← 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
54,000 miles · Feb 25, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHENEVER THE CONTACT PLACED THE VEHICLE IN PARK OR NEUTRAL THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY SURGED FORWARD WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALERSHIP WHERE THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE FAILURE COULD NOT BE REPRODUCED. THERE WERE NO PRIOR WARNINGS. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES …

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHENEVER THE CONTACT PLACED THE VEHICLE IN PARK OR NEUTRAL THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY SURGED FORWARD WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALERSHIP WHERE THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE FAILURE COULD NOT BE REPRODUCED. THERE WERE NO PRIOR WARNINGS. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 54,000.

NHTSA ODI #10314193

60,000 miles · Feb 24, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS HYBRID. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY BETWEEN 60-65 MPH ON NORMAL ROAD. THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL BEGAN TO STICK. THE DRIVER SIDE FLOOR MAT WAS ENTRAPPED UNDERNEATH THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL. THE DRIVER WAS ABLE TO REMOVE THE FLOOR MAT WHILE PRESSURE WAS BEING APPLIED TO THE BRAKE PED…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS HYBRID. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY BETWEEN 60-65 MPH ON NORMAL ROAD. THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL BEGAN TO STICK. THE DRIVER SIDE FLOOR MAT WAS ENTRAPPED UNDERNEATH THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL. THE DRIVER WAS ABLE TO REMOVE THE FLOOR MAT WHILE PRESSURE WAS BEING APPLIED TO THE BRAKE PEDAL. THE VEHICLE WAS ABLE TO SLOW DOWN. THE IDENTICAL FAILURE OCCURRED ON A SEPARATE OCCASION. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER FOR DIAGNOSTIC TESTING. THE TECHNICIAN WAS UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 60,000.

NHTSA ODI #10313818

Mileage unknown · Feb 24, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control

SINCE OWNING OUR 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS, WE HAVE CALLED AT LEAST 4 TIMES WITH A PROBLEM WE HAVE BEEN HAVING. CRAZY ACCELERATING AT HIGH SPEED WITH CRUISE CONTROL. IT USUALLY HAPPENS WHEN WE RESUME CRUISE CONTROL. SOMETIMES IT EXTREMELY SPEEDS UP AND KEEPS GOING BEYOND THE SPEED SET. THE ONLY WAY TO GET IT TO STOP ACCELERATING IS …

Read full complaint

SINCE OWNING OUR 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS, WE HAVE CALLED AT LEAST 4 TIMES WITH A PROBLEM WE HAVE BEEN HAVING. CRAZY ACCELERATING AT HIGH SPEED WITH CRUISE CONTROL. IT USUALLY HAPPENS WHEN WE RESUME CRUISE CONTROL. SOMETIMES IT EXTREMELY SPEEDS UP AND KEEPS GOING BEYOND THE SPEED SET. THE ONLY WAY TO GET IT TO STOP ACCELERATING IS TO BRAKE OR RESET THE SPEED CONTROL. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10313593

8,097 miles · Feb 23, 2010
Power TrainVehicle Speed ControlFire

MY NEAR DEATH EXPERIENCE DRIVE MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS ON AUGUST 30, 2007** **WHILE DRIVING MY 2007 PRIUS BEHIND A 16-WHEELER AND AT AN AVERAGE SPEED OF 60MPH, SUDDENLY MY PRIUS' ENGINE & MOTORS ROARED AND THE SPEED SURGED SO STRONGLY THAT IF I DIDN'T RIDE THE BRAKES, I SAW MYSELF RAMMING INTO THE BACK OF THE 16-WHEELER IN FR…

Read full complaint

MY NEAR DEATH EXPERIENCE DRIVE MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS ON AUGUST 30, 2007** **WHILE DRIVING MY 2007 PRIUS BEHIND A 16-WHEELER AND AT AN AVERAGE SPEED OF 60MPH, SUDDENLY MY PRIUS' ENGINE & MOTORS ROARED AND THE SPEED SURGED SO STRONGLY THAT IF I DIDN'T RIDE THE BRAKES, I SAW MYSELF RAMMING INTO THE BACK OF THE 16-WHEELER IN FRONT OF ME. ALSO AT THIS TIME, A CADILLAC SUV WAS FOLLOWING ME TO CLOSE ON THIS GEORGIA SECONDARY-HIGHWAY#121 WHEREBY I VISUALIZE A TRAGIC ACCIDENT ABOUT TO OCCUR. AFTER ABOUT A HALF-MILE RIDING THE BRAKES AND FEELING THE PULLING TORQUE OF THOSE POWERFUL ELECTRIC MOTORS ON THE FRONT WHEELS, I SAW MY CHANCE TO EXIT AHEAD WHERE TWO TRASH DUMPSTERS APPEARED. AS I STOPPED THE PRIUS, I NOTICE SMOKE COMING OVER THE HOOD. SO I JUMP OUT OF THE PRIUS. I SAW FLAMES ROUND THE FRONT WHEEL WELL THAT SOON FLAMED OUT. I CONTACTED AAA AUTO CLUB SOUTH AND HAD THE PRIUS TOWED 45 MILES BACK TO THE ANN TAYLOR TOYOTA DEALERSHIP/SERVICE CENTER WHERE I ORIGINALLY PURCHASED THE 2007 PRIUS. FIVE DAYS LATER, I WAS NOTIFIED BY THE SERVICE CENTER THAT A PIECE OF FLEXIBLE "CARPET MAT" SUDDENLY "RIGGED" ENOUGH IN ORDER TO BECOME WEDGED ONTO THE ACCELERATOR AND NO ADDITIONAL SERVICES REQUIRED. (INVOICE#TOCS368561 DATED 09/05/07) NOW IN DISBELIEF AND SCARED, I HAD MY 2007 PRIUS RE-INSPECTED AT PRECISION TUNE AUTO CARE (INVOICE#165110 DATED 09/06/07). THIS INSPECTED YIELDED EVIDENCE OF A PREVIOUS FIRE AND BURNED ROTORS! I CONTACTED BY PHONE TOYOTA CORP CUSTOMER SERVICE AND USAA AUTO INSURANCE. I CONTACTED A LEGAL ATTORNEY THAT ADVISED ME THAT MY CIRCUMSTANCES REQUIRED HIRING A MECHANICAL ENGINEER TO DISPROVE TOYOTA'S ASSERTION OR DRIVE THE VEHICLE UNTIL THE RUN-A-WAY ACCELERATION OCCURS AGAIN. AS OF THIS DATE, HAVING BEEN "STONEWALLED" THE PAST TWO YEARS, I WANT TO VERIFY THAT YOUR DEPARTMENT HAS A RECORD OF MY INCIDENT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10313403

36,000 miles · Feb 22, 2010
Service Brakes, ElectricTraction Control SystemVehicle Speed Control

THIS HAS HAPPENED DOZENS OF TIMES, TO MYSELF AND MY WIFE. WE ARE BRAKING, AND WHILST BRAKING DRIVE OVER A POTHOLE OR DRAIN. THE TRACTION CONTROL COMES ON, AND THE CAR DISENGAGES THE BRAKES AND THE CAR LURCHES FORWARD. AFTER CLEARING THE POTHOLE, THE TRACTION CONTROL THEN DISENGAGES, AND THE BRAKES RE-ENGAGE. SEVERAL TIMES, I …

Read full complaint

THIS HAS HAPPENED DOZENS OF TIMES, TO MYSELF AND MY WIFE. WE ARE BRAKING, AND WHILST BRAKING DRIVE OVER A POTHOLE OR DRAIN. THE TRACTION CONTROL COMES ON, AND THE CAR DISENGAGES THE BRAKES AND THE CAR LURCHES FORWARD. AFTER CLEARING THE POTHOLE, THE TRACTION CONTROL THEN DISENGAGES, AND THE BRAKES RE-ENGAGE. SEVERAL TIMES, I HAVE COME CLOSE TO HITTING THE CAR IN FRONT. CONDITIONS: CLEAR, SUNNY, DRY ROADS. CAR: TOYOTA PRIUS, YEAR 2007. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10312607

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

40,000 miles · Feb 17, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control

ACCELERATING FROM A STOP LIGHT, AT ABOUT 30 MPH THE PRIUS ENGINE FELT AND SOUNDED LIKE IT BEGAN TO ACCELERATE AT MAXIMUM RATE. BRAKING HAD NO EFFECT ON SLOWING THE VEHICLE RESULTING IN RUNNING THROUGH A MAJOR INTERSECTION AT A RED LIGHT. THE CAR WAS STOPPED BY SHIFTING INTO NEUTRAL, COASTING TO A STOP, AND PUSHING THE POWER BU…

Read full complaint

ACCELERATING FROM A STOP LIGHT, AT ABOUT 30 MPH THE PRIUS ENGINE FELT AND SOUNDED LIKE IT BEGAN TO ACCELERATE AT MAXIMUM RATE. BRAKING HAD NO EFFECT ON SLOWING THE VEHICLE RESULTING IN RUNNING THROUGH A MAJOR INTERSECTION AT A RED LIGHT. THE CAR WAS STOPPED BY SHIFTING INTO NEUTRAL, COASTING TO A STOP, AND PUSHING THE POWER BUTTON. AFTER WAITING 2 MINUTES, THE CAR WAS RESTARTED AND RAN WITH A PROBLEM. THIS OCCURRED ONCE IN SEPTEMBER 2009. TOYOTA'S REMEDY IS TO REPLACE THE FLOOR MATS, HOWEVER, THE FLOOR MAT WAS SECURED TO THE CARPET AND WAS VERIFIED AT THE TIME OF THE INCIDENT THAT IT WAS FAR FROM INTERFERING WITH THE GAS PEDAL. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10311574

39,965 miles · Feb 17, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control

I AM EXPERIENCING MOMENTARY BRAKE FAILURE WHILE DRIVING OVER BUMPY ROADS IN MY 2007 PRIUS SIMILAR TO THAT DESCRIBED BY OWNERS OF SOME 2010 PRIUSES (HTTP://WWW.CBSNEWS.COM/HTDOCS/PDF/020410_TOYOTA.PDF). I HAVE EXPERIENCED THIS SINCE I BOUGHT THE CAR NEW AND HAVE TREATED IT AS A QUIRK OF THAT PARTICULAR CAR. AFTER HEARING ABOUT T…

Read full complaint

I AM EXPERIENCING MOMENTARY BRAKE FAILURE WHILE DRIVING OVER BUMPY ROADS IN MY 2007 PRIUS SIMILAR TO THAT DESCRIBED BY OWNERS OF SOME 2010 PRIUSES (HTTP://WWW.CBSNEWS.COM/HTDOCS/PDF/020410_TOYOTA.PDF). I HAVE EXPERIENCED THIS SINCE I BOUGHT THE CAR NEW AND HAVE TREATED IT AS A QUIRK OF THAT PARTICULAR CAR. AFTER HEARING ABOUT THE RECALL AND SOFTWARE FIX FOR 2010 MODELS, I INQUIRED OF MY LOCAL DEALER ABOUT A SOFTWARE FIX FOR MY '07 MODEL. THEY SAID THERE WAS NO RECALL OF THE '07S AND THEREFORE THE REPAIR WOULD BE AT MY OWN EXPENSE. I LIVE ATOP A HILL, AND THE ROAD COMING DOWN IT IS OFTEN BUMPY, CAUSING THE MOMENTARY LOSS OF BRAKING. BUT WE ARE USED TO IT BY NOW AND KNOW TO BEGIN BRAKING EXTRA EARLY ON THIS STRETCH OF ROAD, BUT IF THERE IS AN AVAILABLE FIX FOR THIS PROBLEM, I WANT TOYOTA TO PROVIDE IT SOONEST. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10311405

10,000 miles · Feb 17, 2010
Traction Control SystemVehicle Speed Control

I HAVE OWED BOTH A 2005 AND 2007 PRIUS AND HAVE EXPERIENCED TWO PROBLEMS WITH BOTH VEHICLES THAT ARE A SAFETY CONCERN, ALTHOUGH NO ACCIDENT HAS RESULTED FROM THESE PROBLEMS. 1) IN SNOWY CONDITIONS, WHEN TRAVELING UP AN INCLINE, THE TRACTION CONTROL SYSTEM CAN TURN OFF POWER TO BOTH DRIVE WHEELS WITH THE RESULT THAT THE CAR CAN …

Read full complaint

I HAVE OWED BOTH A 2005 AND 2007 PRIUS AND HAVE EXPERIENCED TWO PROBLEMS WITH BOTH VEHICLES THAT ARE A SAFETY CONCERN, ALTHOUGH NO ACCIDENT HAS RESULTED FROM THESE PROBLEMS. 1) IN SNOWY CONDITIONS, WHEN TRAVELING UP AN INCLINE, THE TRACTION CONTROL SYSTEM CAN TURN OFF POWER TO BOTH DRIVE WHEELS WITH THE RESULT THAT THE CAR CAN NOT MAKE IT UP THE HILL. GRANTED THIS CAN HAPPEN EVEN TO A MORE CONVENTIONAL CAR, BUT THE PRIUS DOES THIS UNDER CIRCUMSTANCES WHEN OTHER CARS HAVE NO PROBLEM NEGOTIATING THE HILL. THE OWNERS MANUAL CLAIMS THAT THIS IS TO PROTECT THE ELECTRIC ENGINE, HOWEVER, IT SEEMS THAT THERE SHOULD BE AN OVERRIDE OF SOME SORT THAT ALLOWS THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION MOTOR TO TURN THE WHEELS WHEN TRACTION IS POOR. THIS SYSTEM HAS ALSO LED TO CIRCUMSTANCES IN PARKING LOTS DURING SNOW, WHERE IT BECOMES IMPOSSIBLE TO MOVE THE CAR EVEN THOUGH OTHER CONVENTIONAL CARS ARE ABLE TO NEGOTIATE THE SNOW WITHOUT A PROBLEM. 2) IN CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE THE PRIUS MUST MERGE QUICKLY INTO TRAFFIC FOR INSTANCE WHEN TURNING INTO BUSY TRAFFIC AT AN INTERSECTION, IF YOU FLOOR THE GAS PEDAL THE CAR INITIAL ACCELERATES, BUT THEN THE ACCELERATION FADES DRAMATICALLY, BEFORE IT RESURGES. THIS CAN BE CIRCUMVENTED BY NOT PRESSING THE GAS PEDAL SO HARD, HOWEVER, THE INSTINCT IS TO STEP ON THE GAS AS HARD AS POSSIBLE. THIS IS NOT ONLY HAIR-RAISING WHEN IT HAPPENS, BUT ALSO COULD LEAD ON AN ACCIDENT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10311240

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.