,500 miles · Feb 27, 2010
Exterior Lighting

INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS..HEADLIGHTS RANDOMLY TURN OFF WHILE DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD. SOMETIMES IT THE RIGHT LIGHT, SOMETIMES IT THE LEFT LIGHT, BUT NOW BOTH LIGHTS ARE GOING OUT. THE LAST TIME THIS HAPPENED (YESTERDAY) WAS WHEN THE BRAKES WERE AP…

Read full complaint

INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS..HEADLIGHTS RANDOMLY TURN OFF WHILE DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD. SOMETIMES IT THE RIGHT LIGHT, SOMETIMES IT THE LEFT LIGHT, BUT NOW BOTH LIGHTS ARE GOING OUT. THE LAST TIME THIS HAPPENED (YESTERDAY) WAS WHEN THE BRAKES WERE APPLIED STOPPING AT A STOPLIGHT. SOMETIMES THIS HAPPENS 3 TIMES IN A HALF HOUR TRIP TO AND FROM WORK. I TOOK THIS IN TO TOYOTA IN MCMINNVILLE, OREGON AND THEY SAID THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG BECAUSE THEY COULD NOT REPLICATE IT. THIS HAS BEEN ON GOING FOR OVER A YEAR NOW! I HAVE ALSO READ ON THE INTERNET THAT THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON SINCE ABOUT 2002. I THINK THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH THE CIRCUIT BOARD OR SOFTWARE RUNNING THE LIGHTS. TOYOTA SHOULD INVESTIGATE THIS BEFORE SOME ONE GETS INJURED OR KILLED IF THEY HAVEN'T ALREADY. [XXX] *TR

NHTSA ODI #10314820

Mileage unknown · Feb 25, 2010
Exterior Lighting

2007 TOYOTA PRIUS WITH HEADLIGHT FAILURE. CONSUMER STATES THAT TOYOTA MECHANICS DO NOT TELL CONSUMERS ABOUT THESE ISSUES WHEN VEHICLE IS BEING SERVICED. CONSUMER WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHY THE LIFESPAN FOR THESE HEADLIGHTS IS SO SHORT. *KB

NHTSA ODI #10314290

51,000 miles · Feb 25, 2010
Exterior Lighting

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE HEADLIGHTS WERE FLASHING ON AND OFF. THE FAILURE OCCURRED INTERMITTENTLY. WHENEVER THE LIGHTS CAME BACK ON THEY WERE DIM. WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER THEY STATED THAT NOTHING WAS WRONG WITH THE VEHICLE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 51000. THE VEHICLE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 54000.…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE HEADLIGHTS WERE FLASHING ON AND OFF. THE FAILURE OCCURRED INTERMITTENTLY. WHENEVER THE LIGHTS CAME BACK ON THEY WERE DIM. WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER THEY STATED THAT NOTHING WAS WRONG WITH THE VEHICLE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 51000. THE VEHICLE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 54000. UPDATED 04/05/10 *BF THE DRIVERS SIDE HEADLIGHT WAS REPLACED IN 2008 AFTER ONLY 35,000 MILES. UPDATED 08/11/10

NHTSA ODI #10314216

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.