← 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

Vehicle Speed Control complaints

124 reports
Clear category filter
425 miles · Feb 2, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH, THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL BECAME STUCK AND SHE COULD NOT SLOW DOWN. SHE IMMEDIATELY ENGAGED THE BRAKE PEDAL AND TURNED OFF THE IGNITION. WHEN SHE RESTARTED THE VEHICLE, IT BEGAN TO OPERATE NORMALLY. THE DEALER STATED THAT THERE WERE NO DIAGNOSTIC CODES INDI…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH, THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL BECAME STUCK AND SHE COULD NOT SLOW DOWN. SHE IMMEDIATELY ENGAGED THE BRAKE PEDAL AND TURNED OFF THE IGNITION. WHEN SHE RESTARTED THE VEHICLE, IT BEGAN TO OPERATE NORMALLY. THE DEALER STATED THAT THERE WERE NO DIAGNOSTIC CODES INDICATING THAT THERE WAS A FAILURE AND THAT THE FLOOR MATS MAY HAVE CAUSED THE FAILURE. SHE WAS ALSO TOLD THAT THE COMPUTER WAS SET TO THE DRIVING HABITS OF THE DRIVER AND HER INCONSISTENT DRIVING BEHAVIOR "CONFUSED" THE COMPUTER. THE FAILURE PREVIOUSLY OCCURRED IN 2007. SHE CALLED THE MANUFACTURER AND WAS OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 10,000. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 425.

NHTSA ODI #10303796

Mileage unknown · Feb 1, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control

I HAVE ALSO EXPERIENCED THE UNINTENDED ACCELERATION IN A 2007 PRIUS. IT WOULD NOT SLOW DOWN; BUT IT READJUSTED AFTER ABOUT 20 SECONDS OF ME TAPPING THE GAS PEDAL TO REGAIN CONTROL AND ALTERNATIVELY HITTING THE BRAKE. JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAD THE DATA POINT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10303643

25,000 miles · Feb 1, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A RECALL NOTIFICATION UNDER NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER 09V388000 (VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL:ACCELERATOR PEDAL). THE TECHNICIAN REFUSED TO REPAIR THE VEHICLE UNDER THE FIRST RECALL REMEDY. THERE WAS CONCERN OF THE POTENTIAL SAFETY HAZARD; HOWEVER, NO FAILURE HAS OCCURRED A…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A RECALL NOTIFICATION UNDER NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER 09V388000 (VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL:ACCELERATOR PEDAL). THE TECHNICIAN REFUSED TO REPAIR THE VEHICLE UNDER THE FIRST RECALL REMEDY. THERE WAS CONCERN OF THE POTENTIAL SAFETY HAZARD; HOWEVER, NO FAILURE HAS OCCURRED AT THIS TIME. UPDATED 3/8/10 *CN THE CONSUMER STATED HE RECEIVED THE RECALL FOR THE PEDAL MODIFICATIONS, BUT WHEN HE ARRIVED AT THE DEALER, HE WAS INFORMED THEY WERE NOT GOING TO PERFORM THE RECALL AND THEY WERE WAITING FOR A PERMANENT FIX. UPDATED 04/06/10.*JB

NHTSA ODI #10303634

32,000 miles · Feb 1, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control

UNEXPLAINED SPONTANEOUS ACCELERATION IN 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. IN MID-MAY OF LAST YEAR I WAS DRIVING ALONE ON THE HOLLYWOOD FREEWAY IN APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH TRAFFIC. SUDDENLY THE CAR ACCELERATED DRAMATICALLY, AS IF I HAD PUNCHED THE ACCELERATOR, OR THE CRUISE CONTROL SUDDENLY KICKED IN BUT AT FULL SPEED (THE CRUISE WAS NOT ON). I WAS…

Read full complaint

UNEXPLAINED SPONTANEOUS ACCELERATION IN 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. IN MID-MAY OF LAST YEAR I WAS DRIVING ALONE ON THE HOLLYWOOD FREEWAY IN APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH TRAFFIC. SUDDENLY THE CAR ACCELERATED DRAMATICALLY, AS IF I HAD PUNCHED THE ACCELERATOR, OR THE CRUISE CONTROL SUDDENLY KICKED IN BUT AT FULL SPEED (THE CRUISE WAS NOT ON). I WAS SHOCKED AND SCARED, AND I HIT THEBRAKES, NOTHING HAPPENED, AND THE CAR KEPT ACCELERATING. I THOUGHT ABOUT THE MAT AND HOOKED MY FOOT AROUND THE PEDAL TO SEE BUT THE PEDAL WAS UP. I KEPT HITTING THE BRAKES AGAIN, AND ALSO PUMPED THE ACCELERATOR TO MAKE SURE IT WASN'T STUCK AND THEN THE CAR STOPPED ACCELERATING. THE WHOLE THING LASTED LESS THAN 10 SECONDS, BUT WAS PRETTY SCARY AS I GOT PRETTY CLOSE TO TRAFFIC IN FRONT OF ME. IT IMMEDIATELY OCCURRED TO ME THAT IT COULD HAVE BEEN THE MAT AS THAT HAD HAPPENED IN ANOTHER CAR, BUT THE MAT WAS CLIPPED TO THE FLOOR, AND WAS NOT IN ANY WAY INTERFERING WITH THE GAS PEDAL. ALSO, BEAR IN MIND, AS I'M WRITING ABOUT THIS IT SOUNDS AS IF I WAS ANALYTICAL AND METHODICAL, BUT ACTUALLY I WAS PRETTY FRANTIC AND MY FEET WERE FLYING ON THE PEDALS.... I TOLD MY PARTNER MARK ABOUT IT, TOLD HIM TO WATCH OUT FOR IT, BUT THEN IN JUNE WE BOUGHT ANOTHER CAR AND MARK PRIMARILY DROVE THE PRIUS AFTER THAT. I THEN I FORGOT ABOUT IT, AS I THOUGHT IT WAS JUST AN ANOMALY AND BASED ON WHAT WE PAID FOR THE CAR AND TOYOTA'S REPUTATION FOR SAFETY. I HAD NOT HEARD OF ANY ACCELERATION ISSUES AT THE TIME, AND IN FACT DIDN'T UNTIL MUCH LATER AFTER THE CHP OFFICER'S CRASH IN THE LEXUS. I'M ACTUALLY NOW PRETTY FREAKED OUT ABOUT IT IN HINDSIGHT, AND WE HAVE GONE OVER THE DRILL REPEATEDLY TO MAKE SURE MARK KNOWS WHAT TO DO IF IT HAPPENS AGAIN. I SINCERELY DOUBT IT HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE PEDAL OR THE MAT, AND IN MY GUT I SUSPECT IT IS ELECTRONIC IN NATURE. I AM PRETTY NERVOUS ABOUT IT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10303507

41,629 miles · Jan 6, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash

ON 11/29/09 IN THE AFTERNOON AS I WAS PULLING INTO A PARKING SLOT IN A TRADER JOE'S PARKING LOT, MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS SUDDENLY ACCELERATED FORWARD OVER A CURB, ACROSS A CROSSWALK AND CAME TO REST AGAINST A TREE. SPACE COVERED BY THE CAR FROM ACCELERATION TO THE TREE WAS ABOUT 20-25 FEET. WITNESSES ATTEST THAT I WAS USING MY BR…

Read full complaint

ON 11/29/09 IN THE AFTERNOON AS I WAS PULLING INTO A PARKING SLOT IN A TRADER JOE'S PARKING LOT, MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS SUDDENLY ACCELERATED FORWARD OVER A CURB, ACROSS A CROSSWALK AND CAME TO REST AGAINST A TREE. SPACE COVERED BY THE CAR FROM ACCELERATION TO THE TREE WAS ABOUT 20-25 FEET. WITNESSES ATTEST THAT I WAS USING MY BRAKE AS THEY SAW THE LIGHTS. I DID NOT HAVE TIME TO ATTEMPT TO SHIFT THE CAR TO "NEUTRAL." THE FLOORMATS WERE NOT INTERFERING WITH THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL (I HAVE PICTURES) AND THE FLOOR MATS WERE HOOKED DOWN. FORTUNATELY NO ONE WAS HURT INCLUDING ME. THERE WAS SLIGHT DAMAGE TO THE FRONT DRIVERS SIDE BUMPER OF AN EMPTY CAR PARKED FACING ME. THERE WAS SUBSTANTIAL DAMAGE TO THE FRONT OF MY PRIUS. AS I STATED, THERE WERE TWO WITNESSES WHO GAVE ME THEIR CONTACT INFORMATION AND SAID THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO TESTIFY FOR ME IF NECESSARY. THERE WAS A TRADER JOE WORKER WHO CALLED A TOW TRUCK. THE DRIVER OF THE OTHER VEHICLE WITH THE MINIMAL DAMAGE WAS QUITE UPSET AND CALLED THE POLICE WHO CAME AND WROTE A REPORT. MY CAR HAS NEVER SUDDENLY ACCELERATED BEFORE - THIS WAS THE FIRST TIME. THE CAR WAS TOWED TO HOOMAN TOYOTA IN LONG BEACH. IN RESPONSE TO MY COMPLAINTS TO TOYOTA, A REGIONAL TEAM WAS SENT TO EVALUATE THE ACCELERATOR MECHANISM. THE CAR IS CURRENTLY BEING REPAIRED HOWEVER TOYOTA HAS NOT BEEN IN TOUCH WITH ME TO TELL ME THEIR FINDINGS. TOYOTA'S BEHAVIOR TO MY COMPLAINTS OF SAFETY ISSUES HAS BEEN TO TELL ME THAT THE ONLY PROBLEM THEY HAVE IS FLOORMATS AND THAT MY PROBLEM HAS NEVER BEEN REPORTED BEFORE. THEIR IMPLICATION IS THAT I WAS AT ERROR. MY INSURANCE COMPANY STATE FARM INITIALLY HELD ME RESPONSIBLE FOR NOT CONTROLLING THE VEHICLE. WHEN I REFUSED THIS DECISION, SF DID MORE RESEARCH AND CHANGED THEIR RULING TO FIND FAULT WITH TOYOTA AND WILL TRY TO GET REIMBURSED FOR REPAIR COSTS AND MY DEDUCTIBLE. I EXPECT MY CAR TO BE READY NEXT WEEK AND AM DEEPLY CONCERNED THAT THE PROBLEM WILL NOT BE FIXED. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10298480

36,600 miles · Dec 23, 2009
Vehicle Speed Control

OUR LEASED 2007TOYOTA PRIUS SOMETIMES "JUMPS" FORWARD UNEXPECTEDLY WHEN GOING OVER A STONE OR BUMP ON A DIRT ROAD OR OTHER STREET, BRIEFLY INCREASING ACCELERATION. THIS HAS HAPPENED WHEN TRAVELING A STRAIGHT ROAD AND ALSO WHEN TAKING A CORNER ONTO A DIRT ROAD. BRAKING DOESN'T SLOW DOWN THE ACCELERATION, INCREASING THE CHANCES O…

Read full complaint

OUR LEASED 2007TOYOTA PRIUS SOMETIMES "JUMPS" FORWARD UNEXPECTEDLY WHEN GOING OVER A STONE OR BUMP ON A DIRT ROAD OR OTHER STREET, BRIEFLY INCREASING ACCELERATION. THIS HAS HAPPENED WHEN TRAVELING A STRAIGHT ROAD AND ALSO WHEN TAKING A CORNER ONTO A DIRT ROAD. BRAKING DOESN'T SLOW DOWN THE ACCELERATION, INCREASING THE CHANCES OF A COLLISION WITH A VEHICLE OR OTHER OBSTRUCTION THAT MAY BE IN FRONT OF OUR CAR. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10296779

75,850 miles · Dec 2, 2009
Exterior LightingVehicle Speed Control

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHENEVER SHE WAS DRIVING THE HEADLIGHTS CAME ON AND SHUT OFF INTERMITTENTLY. OCCASIONALLY, THE HEADLIGHTS WOULD NOT COME BACK ON FOR FIFTEEN MINUTES AFTER THEY SHUT OFF. THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL ALSO BEGAN STICKING TO THE FLOOR; HOWEVER, THERE WERE NO FLOOR MATS IN HE…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHENEVER SHE WAS DRIVING THE HEADLIGHTS CAME ON AND SHUT OFF INTERMITTENTLY. OCCASIONALLY, THE HEADLIGHTS WOULD NOT COME BACK ON FOR FIFTEEN MINUTES AFTER THEY SHUT OFF. THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL ALSO BEGAN STICKING TO THE FLOOR; HOWEVER, THERE WERE NO FLOOR MATS IN HER VEHICLE. THE DEALER INFORMED HER THAT FOR $400 THEY WOULD REPLACE THE BULBS IN THE VEHICLE. THERE WERE NO RELATED RECALLS. THE VIN NUMBER WAS UNKNOWN. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 75,850.

NHTSA ODI #10294283

15,000 miles · Nov 18, 2009
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. HE STATED THAT WHEN HE APPROACHED A STOP LIGHT AND ENGAGED THE BRAKE PEDAL, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED WITHOUT WARNING. THE CONTACT LOST CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE AND CRASHED INTO A TREE. THE AIR BAGS DEPLOYED; HOWEVER, THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER TO BE REPAIRED. THE DEALER …

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. HE STATED THAT WHEN HE APPROACHED A STOP LIGHT AND ENGAGED THE BRAKE PEDAL, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED WITHOUT WARNING. THE CONTACT LOST CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE AND CRASHED INTO A TREE. THE AIR BAGS DEPLOYED; HOWEVER, THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER TO BE REPAIRED. THE DEALER CONFIRMED THAT THE FAILURE COULD HAVE BEEN DUE TO THE FLOOR MATS. THE VEHICLE IS BEING REPAIRED AND THE INSURANCE COMPANY WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REPAIR COST. THE CONTACT IS VERY CONCERNED OF THE SAFETY RISK AND THE POSSIBILITY THAT THE FAILURE COULD REOCCUR. THERE WERE NO INJURIES. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 15000.

NHTSA ODI #10292656

29,000 miles · Nov 16, 2009
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 25 MPH THE VEHICLE IN FRONT OF HIM MADE A SUDDEN STOP; HOWEVER, AFTER ENGAGING THE BRAKE PEDAL, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED AND CRASHED INTO HIT THE VEHICLE IN FRONT OF HIM. THE VEHICLE HE CRASHED INTO ALSO CRASHED INTO ANOTHER VEHICLE. THERE WERE NO IN…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 25 MPH THE VEHICLE IN FRONT OF HIM MADE A SUDDEN STOP; HOWEVER, AFTER ENGAGING THE BRAKE PEDAL, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED AND CRASHED INTO HIT THE VEHICLE IN FRONT OF HIM. THE VEHICLE HE CRASHED INTO ALSO CRASHED INTO ANOTHER VEHICLE. THERE WERE NO INJURIES. THE CONTACTS INSURANCE RATE WILL DOUBLE DUE TO THE CRASH. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 29,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 31,500. UPDATED 12/7/09 *CN UPDATED 12/08/09.*JB

NHTSA ODI #10292373

500 miles · Nov 12, 2009
Vehicle Speed Control

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. DURING BRAKE APPLICATION AT 25 MPH, THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO ACCELERATE. AFTER SHE WAS ABLE TO DECELERATE, THE VEHICLE WOULD NO LONGER ACCELERATE TO THE INTENDED SPEED. THE VEHICLE HAS NOT BEEN TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR INSPECTION. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 500. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS …

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. DURING BRAKE APPLICATION AT 25 MPH, THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO ACCELERATE. AFTER SHE WAS ABLE TO DECELERATE, THE VEHICLE WOULD NO LONGER ACCELERATE TO THE INTENDED SPEED. THE VEHICLE HAS NOT BEEN TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR INSPECTION. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 500. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 18,000.

NHTSA ODI #10291978

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.