NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic complaints
145 reportsClear category filter17,000 miles · Feb 8, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
2007 PRIUS BRAKES APPLIED FOR YELLOW LIGHT ON GOOD ROADBED, BRAKES STOPPED WORKING APPROXIMATELY 1 SECOND AND A FEW FEET LATER, AN ADDITIONAL FAILURE OF APPROXIMATELY 1 SECOND. CAR STOPPED BUT BRAKING DISTANCE GREATLY EXTENDED. THIS CAR HAS ALWAYS HAD ISSUES WITH STOPPING ON ROUGH SURFACES. THIS IS THE FIRST EXPERIENCE ON GOO…
Read full complaint
2007 PRIUS BRAKES APPLIED FOR YELLOW LIGHT ON GOOD ROADBED, BRAKES STOPPED WORKING APPROXIMATELY 1 SECOND AND A FEW FEET LATER, AN ADDITIONAL FAILURE OF APPROXIMATELY 1 SECOND. CAR STOPPED BUT BRAKING DISTANCE GREATLY EXTENDED. THIS CAR HAS ALWAYS HAD ISSUES WITH STOPPING ON ROUGH SURFACES. THIS IS THE FIRST EXPERIENCE ON GOOD ROAD.
NHTSA ODI #10307478
327 miles · Feb 7, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
THE BRAKES ON THE 2007 PRIUS ACT THE SAME AS THE 2010 BRAKES. EVER SINCE I OWNED MY PRIUS IF I HAPPENED TO BRAKE ON UNEVEN SURFACES NO MATTER WHAT THE SPEED THE BRAKES SEEM TO RELEASE AND THEN START BRAKING AGAIN. THE TIME SPAN IS SHORT, MAYBE 1-2 SECONDS, BUT THE TRACTION LIGHT COMES ON FOR EVERY INCIDENT. CALLED THE DEALERSHIP…
Read full complaint
THE BRAKES ON THE 2007 PRIUS ACT THE SAME AS THE 2010 BRAKES. EVER SINCE I OWNED MY PRIUS IF I HAPPENED TO BRAKE ON UNEVEN SURFACES NO MATTER WHAT THE SPEED THE BRAKES SEEM TO RELEASE AND THEN START BRAKING AGAIN. THE TIME SPAN IS SHORT, MAYBE 1-2 SECONDS, BUT THE TRACTION LIGHT COMES ON FOR EVERY INCIDENT. CALLED THE DEALERSHIP SEVERAL TIMES AND THEN RECENTLY AFTER HEARING ABOUT THE 2010 BRAKES AND THEIR RESPONSE IS THE SAME, NO INJURY, NO ACCIDENT, NO PROBLEM. I HOPE SOMEONE MAKES THEM FIX THE ENTIRE PRIUS LINE BRAKES, ALL MAKES AND MODELS. THE INCIDENT DATE IS THE FIRST DAY I NOTICED THE PROBLEM. *TW
NHTSA ODI #10307169
15,000 miles · Feb 6, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
THIS INVOLVES A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. I HAVE THE SAME EXPERIENCE WITH THE BRAKES OF THIS VEHICLE AS DESCRIBED WITH THE 2010 TOYOTA PRIUS MODEL. WHEN BRAKING SOMEWHAT FORCEFULLY AND DRIVING OVER A SUDDENLY UNEVEN SURFACE, THE BRAKING CEASES FOR A BRIEF MOMENT. I HAVE REPORTED THIS SEVERAL TIMES TO THE TOYOTA DEALER/SERVICE CENTE…
Read full complaint
THIS INVOLVES A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. I HAVE THE SAME EXPERIENCE WITH THE BRAKES OF THIS VEHICLE AS DESCRIBED WITH THE 2010 TOYOTA PRIUS MODEL. WHEN BRAKING SOMEWHAT FORCEFULLY AND DRIVING OVER A SUDDENLY UNEVEN SURFACE, THE BRAKING CEASES FOR A BRIEF MOMENT. I HAVE REPORTED THIS SEVERAL TIMES TO THE TOYOTA DEALER/SERVICE CENTER. THAT DEALERSHIP/SERVICE CENTER IS TOYOTA OF BRAINTREE, BRAINTREE, MA. EACH TIME, I WAS TOLD THAT THEY (THE DEALERSHIP/SERVICE CENTER) AND THE WIDER TOYOTA ORGANIZATION HAD NO KNOWLEDGE AND THAT IT WAS PROBABLY OPERATOR RELATED. THE LAST TIME I BROUGHT THIS UP WAS SATURDAY, JANUARY 30, 2010. I MENTION THIS DATE DATE BELOW AS THE INCIDENT DATE ALTHOUGH I REPORTED THESE OCCURRENCES BEFORE. *CN
NHTSA ODI #10307073
53,490 miles · Feb 6, 2010
Service Brakes, ElectricService Brakes, Hydraulic
ON SEVEN SEPARATE OCCASIONS SINCE 2007 (THE YEAR OF THE PRIUS BEING REPORTED ) A SLIGHT SKID OCCURS, WHICH ALSO RESULTS IN THE SKID LIGHT COMING ON, WHEN BRAKE PEDAL IS PRESSED. HAS BEEN INCREASING IN FREQUENCY -- THREE TIMES IN LAST WEEK--AND USUALLY OCCURS WITHIN THE FIRST MILE OF CAR USE THAT DAY. I REPORTED THE LAST INCID…
Read full complaint
ON SEVEN SEPARATE OCCASIONS SINCE 2007 (THE YEAR OF THE PRIUS BEING REPORTED ) A SLIGHT SKID OCCURS, WHICH ALSO RESULTS IN THE SKID LIGHT COMING ON, WHEN BRAKE PEDAL IS PRESSED. HAS BEEN INCREASING IN FREQUENCY -- THREE TIMES IN LAST WEEK--AND USUALLY OCCURS WITHIN THE FIRST MILE OF CAR USE THAT DAY. I REPORTED THE LAST INCIDENT BELOW. HOWEVER, THIS WAS FIRST NOTICED SOMETIME IN 2007 AFTER JULY PURCHASE DATE. *CN
NHTSA ODI #10306975
32,000 miles · Feb 6, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
WHILE DRIVING MY 2007 PRIUS ON MANY OCCASIONS, THE VEHICLE FAILED TO STOP WHILE I WAS DRIVING OVER ANY UNEVEN ROAD SUCH AS GROOVES AND POTHOLES. BRAKING SYSTEM ONLY BECAME EFFECTIVE AFTER THE SURFACE BECAME MORE REGULAR. THIS HAS OCCURRED MANY TIMES AND I DID NOT REPORT ISSUE TO TOYOTA AS I BELIEVE THIS WAS A NORMAL VEHICLE "BE…
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING MY 2007 PRIUS ON MANY OCCASIONS, THE VEHICLE FAILED TO STOP WHILE I WAS DRIVING OVER ANY UNEVEN ROAD SUCH AS GROOVES AND POTHOLES. BRAKING SYSTEM ONLY BECAME EFFECTIVE AFTER THE SURFACE BECAME MORE REGULAR. THIS HAS OCCURRED MANY TIMES AND I DID NOT REPORT ISSUE TO TOYOTA AS I BELIEVE THIS WAS A NORMAL VEHICLE "BEHAVIOR" GIVEN THE DRIVING CONDITIONS. IN VIEW OF TOYOTA'S POTENTIAL RECALL OF 2010 PRIUS VEHICLES, IT HAS BECOME CLEAR TO ME THAT VEHICLES FROM OTHER YEARS SHOULD ALSO BE EVALUATED. *CN
NHTSA ODI #10306917
Mileage unknown · Feb 6, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
BRAKING SYSTEM FAILS TO RESPOND UNDER CIRCUMSTANCES OF WET OR UNEVEN PAVEMENT. TRACTION CONTROL SYMBOL LIGHTS UP ON DASH. THIS HAS HAPPENED SINCE NEW. (I FILLED IN AN APPROXIMATE INCIDENT DATE ONLY BECAUSE IT IS A REQUIRED FIELD IN THIS FORM.) *CN
NHTSA ODI #10306897
15,000 miles · Feb 6, 2010
Power TrainService Brakes, Hydraulic
WHEN I BOUGHT MY NEW PRIUS IN 2007 I KNEW THERE WAS SOMETHING STRANGE. EVERYTIME I WENT DOWN THIS BIG HILL NEAR MY HOUSE THE CAR WOULD SHOOT FORWARD A BIT AND IT WOULD BE HARD TO BRAKE. I CALLED MY DEALER AND THEY TOLD ME IT WAS AN ADVANCED SAFTY FEATURE. THE MORE I DROVE THE CAR THE WORSE IT GOT. I WOULD AVOID ROUTES WITH H…
Read full complaint
WHEN I BOUGHT MY NEW PRIUS IN 2007 I KNEW THERE WAS SOMETHING STRANGE. EVERYTIME I WENT DOWN THIS BIG HILL NEAR MY HOUSE THE CAR WOULD SHOOT FORWARD A BIT AND IT WOULD BE HARD TO BRAKE. I CALLED MY DEALER AND THEY TOLD ME IT WAS AN ADVANCED SAFTY FEATURE. THE MORE I DROVE THE CAR THE WORSE IT GOT. I WOULD AVOID ROUTES WITH HILLS IN THE RAIN. IN 2009 WHEN I HAD MY 2ND CHILD I DECIDED TO GET RID OF THE CAR BECAUSE THE PROBLEM WAS GETTING WORSE. IT WAS AS IF I WAS SLIDING ON ICE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SUMMER *CN
NHTSA ODI #10306881
25,491 miles · Feb 5, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
ON DECEMBER 6, 2009, AUTOMATIC BRAKES KICKED IN AT LOW SPEED COMING TO A STOP AT A RED LIGHT. SHORTLY THEREAFTER A SCREECHING METAL AGAINST METAL SOUND. TOOK THE CAR TO THE DEALER AND THEY SAID BRAKES WERE FINE. ON DECEMBER 28TH, AGAIN AT LOW SPEED BRAKING FOR A RED LIGHT, APPLIED THE BRAKES AND HEARD A LOUD BANG AND THE CAR LUR…
Read full complaint
ON DECEMBER 6, 2009, AUTOMATIC BRAKES KICKED IN AT LOW SPEED COMING TO A STOP AT A RED LIGHT. SHORTLY THEREAFTER A SCREECHING METAL AGAINST METAL SOUND. TOOK THE CAR TO THE DEALER AND THEY SAID BRAKES WERE FINE. ON DECEMBER 28TH, AGAIN AT LOW SPEED BRAKING FOR A RED LIGHT, APPLIED THE BRAKES AND HEARD A LOUD BANG AND THE CAR LURCHED. AT FIRST I THOUGHT I HAD BEEN REAR-ENDED BUT THERE WAS NO CAR BEHIND ME. DROVE IMMEDIATELY TO THE DEALER. THIS TIME THEY SAID THE BRAKES WERE GRABBING AND THEY CLEANED AND ADJUSTED THE BRAKES. THIS HAPPENED ON A 2007 PRIUS, NOT A 2010 PRIUS, SO I AM WONDERING IF THE BRAKE PROBLEM IS MORE WIDESPREAD THAN IS CURRENTLY ASSUMED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10306805
9,000 miles · Feb 5, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
I OWN A PRIUS 2007 AND HAVE BEEN EXPERIENCING THE BRAKE PROBLEMS REPORTED IN THE NEWS SINCE BUYING THE CAR USED IN 12/08. SOMETIMES WHEN APPLYING THE BRAKES ON UNEVEN SURFACES, A DASHBOARD SLIP INDICATOR LIGHT COMES ON AS THE BRAKES RELEASE/STOP WORKING AND THE CAR FEELS LIKE IT IS SKIDDING FORWARD FOR ABOUT A SECOND. THEN THE…
Read full complaint
I OWN A PRIUS 2007 AND HAVE BEEN EXPERIENCING THE BRAKE PROBLEMS REPORTED IN THE NEWS SINCE BUYING THE CAR USED IN 12/08. SOMETIMES WHEN APPLYING THE BRAKES ON UNEVEN SURFACES, A DASHBOARD SLIP INDICATOR LIGHT COMES ON AS THE BRAKES RELEASE/STOP WORKING AND THE CAR FEELS LIKE IT IS SKIDDING FORWARD FOR ABOUT A SECOND. THEN THEY REENGAGE AND THE CAR CAN BE STOPPED. I HAVE NOT BEEN IN A ACCIDENT YET. MY DEALERSHIP HAD TOLD ME THAT IT IS A NORMAL FUNCTION OF THE PRIUS. THIS HAPPEN AGAIN ON 2/2/10 AS I WAS TURNING INTO A PARKING LOT AND WENT OVER THE LIP OF THE ENTRANCE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10306781
Mileage unknown · Feb 5, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
I AM EXPERIENCING A PROBLEM WITH MY '07 TOYOTA PRIUS. I PURCHASED MY PRIUS IN MAY OF '07 & HAVE APPROXIMATELY 17,600 MILES ON THE ODOMETER. SINCE THEN I HAVE EXPERIENCED ON APPROXIMATELY 6 OCCASIONS A LURCHING WHEN BRAKING TO A FULL STOP AT A STOP LIGHT. I AM BRAKING AFTER A SLOW COAST AND GRADUALLY BRAKING SO IT IS NOT A SU…
Read full complaint
I AM EXPERIENCING A PROBLEM WITH MY '07 TOYOTA PRIUS. I PURCHASED MY PRIUS IN MAY OF '07 & HAVE APPROXIMATELY 17,600 MILES ON THE ODOMETER. SINCE THEN I HAVE EXPERIENCED ON APPROXIMATELY 6 OCCASIONS A LURCHING WHEN BRAKING TO A FULL STOP AT A STOP LIGHT. I AM BRAKING AFTER A SLOW COAST AND GRADUALLY BRAKING SO IT IS NOT A SUDDEN ACTION. SINCE IT HAPPENS SO RARELY AND WITH NO WARNING AND DOESN'T REPEAT THE PROBLEM FOR MONTHS I HAVE NOT TAKEN MY CAR IN TO THE DEALERSHIP. AFTER HEARING SIMILAR COMPLAINTS RE: 2010 PRIUS I CALLED MY DEALERSHIP TO SEE IF THEY COULD CHECK MY CAR FOR THE SAME DEFECT. THE DEALERSHIP SAID IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO DIAGNOSE UNLESS THE CAR WOULD JUST HAPPEN TO EXPERIENCE THE BEHAVIOR DURING A TEST DRIVE. BUT FOR $79 I COULD BRING IT IN WHICH WOULD DOCUMENT MY COMPLAINT. I WAS ALSO TOLD THAT SINCE THE 2010 RECALL THE DEALERSHIP WAS BEING INUNDATED WITH HYPOCHONDRIAC OWNER'S REPORTING IMAGINED PROBLEMS. I THINK THOSE OWNER'S ARE MORE LIKELY TO BE LIKE ME. JUST NOW REPORTING A HARD TO REPLICATE INCIDENT. I THINK THE INVESTIGATION NEEDS TO BE BROADENED IMMEDIATELY FOR ALL PRIUS INVOLVED IN THE FLOOR MAT RECALL AS I THINK THAT IS JUST AN INVENTED PROBLEM TO COVER UP THE BRAKING/ACCELERATION DEFECT. *TR UPDATED 04/15/10.
NHTSA ODI #10306698
Official recalls
4Nov 14, 2012
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Hybrid Propulsion System: Inverter
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.
Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Engine And Engine Cooling
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.
Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Nov 14, 2012
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Steering:gear Box:shaft Sector
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.
Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Steering
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.
Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Feb 3, 2010
SOUTHEAST TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2005-2011 PASSENGER VEHICLES FOR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 110, "TIRE SELECTION AND RIMS." THESE VEHICLES WERE SOLD WITHOUT THE REQUISITE LOAD CARRYING CAPACITY MODIFICATION LABELS.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A DRIVER MAY OVERLOAD A VEHICLE WHICH MAY INCREASE THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL MAIL TO CONSUMERS THE CORRECTED LABEL OR THE CUSTOMER WILL HAVE THE OPTION FOR DEALERS TO INSTALL THE LABEL FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON MAY 27, 2010. OWNERS MAY CONTACT SOUTHEAST TOYOTA AT 1-800-301-6859.
Oct 5, 2009
TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2004-2010 PASSENGER VEHICLES. THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL CAN GET STUCK IN THE WIDE OPEN POSITION DUE TO ITS BEING TRAPPED BY AN UNSECURED OR INCOMPATIBLE DRIVER'S FLOOR MAT.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A STUCK OPEN ACCELERATOR PEDAL MAY RESULT IN VERY HIGH VEHICLE SPEEDS AND MAKE IT DIFFICULT TO STOP THE VEHICLE, WHICH COULD CAUSE A CRASH, SERIOUS INJURY OR DEATH.
Remedy: TOYOTA FILED AN AMENDED DEFECT REPORT ON NOVEMBER 25, 2009, STATING THAT DEALERS WILL MODIFY THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL AND, ON CERTAIN VEHICLES, ALTER THE SHAPE OF THE FLOOR SURFACE UNDER THE PEDAL. THESE CHANGES ADDRESS THE RISK OF PEDAL ENTRAPMENT DUE TO INTERFERENCE WITH THE FLOOR MAT. REDESIGNED ACCELERATOR PEDALS WILL BECOME AVAILABLE BEGINNING IN APRIL 2010 AND DEALERS WILL REPLACE ANY MODIFIED PEDAL WITH THE NEW PEDAL IF DESIRED. ALSO, DEALERS WILL REPLACE ANY GENUINE TOYOTA OR LEXUS ALL-WEATHER FLOOR MATS WITH REDESIGNED ALL-WEATHER MATS, OR REPURCHASE THE PREVIOUS MATS FROM OWNERS WHO DO NOT WANT THE NEW ONES. ADDITIONALLY, SOFTWARE MODIFICATIONS WILL BE INSTALLED ON CAMRY, AVALON AND LEXUS ES 350, IS 350 AND IS 250 MODELS THAT WILL ENSURE THAT THE BRAKE OVERRIDES THE ACCELERATOR IN THE EVENT BOTH BRAKE AND ACCELERATOR PEDALS ARE APPLIED. TOYOTA WILL BEGIN MAILING LETTERS TO OWNERS ON DECEMBER 31, 2009. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331, LEXUS AT 1-800-255-3987.
Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗
NHTSA investigations
3DP22005 · Pedestrian Alert Sounds
Opened Jan 27, 2023 · Closed Aug 7, 2023
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Electrical System:propulsion System
NHTSA received a petition on or about July 18, 2022, requesting that Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 141 be applied to all electric and hybrid vehicles operating in the United States. The petition can be reviewed at NHTSA.gov under ODI Number 11486072. FMVSS 141 establishes performance requirements for pedestrian alert sounds for motor vehicles. The standard applies to hybrid and electric vehicles that have a gross vehicle weight rating of 4,536 KG or less or are defined as low-speed vehicles. The standard became fully applicable to all such vehicles manufactured on or after March 1, 2021.On January 27, 2023, NHTSA opened Defect Petition (DP) 22-005 to evaluate the subject matter described in the petition. On June 24, 2023 and as supplemented on June 25, 2023, the petitioner notified NHTSA he was withdrawing his petition. The petitioner indicated that, based on his review of data, there is no justification for asserting potential benefits that could be derived from actions sought by my petition. Based on the petitioner's withdrawal, DP22-005 is closed. Closure of this DP does not represent a determination by NHTSA regarding the subject matter of the petition.
DP13001 · Intermediate Steering Shaft Separation
Opened Feb 21, 2013 · Closed Apr 8, 2020
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Steering; Steering:column; Steering:linkages
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606
Additional source detail variants (3)
Steering:column
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606
Steering:linkages
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606
Steering
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606
PE09019 · Headlight Failure
Opened Apr 17, 2009 · Closed Aug 27, 2009
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Exterior Lighting; Exterior Lighting:headlights
ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION AFTER RECEIVING REPORTS THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS WOULD GO OUT, OR EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH HIGH INTENSITY DISCHARGE (HID) HEADLAMPS THAT OPERATE ON INDEPENDENT LAMPS AND ECU'S (ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNITS) FOR EACH HEADLIGHT, MEANING THAT EACH HEADLIGHT RUNS INDEPENDENTLY OF THE OTHER, AND A FAILURE IN ONE LAMP OR ECU DOES NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN A FAILURE OF THE OTHER.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, A RANDOM SAMPLE OF FORTY CONSUMERS WAS CONTACTED BY ODI IN A TELEPHONE SURVEY TO VERIFY THEIR EXPERIENCES.THE CONSUMERS STATED IN COMPLAINTS TO TOYOTA THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS FAILED AT THE SAME TIME.ODI DISCOVERED THROUGH TALKING WITH THESE COMPLAINANTS THAT IN FACT ONE HEADLIGHT WOULD BEGIN TO FLICKER AND THEN CUT OFF.THE OTHER HEADLIGHT WOULD STILL BE OPERATIONAL.IN A FEW CASES WHERE NO ACTION WAS TAKEN, SOME COMPLAINANTS STATED THAT AFTER A FEW MONTHS BOTH HEADLAMPS WOULD BEGIN TO FAIL RESULTING IN NO HEADLIGHTS; HOWEVER NONE REPORTED THAT BOTH LAMPS FAILED SIMULTANEOUSLY.COMPLAINANTS ALSO STATED THAT THEY COULD TOGGLE THE HEADLAMP SWITCH ON AND OFF TO TEMPORARILY RESTORE LIGHTING WHEN THIS CONDITION OCCURRED, EVEN IN CASES WERE BOTH HEADLAMPS WERE EXTINGUISHED.THE RESULTS OF THIS SURVEY ARE LARGELY CONSISTENT WITH ODI'S ASSESSMENT OF THE REPORTS AND WARRANTY DATA.TOYOTA SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER THAT, GENERALLY SPEAKING, ONLY ONE LAMP FAILED AT A TIME, AND THAT TOGGLING THE SWITCH RESTORED THE LAMP.TOYOTA REQUESTED A MEETING WITH ODI AND ON AUGUST 6, 2009, PRESENTED THEIR ASSESSMENT OF HEADLAMP FAILURE.TOYOTA CONFIRMED THAT A HEADLAMP COULD EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING DUE TO A BULB FAILURE, AND THAT IT COULD BE TEMPORARILY RESTORED BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH ON AND OFF, AND THAT SIMULTANEOUS FAILURE OF BOTH HEADLAMPS WAS RARE AND UNLIKELY.TOYOTA ALSO BRIEFLY DISCUSSED THEIR INTENTION TO CONDUCT A CUSTOMER SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO ADDRESS CONSUMER DISSATISFACTION WITH HID BULB FAILURES.SINCE THERE IS STILL ONE HEADLIGHT OPERATING WHEN THE OTHER ONE CUTS OFF, THERE IS STILL LIGHTING AVAILABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR FACILITY.THUS, A SAFETY DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Exterior Lighting:headlights
ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION AFTER RECEIVING REPORTS THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS WOULD GO OUT, OR EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH HIGH INTENSITY DISCHARGE (HID) HEADLAMPS THAT OPERATE ON INDEPENDENT LAMPS AND ECU'S (ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNITS) FOR EACH HEADLIGHT, MEANING THAT EACH HEADLIGHT RUNS INDEPENDENTLY OF THE OTHER, AND A FAILURE IN ONE LAMP OR ECU DOES NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN A FAILURE OF THE OTHER.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, A RANDOM SAMPLE OF FORTY CONSUMERS WAS CONTACTED BY ODI IN A TELEPHONE SURVEY TO VERIFY THEIR EXPERIENCES.THE CONSUMERS STATED IN COMPLAINTS TO TOYOTA THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS FAILED AT THE SAME TIME.ODI DISCOVERED THROUGH TALKING WITH THESE COMPLAINANTS THAT IN FACT ONE HEADLIGHT WOULD BEGIN TO FLICKER AND THEN CUT OFF.THE OTHER HEADLIGHT WOULD STILL BE OPERATIONAL.IN A FEW CASES WHERE NO ACTION WAS TAKEN, SOME COMPLAINANTS STATED THAT AFTER A FEW MONTHS BOTH HEADLAMPS WOULD BEGIN TO FAIL RESULTING IN NO HEADLIGHTS; HOWEVER NONE REPORTED THAT BOTH LAMPS FAILED SIMULTANEOUSLY.COMPLAINANTS ALSO STATED THAT THEY COULD TOGGLE THE HEADLAMP SWITCH ON AND OFF TO TEMPORARILY RESTORE LIGHTING WHEN THIS CONDITION OCCURRED, EVEN IN CASES WERE BOTH HEADLAMPS WERE EXTINGUISHED.THE RESULTS OF THIS SURVEY ARE LARGELY CONSISTENT WITH ODI'S ASSESSMENT OF THE REPORTS AND WARRANTY DATA.TOYOTA SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER THAT, GENERALLY SPEAKING, ONLY ONE LAMP FAILED AT A TIME, AND THAT TOGGLING THE SWITCH RESTORED THE LAMP.TOYOTA REQUESTED A MEETING WITH ODI AND ON AUGUST 6, 2009, PRESENTED THEIR ASSESSMENT OF HEADLAMP FAILURE.TOYOTA CONFIRMED THAT A HEADLAMP COULD EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING DUE TO A BULB FAILURE, AND THAT IT COULD BE TEMPORARILY RESTORED BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH ON AND OFF, AND THAT SIMULTANEOUS FAILURE OF BOTH HEADLAMPS WAS RARE AND UNLIKELY.TOYOTA ALSO BRIEFLY DISCUSSED THEIR INTENTION TO CONDUCT A CUSTOMER SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO ADDRESS CONSUMER DISSATISFACTION WITH HID BULB FAILURES.SINCE THERE IS STILL ONE HEADLIGHT OPERATING WHEN THE OTHER ONE CUTS OFF, THERE IS STILL LIGHTING AVAILABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR FACILITY.THUS, A SAFETY DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Exterior Lighting
ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION AFTER RECEIVING REPORTS THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS WOULD GO OUT, OR EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH HIGH INTENSITY DISCHARGE (HID) HEADLAMPS THAT OPERATE ON INDEPENDENT LAMPS AND ECU'S (ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNITS) FOR EACH HEADLIGHT, MEANING THAT EACH HEADLIGHT RUNS INDEPENDENTLY OF THE OTHER, AND A FAILURE IN ONE LAMP OR ECU DOES NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN A FAILURE OF THE OTHER.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, A RANDOM SAMPLE OF FORTY CONSUMERS WAS CONTACTED BY ODI IN A TELEPHONE SURVEY TO VERIFY THEIR EXPERIENCES.THE CONSUMERS STATED IN COMPLAINTS TO TOYOTA THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS FAILED AT THE SAME TIME.ODI DISCOVERED THROUGH TALKING WITH THESE COMPLAINANTS THAT IN FACT ONE HEADLIGHT WOULD BEGIN TO FLICKER AND THEN CUT OFF.THE OTHER HEADLIGHT WOULD STILL BE OPERATIONAL.IN A FEW CASES WHERE NO ACTION WAS TAKEN, SOME COMPLAINANTS STATED THAT AFTER A FEW MONTHS BOTH HEADLAMPS WOULD BEGIN TO FAIL RESULTING IN NO HEADLIGHTS; HOWEVER NONE REPORTED THAT BOTH LAMPS FAILED SIMULTANEOUSLY.COMPLAINANTS ALSO STATED THAT THEY COULD TOGGLE THE HEADLAMP SWITCH ON AND OFF TO TEMPORARILY RESTORE LIGHTING WHEN THIS CONDITION OCCURRED, EVEN IN CASES WERE BOTH HEADLAMPS WERE EXTINGUISHED.THE RESULTS OF THIS SURVEY ARE LARGELY CONSISTENT WITH ODI'S ASSESSMENT OF THE REPORTS AND WARRANTY DATA.TOYOTA SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER THAT, GENERALLY SPEAKING, ONLY ONE LAMP FAILED AT A TIME, AND THAT TOGGLING THE SWITCH RESTORED THE LAMP.TOYOTA REQUESTED A MEETING WITH ODI AND ON AUGUST 6, 2009, PRESENTED THEIR ASSESSMENT OF HEADLAMP FAILURE.TOYOTA CONFIRMED THAT A HEADLAMP COULD EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING DUE TO A BULB FAILURE, AND THAT IT COULD BE TEMPORARILY RESTORED BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH ON AND OFF, AND THAT SIMULTANEOUS FAILURE OF BOTH HEADLAMPS WAS RARE AND UNLIKELY.TOYOTA ALSO BRIEFLY DISCUSSED THEIR INTENTION TO CONDUCT A CUSTOMER SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO ADDRESS CONSUMER DISSATISFACTION WITH HID BULB FAILURES.SINCE THERE IS STILL ONE HEADLIGHT OPERATING WHEN THE OTHER ONE CUTS OFF, THERE IS STILL LIGHTING AVAILABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR FACILITY.THUS, A SAFETY DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.