← 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

Service Brakes, Hydraulic complaints

145 reports
Clear category filter
50,000 miles · Feb 25, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT AS HE CAME TO A COMPLETE STOP WITH HIS FEET ON THE BRAKE PEDAL AND THERE WAS A BUMP IN THE ROAD THE VEHICLE WOULD LUNGE FORWARD AND ACCELERATE. THE DEALER WAS CALLED, STATED THAT WAS NORMAL AND THERE WAS NO FAILURE. THE CONTACT STATED THE FAILURE OCCURRED REPEATEDL…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT AS HE CAME TO A COMPLETE STOP WITH HIS FEET ON THE BRAKE PEDAL AND THERE WAS A BUMP IN THE ROAD THE VEHICLE WOULD LUNGE FORWARD AND ACCELERATE. THE DEALER WAS CALLED, STATED THAT WAS NORMAL AND THERE WAS NO FAILURE. THE CONTACT STATED THE FAILURE OCCURRED REPEATEDLY WHENEVER HE STOPPED THE VEHICLE. THE TOYOTA MANUFACTURER WAS NEVER CALLED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 50,000.

NHTSA ODI #10314373

9,500 miles · Feb 23, 2010
Service Brakes, HydraulicTraction Control System

2007 TOYOTA PRIUS - BRAKING ISSUE ON RAINY OR SLICK SURFACE. UPON NORMAL BRAKING ON A SLICK OR WET SURFACE THE CAR BECOMES UNSTABLE, THE ABS BRAKING BECOMES IRREGULAR AND THE CAR GOES INTO A SKID AND DOES NOT STOP IN A NORMAL FASHION OR WITHIN A NORMAL BRAKING DISTANCE. THE SAME BRAKING RESPONSE OCCURS IF I HIT A POTHOLE WHILE B…

Read full complaint

2007 TOYOTA PRIUS - BRAKING ISSUE ON RAINY OR SLICK SURFACE. UPON NORMAL BRAKING ON A SLICK OR WET SURFACE THE CAR BECOMES UNSTABLE, THE ABS BRAKING BECOMES IRREGULAR AND THE CAR GOES INTO A SKID AND DOES NOT STOP IN A NORMAL FASHION OR WITHIN A NORMAL BRAKING DISTANCE. THE SAME BRAKING RESPONSE OCCURS IF I HIT A POTHOLE WHILE BRAKING. THE TOYOTA DEALER TELLS ME THAT THIS IS NORMAL. IT IS NOT NORMAL AS I CANNOT DRIVE THE CAR UNDER WET OR SNOWY CONDITIONS FOR FEAR OF AN ACCIDENT. THE BRAKING ISSUES NOTED IN THE 2010 PRIUS MAKE ME WONDER IF A SIMILAR CONDITION EXISTS FOR THE 2007 MODEL YEAR. I SUSPECT THAT IT IS THE ECU WHICH IS FAULTY. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10313396

12,000 miles · Feb 23, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. SHE EXPERIENCED BREAK FAILURE WHILE DRIVING 20 MPH IN INCLEMENT WEATHER. HER FIRST FAILURE OCCURRED WHEN SHE WAS UNABLE TO STOP THE VEHICLE WHEN THE BRAKES WERE APPLIED WITH A VEHICLE IN FRONT OF HER. SHE WAS FORCED TO MAKE A LEFT TURN TO AVOID CRASHING INTO A VEHICLE. SHE HAS EXPERIENC…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. SHE EXPERIENCED BREAK FAILURE WHILE DRIVING 20 MPH IN INCLEMENT WEATHER. HER FIRST FAILURE OCCURRED WHEN SHE WAS UNABLE TO STOP THE VEHICLE WHEN THE BRAKES WERE APPLIED WITH A VEHICLE IN FRONT OF HER. SHE WAS FORCED TO MAKE A LEFT TURN TO AVOID CRASHING INTO A VEHICLE. SHE HAS EXPERIENCED THE FAILURE FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS AND THOUGHT THAT IT WAS DRIVERS ERROR. SHE HAS NOT TAKEN THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 12,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 38,000.

NHTSA ODI #10312980

88,636 miles · Feb 21, 2010
Service Brakes, HydraulicVehicle Speed Control

ABS, VSC, BRAKE FAILURE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10312448

14,000 miles · Feb 18, 2010
Service Brakes, HydraulicVehicle Speed ControlCrash

1. SAFETY ' WHILE DRIVING ON A BUMPY ROAD IN DARIEN (WEST AVENUE NEAR THE TRAIN STATION) LAST YEAR THE PRIUS BRAKES DID NOT STOP THE CAR. ALTHOUGH THE SPEED WAS LOW (ABOUT 5MPH), THE RESULTANT ACCIDENT DAMAGED ITS FRONT END AND THE CAR IN FRONT OF US. 2. DRIVABILITY AND SAFETY ' THE CRUISE CONTROL HOLDS THE MINIMUM SPEED BUT AL…

Read full complaint

1. SAFETY ' WHILE DRIVING ON A BUMPY ROAD IN DARIEN (WEST AVENUE NEAR THE TRAIN STATION) LAST YEAR THE PRIUS BRAKES DID NOT STOP THE CAR. ALTHOUGH THE SPEED WAS LOW (ABOUT 5MPH), THE RESULTANT ACCIDENT DAMAGED ITS FRONT END AND THE CAR IN FRONT OF US. 2. DRIVABILITY AND SAFETY ' THE CRUISE CONTROL HOLDS THE MINIMUM SPEED BUT ALLOWS OVER SPEED CONDITIONS. WHILE RETURNING FROM DANBURY ON ROUTE 7 THE CRUISE CONTROL HOLDS 40MPH UNTIL GOING DOWNHILL. ON DOWNHILL SLOPES THE SPEED INCREASES AND INTERVENTION IS REQUIRED TO TURN OFF THE CRUISE CONTROL AND APPLY THE BRAKES. 3. DRIVABILITY ' DURING COLD WEATHER THE MAIN BATTERY ACCEPTS A CHARGE BUT DOES NOT RETURN MUCH ENERGY TO THE DRIVE SYSTEM. THE MILEAGE DECREASES BY 10-15MPG. TOYOTA OF STAMFORD REFUSED TO DO A FREE SAFETY INSPECTION. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10311704

1,000 miles · Feb 17, 2010
Exterior LightingService Brakes, Hydraulic

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING OVER ANY POTHOLES IN THE ROAD AT SPEEDS OF OVER 10 MPH, THE TRACTION WARNING LIGHT WOULD ILLUMINATE ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL. THE VEHICLE ALSO MADE A LOUD GRINDING NOISE WHILE DEPRESSING THE BRAKE PEDAL AND THEY WOULD NOT ENGAGE. THE CONTACT CONFIRMED THAT THE BRAKES FELT AS …

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING OVER ANY POTHOLES IN THE ROAD AT SPEEDS OF OVER 10 MPH, THE TRACTION WARNING LIGHT WOULD ILLUMINATE ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL. THE VEHICLE ALSO MADE A LOUD GRINDING NOISE WHILE DEPRESSING THE BRAKE PEDAL AND THEY WOULD NOT ENGAGE. THE CONTACT CONFIRMED THAT THE BRAKES FELT AS IF THEY WERE "LOCKING." THE MANUFACTURER AND A LOCAL DEALER WERE CONTACTED, BOTH OF WHICH WERE NOT WILLING TO OFFER ANY ASSISTANCE. NO REPAIRS WERE MADE TO THE VEHICLE. ON A SEPARATE OCCASION, THE HEADLIGHTS INTERMITTENTLY FAILED TO OPERATE. THE DEALER REPLACED THE BULBS IN BOTH HEADLIGHTS. THERE WERE NO RECALLS. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS UNDER 1,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 20,400. UPDATED 03/04/10. *LJ UPDATED 05/10/10

NHTSA ODI #10311400

6,000 miles · Feb 16, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 30 MPH ON AN UNEVEN ROAD SURFACE. WHILE BRAKING THE VEHICLE LOSS SLIGHT CONTROL AND SKIDDED. SUDDENLY, THE SKID CONTROL WARNING LIGHT INDICATOR ILLUMINATED ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL. THE DRIVER WAS ABLE TO GAIN CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE. THE FAILURES…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 30 MPH ON AN UNEVEN ROAD SURFACE. WHILE BRAKING THE VEHICLE LOSS SLIGHT CONTROL AND SKIDDED. SUDDENLY, THE SKID CONTROL WARNING LIGHT INDICATOR ILLUMINATED ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL. THE DRIVER WAS ABLE TO GAIN CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE. THE FAILURES OCCURRED WHENEVER ENCOUNTERING UNEVEN ROAD SURFACES, AND POTHOLES. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 6,000.

NHTSA ODI #10310810

39,000 miles · Feb 16, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic

I AM AWARE THAT THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH THE BRAKES ON THE TOYOTA PRIUS. NEWS REPORTS INDICATE THAT THE PROBLEM IS CONFINED TO THE 2010 MODEL, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO REPORT A BRAKE FAILURE INCIDENT WITH OUR 2007 MODEL PRIUS. IN JUNE OF 2009 MY WIFE AND I WERE DRIVING OUR PRIUS DOWN A HILL APPROACHING A STOP LIGHT. IT HAD BEEN RAININ…

Read full complaint

I AM AWARE THAT THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH THE BRAKES ON THE TOYOTA PRIUS. NEWS REPORTS INDICATE THAT THE PROBLEM IS CONFINED TO THE 2010 MODEL, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO REPORT A BRAKE FAILURE INCIDENT WITH OUR 2007 MODEL PRIUS. IN JUNE OF 2009 MY WIFE AND I WERE DRIVING OUR PRIUS DOWN A HILL APPROACHING A STOP LIGHT. IT HAD BEEN RAINING AND THE PAVEMENT WAS WET, BUT THERE WAS NO STANDING WATER ON THE ROAD SURFACE. THE LIGHT TURNED YELLOW AS WE APPROACHED THE INTERSECTION AT A SPEED OF ABOUT 35 MPH. I APPLIED THE BRAKES BUT THE CAR CONTINUED TO MOVE FORWARD DOWN THE HILL WITH NO BRAKING ACTION AND NO DECELERATION. I HAD NO ALTERNATIVE BUT TO SPEED UP TO TRY GET THROUGH THE INTERSECTION BEFORE THE LIGHT TURNED RED. THE LIGHT DID TURN RED JUST BEFORE WE ENTERED THE INTERSECTION, BUT WE WERE ABLE TO MAKE IT THROUGH BEFORE ANY OPPOSING TRAFFIC ENTERED THE INTERSECTION. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT DURING THIS INCIDENT THE CAR SHOWED NO EVIDENCE OF BEING IN A SKID - - IT SIMPLY MOVED FORWARD WITHOUT ANY SWERVING. FURTHERMORE, THERE WAS NO VIBRATION IN THE BRAKE PEDAL NOR ANY SOUNDS THAT MIGHT BE ASSOCIATED WITH ANTI-LOCK BRAKE ACTION. I TOOK THE CAR TO THE TOYOTA DEALER AND ASKED THE SERVICE MANAGER IF THERE COULD BE SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE ANTI-LOCK SYSTEM. I WAS TOLD THAT THEY HAD NO WAY TO CHECK THAT. WE HAVE HAD NO FURTHER PROBLEM WITH THE BRAKES, BUT I AM CONCERNED THAT THIS BEHAVIOR MAY RECUR BECAUSE OF THE CURRENT BRAKING ISSUE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10310766

35,878 miles · Feb 14, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic

I AM THE ORIGINAL OWNER OF A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. MY BRAKES SEEM TO FAIL MOMENTARILY WHEN I AM TRYING TO STOP AT A BUMPY INTERSECTION. THIS HAS HAPPENED MORE ONE TIME. ALTHOUGH I HAVE NOT HAD AN ACCIDENT AS A RESULT IT IS A VERY UNCOMFORTABLE FEELING, BECAUSE YOU JUST DON'T KNOW IF THEY ARE GOING TO BRING YOU TO A STOP. I HAVE…

Read full complaint

I AM THE ORIGINAL OWNER OF A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. MY BRAKES SEEM TO FAIL MOMENTARILY WHEN I AM TRYING TO STOP AT A BUMPY INTERSECTION. THIS HAS HAPPENED MORE ONE TIME. ALTHOUGH I HAVE NOT HAD AN ACCIDENT AS A RESULT IT IS A VERY UNCOMFORTABLE FEELING, BECAUSE YOU JUST DON'T KNOW IF THEY ARE GOING TO BRING YOU TO A STOP. I HAVE REPORTED THIS PROBLEM TO THE TOYOTA DEALER (SMART TOYOTA - MADISON, WI) AND THEIR ANALYSIS AT THE TIME I TOOK IT IN ON MAY 14, 2009 WAS THAT IT COULD NOT BE DUPLICATED AND ESSENTIALLY FOUND NOTHING WRONG. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10310300

39,050 miles · Feb 12, 2010
Electronic Stability Control (esc)Service Brakes, HydraulicCrash

I READ ABOUT THE RECALL OF THE 2010 PRIUS CONCERNING THE ABS SOFTWARE. MY 2007 PRIUS EXPERIENCED THE SAME PROBLEMS RECENTLY WHEN I RAN OVER A CURB AT LOW SPEED AND THE CAR LURCHED FORWARD AT HIGH SPEED AFTER I APPLIED THE BRAKES AND I HIT A WALL ABOUT 5 FEET AWAY. DAMAGE TO MY CAR WAS A CRACKED BUMPER, SLIGHTLY DENTED HOOD, CRAC…

Read full complaint

I READ ABOUT THE RECALL OF THE 2010 PRIUS CONCERNING THE ABS SOFTWARE. MY 2007 PRIUS EXPERIENCED THE SAME PROBLEMS RECENTLY WHEN I RAN OVER A CURB AT LOW SPEED AND THE CAR LURCHED FORWARD AT HIGH SPEED AFTER I APPLIED THE BRAKES AND I HIT A WALL ABOUT 5 FEET AWAY. DAMAGE TO MY CAR WAS A CRACKED BUMPER, SLIGHTLY DENTED HOOD, CRACKED HEAD LIGHT. I USED TO GET 50 TO 60 MILES PER GALLON AND I CAN NOT GET OVER 41 MILES PER GALLON NOW. I BOUGHT NEW TIRES AND HAD THEM BALANCED AND ALIGNED BUT THE MILEAGE HAD NOT IMPROVED. DAMAGES TO THE EXTERIOR OF THE CAR WILL AMOUNT TO ABOUT 2 TO 3 THOUSAND DOLLARS. MY TOYOTA DEALER SAYS THAT MY 2007 MODEL IS NOT PART OF THE RECALL. I HAVE READ BLOGS WHERE PEOPLE WITH MY MODEL TOYOTA HAVE HAD SIMILAR EXPERIENCES. I BELIEVE THAT THE ABS SOFTWARE IS FAULTY IN MORE THAN THE 2010 PRIUSES. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10308978

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.