← 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

What owners actually said

2,003 reports
59,000 miles · Dec 9, 2015
Structure

READ HATCH DOOR LATCH SWITCH FAILURE DUE TO RUBBER COVER THAT HAS DETERIORATED AND MELTED INTO STICKY GOO. THE SWITCH NOW IS INTERMITTENT. BLACK TARRY RUBBER GETS ON MY HANDS WHEN I TRY TO USE IT. THE PRICE TO REPAIR WAS QUOTED AS $350

NHTSA ODI #10809239

1,000,000 miles · Dec 9, 2015
EnginePower Train

WIFE BACKED VEHICLE UP THEN SHIFTED TO DRIVE .MULTIPAL DASH WARNING LIGHTS CAME ON. VEHICLE WAS STOPPED AND SHUT OFF. AN ATTEMPT WAS MADE TO RESTART THE VEHICLE TO MOVE IT BACK TO A PARKED POSITION. THE VEHICLE COULD NOT BE PUT BACK INTO DRIVE OR REVERSE. HAD TO MANUALLY PUSH THE VEHICLE TO A PARKED POSITION. IT WAS LUCKY THAT T…

Read full complaint

WIFE BACKED VEHICLE UP THEN SHIFTED TO DRIVE .MULTIPAL DASH WARNING LIGHTS CAME ON. VEHICLE WAS STOPPED AND SHUT OFF. AN ATTEMPT WAS MADE TO RESTART THE VEHICLE TO MOVE IT BACK TO A PARKED POSITION. THE VEHICLE COULD NOT BE PUT BACK INTO DRIVE OR REVERSE. HAD TO MANUALLY PUSH THE VEHICLE TO A PARKED POSITION. IT WAS LUCKY THAT THIS TOOK PLACE ON OUR PROPERTY IN FRONT OF OUR RESIDENCE AND NOT A BUSY PUBLIC ROADWAY. HAD THE VEHICLE TOWED ON A FLATBED TO A TOYOTA DEALER APPROX. 50 MILES AWAY. TOYOTA DEALER ADVISED LATER THE TRANSAXLE/TRANSMISSION FAILED. FOUND A TOYOTA "TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN" DATED JULY 7,2006 SPECIFICALLY DEALING WITH THIS ISSUE IN THE 2004 TO 2007 PRIUS. DOCUMENT TITLE: M.I.L. "ON" DTC P0AA6 OR P3009, INFORMATION CODES 526 & 613 MODELS '04- PRIUS. IN THE DOCUMENT IT STATES "THE TRANSAXEL ASSEMBLY HAS BEEN IMPROVED TO PREVENT THIS CONDITION." BOTTOM LINE IS TOYOTA IS AWARE OF THE FAULTY EQUIPMENT MENTIONED ABOVE AND HAS NOT ADDRESSED THE PROBLEM PROPERLY TO RECALL THE VEHICLES WITH THIS ISSUE EVEN THOUGH THIS IS AN OBVIOUS SAFETY ISSUE.

NHTSA ODI #10809147

100,000 miles · Dec 4, 2015
Exterior Lighting

THE RIGHT HID HEADLAMP ON OUR 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS HAS AN INTERMITTENT FAULT. IT GOES OUT AND THEN WILL COME BACK ON. THE DURATION THE HID LIGHT GOES OUT VARIES, AND IT MAY WORK FOR SEVERAL WEEKS BEFORE FAILING AGAIN. THIS PROBLEM HAS BEEN OCCURRING SINCE WE PURCHASED THE CAR NEW IN 2007. EARLIER, THE DEALERSHIP REPLACED T…

Read full complaint

THE RIGHT HID HEADLAMP ON OUR 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS HAS AN INTERMITTENT FAULT. IT GOES OUT AND THEN WILL COME BACK ON. THE DURATION THE HID LIGHT GOES OUT VARIES, AND IT MAY WORK FOR SEVERAL WEEKS BEFORE FAILING AGAIN. THIS PROBLEM HAS BEEN OCCURRING SINCE WE PURCHASED THE CAR NEW IN 2007. EARLIER, THE DEALERSHIP REPLACED THE LIGHT BULB AND POWER SUPPLY MODULES (UNDER WARRANTY). THAT SEEMED TO HAVE FIXED THE PROBLEM, BUT NOW IT THE PROBLEM IS OCCURRING AGAIN. WE NOTICE THE PROBLEM WHILE DRIVING AT NIGHT, I'VE BEEN UNABLE TO IDENTIFY A PATTERN THAT SUGGESTS IT MAY BE A LOOSE CONNECTION (SUCH AS, OCCURRING ON ROUGH OR BUMPY SURFACES). SO FAR THE PROBLEM HAS ONLY OCCURRED IN ONE HID HEADLAMP AND NOT BOTH AT THE SAME TIME. WHICH HAS THE POTENTIAL TO BE A SERIOUS SAFETY ISSUE.

NHTSA ODI #10808331

71,000 miles · Dec 2, 2015
Exterior Lighting

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING AT ANY SPEED, THE HEADLIGHTS WOULD FAIL TO ILLUMINATE. THE FAILURE RECURRED NUMEROUS TIMES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED BUT WAS NOT REPAIRED AND THE DETAILS WERE UNAVAILABLE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING AT ANY SPEED, THE HEADLIGHTS WOULD FAIL TO ILLUMINATE. THE FAILURE RECURRED NUMEROUS TIMES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED BUT WAS NOT REPAIRED AND THE DETAILS WERE UNAVAILABLE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 71,000.

NHTSA ODI #10808084

85,000 miles · Dec 2, 2015
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

ONE HID HEADLAMP WILL OCCASIONALLY TURN ITSELF OFF. TURNING HEADLAMP SWITCH OFF FOR 3-5 MINUTES AND THEN BACK ON WILL CORRECT THE ISSUE. AS ONE COULD IMAGINE, VERY PROBLEMATIC WHEN DRIVING ON THE FREEWAY AT NIGHT. MULTIPLE BULB REPLACEMENTS (OVER $150 EACH) HAVE HAD NO EFFECT. DEALER RECOMMENDED FULL HEADLAMP REPLACEMENT IS OVER…

Read full complaint

ONE HID HEADLAMP WILL OCCASIONALLY TURN ITSELF OFF. TURNING HEADLAMP SWITCH OFF FOR 3-5 MINUTES AND THEN BACK ON WILL CORRECT THE ISSUE. AS ONE COULD IMAGINE, VERY PROBLEMATIC WHEN DRIVING ON THE FREEWAY AT NIGHT. MULTIPLE BULB REPLACEMENTS (OVER $150 EACH) HAVE HAD NO EFFECT. DEALER RECOMMENDED FULL HEADLAMP REPLACEMENT IS OVER $1000. RESEARCH FOUND THAT MANY OTHERS HAVE HAD A SIMILAR ISSUE, AND EVENTUALLY TRACE THE PROBLEM BACK TO THE BALLAST OF THE HID LAMP, WHICH IS EASILY DAMAGED BY WATER FROM POOR DESIGN (THE BALLAST IS WEATHER-SEALED AGAINST THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT, BUT NOT AGAINST THE HEADLAMP ITSELF; ANY WATER THAT MAKES ITS WAY INTO THE LAMP WILL RUN DOWN AND POOL ON THE BALLAST ELECTRONICS).

NHTSA ODI #10807902

70,000 miles · Dec 1, 2015
Structure

LIFTGATE HANDLE LATCH MECHANISM DETERIORATED (INSIDE THE EXTERIOR HANDLE, NOT THE ACTUAL CONNECTION DOWN NEAR THE BUMPER). THIS IS A KNOWN 2007 PRIUS PROBLEM BOTH WITHIN THIS DATABASE AND IN ONLINE FORUMS, IF YOU SEARCH. PROBABLY PART OF THE 'RUBBER PARTS / GASKET TURNING INTO GOOP' PROBLEM DISCUSSED ELSEWHERE. SHOULD BE A DEALE…

Read full complaint

LIFTGATE HANDLE LATCH MECHANISM DETERIORATED (INSIDE THE EXTERIOR HANDLE, NOT THE ACTUAL CONNECTION DOWN NEAR THE BUMPER). THIS IS A KNOWN 2007 PRIUS PROBLEM BOTH WITHIN THIS DATABASE AND IN ONLINE FORUMS, IF YOU SEARCH. PROBABLY PART OF THE 'RUBBER PARTS / GASKET TURNING INTO GOOP' PROBLEM DISCUSSED ELSEWHERE. SHOULD BE A DEALER WARRANTY REPAIR AS IT IS EXPENSIVE DEFECT TO FIX, $600 OR SO, ENTAILING REMOVING PANELS FROM THE INSIDE ETC AND REPLACING THE SWITCH. I CALLED TOYOTA AND THEY GAVE ME A CASE NUMBER BUT THAT IS ALL THUS FAR. LEXINGTON TOYOTA DEALER (MASS.) SAID THEY HAD NEVER HEARD OF IT, WHICH SEEMS UNLIKELY.

NHTSA ODI #10807840

35,000 miles · Dec 1, 2015
Unknown Or Other

THE REAR HATCH LATCH IS ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO OPEN. THE EXTERIOR HANDLE RUBBER HAS BEEN SOFTENING, ALMOST MELTING, FOR SEVERAL YEARS. IT IS NOW CONSISTENTLY AFFECTING THE OPERATION OF THE LATCH. I ASKED THE DEALER IF THERE WAS A BULLETIN OR RECALL AND HE SAID, NO. HE DID SAY THEY GET A LOT OF COMPLAINTS/REPAIRS ON THE 2007 HA…

Read full complaint

THE REAR HATCH LATCH IS ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO OPEN. THE EXTERIOR HANDLE RUBBER HAS BEEN SOFTENING, ALMOST MELTING, FOR SEVERAL YEARS. IT IS NOW CONSISTENTLY AFFECTING THE OPERATION OF THE LATCH. I ASKED THE DEALER IF THERE WAS A BULLETIN OR RECALL AND HE SAID, NO. HE DID SAY THEY GET A LOT OF COMPLAINTS/REPAIRS ON THE 2007 HATCH LATCH.

NHTSA ODI #10807790

52,800 miles · Nov 30, 2015
Electrical SystemService Brakes

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING 70 MPH, THE BRAKE PEDAL DEPRESSED ON ITS OWN AND THE VEHICLE FAILED TO ACCELERATE. THE BRAKE HAZARD WARNING INDICATOR ILLUMINATED SEVERAL TIMES. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VIN WAS UNAVAILABLE. THE APPRO…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING 70 MPH, THE BRAKE PEDAL DEPRESSED ON ITS OWN AND THE VEHICLE FAILED TO ACCELERATE. THE BRAKE HAZARD WARNING INDICATOR ILLUMINATED SEVERAL TIMES. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VIN WAS UNAVAILABLE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 52,800.

NHTSA ODI #10807431

81,000 miles · Nov 27, 2015
Electrical System

YET ANOTHER 2007 PRIUS WITH THE REAR HATCH DOOR LATCH COVER THAT HAS DECOMPOSED RENDERING THE ABILITY TO OPEN THE DOOR FROM THE OUTSIDE IMPOSSIBLE. THIS IS A DEFECT THAT IS WIDELY DOCUMENTED ON VARIOUS WEBSITES. TOYOTA SHOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE AND CORRECT THIS DEFECT AT THEIR COST. SAFETY ISSUES: INABILITY TO ACCESS EQUIPME…

Read full complaint

YET ANOTHER 2007 PRIUS WITH THE REAR HATCH DOOR LATCH COVER THAT HAS DECOMPOSED RENDERING THE ABILITY TO OPEN THE DOOR FROM THE OUTSIDE IMPOSSIBLE. THIS IS A DEFECT THAT IS WIDELY DOCUMENTED ON VARIOUS WEBSITES. TOYOTA SHOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE AND CORRECT THIS DEFECT AT THEIR COST. SAFETY ISSUES: INABILITY TO ACCESS EQUIPMENT NECESSARY TO REPAIR A TIRE FAILURE, POTENTIAL TO BE STRANDED ON INTERSTATE HIGHWAYS, IN REMOTE AREAS ETC. I AM 69 YEARS OLD, HAVE HAD A HIP REPLACEMENT, A COMMINUTED FRACTURE OF THE PATELLA ON THE SAME LEG RESULTING IN WIRE AND SCREWS HOLDING THE PATELLA TOGETHER. THE OTHER LEG HAS SUSTAINED A TRAUMATIC INJURY THAT RESULTED IN A ROD FROM TOP TO BOTTOM OF THE TIBIA, AND MUSCLE, VASCULAR, AND SKIN GRAFTS. CRAWLING INSIDE THE VEHICLE TO ACCESS THE MANUAL RELEASE IS NOT THE EASY TASK IT MAY HAVE ONCE BEEN; INABILITY TO ACCESS FIRST AID OR OTHER SAFEY EQUIPMENT IN THE EVENT OF AN INCIDENT; INABILITY OF RESCUERS TO ACCESS THE CABIN VIA THE REAR HATCH IN THE EVENT OF AN ACCIDENT.

NHTSA ODI #10807209

170,000 miles · Nov 21, 2015
Service Brakes

12/17/2013 VEHICLE EXPERIENCED COMPLETE BRAKE FAILURE ON THE FREEWAY. BRAKE LIGHTS AND ALARMS WENT ON. BRAKE PEDALS WERE NON RESPONSIVE AND WENT TO THE FLOOR WHEN PRESSED. MANAGED TO PULL OVER TO SIDE OF FREEWAY AND HAVE VEHICLE TOWED TO DEALERSHIP. AT DEALERSHIP WAS TOLD THAT THE BRAKE COMPUTER OR BRAKE ACTUATOR HAD FAILED. DEA…

Read full complaint

12/17/2013 VEHICLE EXPERIENCED COMPLETE BRAKE FAILURE ON THE FREEWAY. BRAKE LIGHTS AND ALARMS WENT ON. BRAKE PEDALS WERE NON RESPONSIVE AND WENT TO THE FLOOR WHEN PRESSED. MANAGED TO PULL OVER TO SIDE OF FREEWAY AND HAVE VEHICLE TOWED TO DEALERSHIP. AT DEALERSHIP WAS TOLD THAT THE BRAKE COMPUTER OR BRAKE ACTUATOR HAD FAILED. DEALERSHIP REPLACED BRAKE ACTUATOR. MILEAGE ON VEHICLE AT THE TIME WAS 128,451. BRAKE ACTUATOR FAILED AGAIN. THIS TIME VEHICLE FAILED TO STOP WHILE DRIVING ON RESIDENTIAL STREET. BRAKE WARNING LIGHT AND ALARM WENT ON BRIEFLY. DROVE VEHICLE TO DEALERSHIP. DEALERSHIP DIAGNOSED PROBLEM AS BRAKE ACTUATOR FAILING AGAIN. CURRENT MILEAGE ABOUT 170,000. LUCKILY BOTH TIMES NOBODY WAS HURT, NO PROPERTY WAS DAMAGED. HOWEVER, I DON'T BELIEVE IT THAT A VEHICLE SHOULD SUDDENLY NOT BE ABLE TO BRAKE DUE TO A COMPUTER MALFUNCTION, ESPECIALLY 42,000 MILES APART.

NHTSA ODI #10795264

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.