NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
670 reports53,058 miles · Oct 11, 2023
Engine
The contact owns a 2015 Honda CR-V. The contact stated that while driving at a very low speed while parking the vehicle, the vehicle independently accelerated and jilted forward. The contact stated she was able to stop the vehicle by depressing the brake pedal with force. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired by an independe…
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2015 Honda CR-V. The contact stated that while driving at a very low speed while parking the vehicle, the vehicle independently accelerated and jilted forward. The contact stated she was able to stop the vehicle by depressing the brake pedal with force. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired by an independent mechanic or dealer. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 53,058.
NHTSA ODI #11549366
68,000 miles · Oct 6, 2023
Structure
The contact owns a 2015 Honda CR-V. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, the sun visor failed to stay secured, potentially obstructing visibility. The vehicle was taken to the dealer, who determined that the visor would need to be replaced. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The failure m…
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2015 Honda CR-V. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, the sun visor failed to stay secured, potentially obstructing visibility. The vehicle was taken to the dealer, who determined that the visor would need to be replaced. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The failure mileage was 68,000.
NHTSA ODI #11548720
Mileage unknown · Sep 20, 2023
Electrical System
Doors lock and unlock by themselves all the time
NHTSA ODI #11545703
125,000 miles · Sep 7, 2023
EngineEngine And Engine Cooling
The contact owns a 2015 Honda CR-V. The contact stated while stopped at a traffic signal and accelerating to approximately 20 MPH to cross the intersection, the vehicle stalled. The contact stated no warning light was illuminated. The contact was able to shift into park(P) and restart the vehicle. The contact stated that the fai…
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2015 Honda CR-V. The contact stated while stopped at a traffic signal and accelerating to approximately 20 MPH to cross the intersection, the vehicle stalled. The contact stated no warning light was illuminated. The contact was able to shift into park(P) and restart the vehicle. The contact stated that the failure was intermittent; however, several times after stalling, several attempts were needed to restart the vehicle. The contact stated vehicle was hesitating while depressing the accelerator pedal before the vehicle responded. The contact stated that the vehicle would not start at one point, and the battery was replaced. The contact stated that the stalling had occurred when the weather was hot. The contact checked the coolant level, and the reservoir was full. Additionally, the contact stated that following an oil change, the brake pedal was depressed with force and the check oil warning light illuminated. The contact stated that after checking the oil level, two quarts of oil needed to be added to top up the oil level. The contact checked for oil leaks but found none. The contact had not taken the vehicle to a local dealer or independent mechanic. The vehicle had not been diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer had been informed of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 125,000.
NHTSA ODI #11543235
169,000 miles · Aug 8, 2023
Engine
The contact owns a 2015 Honda CR-V. The contact stated while driving approximately 40 MPH, several unknown warning lights were illuminated. The contact stated that vehicle started to lose motive power. The contact stated that the accelerator pedal was depressed, and the vehicle made a loud revving sound but failed to respond as …
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2015 Honda CR-V. The contact stated while driving approximately 40 MPH, several unknown warning lights were illuminated. The contact stated that vehicle started to lose motive power. The contact stated that the accelerator pedal was depressed, and the vehicle made a loud revving sound but failed to respond as needed. The contact stopped and turned off and restarted the vehicle however, the vehicle would not exceed 15 MPH while driving. The contact stated that the failure had become a recurring failure. The contact had taken the vehicle to a local dealer, where it was diagnosed and determined that the crank shaft position sensor needed to be replaced. The vehicle was repaired. The contact stated that the failure had recurred. Additionally, the contact stated that the vehicle had recently started to backfire during cold starts and the vehicle would only start after several attempts. The contact stated that there was an abnormal odor of gasoline following the backfire. The manufacturer had been informed of the failure. The contact researched online and related the failure to manufacturer Technical Service Bulletin number: 16-011 - CKP sensor no signal and engine wire harness (Engine). The failure mileage was approximately 169,000.
NHTSA ODI #11537201
Mileage unknown · Jun 28, 2023
Fuel/propulsion System
While on cruise control at 70mph car went into limp mode reducing speed and unable to accelerate on highway. Check engine light came on. Rested car on highway, then drove another 1.5hr no issues (not using cruise control) - check engine light was off. Checked oil - oil was clean (done less than 1,000 miles ago). Began trip agai…
Read full complaint
While on cruise control at 70mph car went into limp mode reducing speed and unable to accelerate on highway. Check engine light came on. Rested car on highway, then drove another 1.5hr no issues (not using cruise control) - check engine light was off. Checked oil - oil was clean (done less than 1,000 miles ago). Began trip again, oil light came on indicating need for a change. Vehicle went into limp mode for the second time going 70mph. Check engine light came on for the second time, this time blinking. Vehicle was towed. Dealership initially reported all was fine no issues only needed an oil change. Requested Honda dealer to drive on highway - dealer drove on highway reach 60-70mph. Vehicle for the third time went into limp mode needing a second tow. Honda Dealership indicated that the vehicle needed new fuel injectors, however the parts needed to fix the vehicle are back ordered indefinitely. Overall vehicle went into limp mode three times on highway at a fast speed. Vehicle lights for maintenance would go away after vehicle was shut off indicating no issue or further need for evaluations.
NHTSA ODI #11529473
Mileage unknown · Jun 15, 2023
Forward Collision AvoidanceLane Departure
My 2015 CRV suddenly had all the crash warning/adaptive cruise control/lane keep assist lights flashing…very alarming…so we brought it to White Rock Honda for to find out what was happening?
They diagnosed our Multi-purpose camera is faulty. $2193 to repair…plus $197.12 yesterday to diagnose!
We have done nothing to cause thi…
Read full complaint
My 2015 CRV suddenly had all the crash warning/adaptive cruise control/lane keep assist lights flashing…very alarming…so we brought it to White Rock Honda for to find out what was happening?
They diagnosed our Multi-purpose camera is faulty. $2193 to repair…plus $197.12 yesterday to diagnose!
We have done nothing to cause this substantial/expensive repair. We are shocked as we are long-time Honda owners, (3 Hondas in the past 20 years) and have never experienced anything like this.
Now we are in danger all of our safety features no longer functioning.
This this is a huge hardship for us at this time as I just began a gradual return to work this week after an illness. I need to safely rely on this car every day for my long commute from Surrey to Richmond.
So as mentioned, this is a hardship that we had no part in causing – and we feel is entirely unfair. We have contacted Honda Customer Relations. We have forwarded the diagnostic receipt, the situation is now in mediation. -Yes, available for NHTSA inspection.
NHTSA ODI #11527120
Mileage unknown · Jun 7, 2023
Electrical System
5/28/2023: Vehicle won’t start, AAA called and towed it to repair facility where they claimed they fixed the issue (battery replacement) 6/01/2023: Vehicle traveling WB SR520, where all dashboard warning lights started illuminating. At the same time, steering wheel locks up and infotainment screen shuts off. Was able to get veh…
Read full complaint
5/28/2023: Vehicle won’t start, AAA called and towed it to repair facility where they claimed they fixed the issue (battery replacement) 6/01/2023: Vehicle traveling WB SR520, where all dashboard warning lights started illuminating. At the same time, steering wheel locks up and infotainment screen shuts off. Was able to get vehicle off the freeway and onto the shoulder of a nearby exit ramp where it eventually died. Called AAA again and had it towed back to the repair facility once again, where this time, the alternator failed.
NHTSA ODI #11525924
Mileage unknown · May 26, 2023
Visibility
The contact owns a 2015 Honda CR-V. The contact stated that while inspecting the vehicle, she became aware that the sunroof glass was cracked. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic, who informed the contact that it was a common failure with the year, make, and model vehicle. The contact stated that while driving at an…
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2015 Honda CR-V. The contact stated that while inspecting the vehicle, she became aware that the sunroof glass was cracked. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic, who informed the contact that it was a common failure with the year, make, and model vehicle. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, the sunroof shattered. The vehicle was then taken to the dealer; however, the dealer did not provide any assistance. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was unknown.
NHTSA ODI #11523986
Mileage unknown · Apr 11, 2023
Unknown Or Other
Engine start failure. Intermittent you never know when it will happen. Several times the car just will not crank you push the button and all you get is a click. Has not been taken to a dealer or service center because this is a known Honda issue. It has been reported multiple times. You will be stranded in the middle of the nigh…
Read full complaint
Engine start failure. Intermittent you never know when it will happen. Several times the car just will not crank you push the button and all you get is a click. Has not been taken to a dealer or service center because this is a known Honda issue. It has been reported multiple times. You will be stranded in the middle of the night or midday it makes no difference you cannot get to an appointment or an emergency if needed. Causes great inconvenience when you are needed to be at an appointment at a certain time in your car will not crank at random times
NHTSA ODI #11516589
Official recalls
3Dec 18, 2023
Honda (American Honda Motor Co.) is recalling certain 2013-2023 Honda Accord, Civic Coupe, Civic Sedan, Civic Hatchback, Civic Type R, CR-V, HR-V, Ridgeline, Odyssey, Acura ILX, MDX, MDX Hybrid, RDX, RLX, TLX, 2019-2022 Honda Insight, Passport, 2020 Honda CR-V Hybrid, 2018-2019 Honda Clarity PHEV, Fit, and 2015-2020 Honda Accord Hybrid, Pilot, Acura NSX vehicles. The fuel pump inside the fuel tank may fail.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: Fuel pump failure can cause an engine stall while driving, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Dealers will replace the fuel pump module, free of charge. Owner letters were mailed September 6, 2024. Owners may contact Honda customer service at 1-888-234-2138. Honda's numbers for this recall are KGC and KGD. This recall is an expansion of NHTSA recall numbers 21V-215 and 20V-314.
May 4, 2017
Honda (American Honda Motor Co.) is recalling certain 2015-2016 Honda CR-V vehicles that recently received a replacement engine. The replacement engine may have been built with the wrong pistons, potentially affecting the engine's performance.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: The reduced performance may result in an engine stall, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Honda will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the engines and replace the incorrect components, as necessary, free of charge. The recall began June 20, 2017. Owners may contact Honda customer service at 1-888-234-2138. Honda's number for this recall is KF6.
Mar 2, 2015
American Honda Motor Co. (Honda) is recalling certain model year 2014 Accord L4 vehicles manufactured July 29, 2014, to July 31, 2014, 2015 Accord L4 vehicles manufactured August 14, 2014, to January 30, 2015, and 2015 CR-V vehicles manufactured September 9, 2014, to February 6, 2015. The affected vehicles may have been assembled with improperly torqued connecting rod bolts, which can cause the engine to lose power or leak oil.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: Loss of engine power may result in a vehicle stall, increasing the risk of a crash. If the engine leaks oil in the proximity of hot engine or exhaust components, there is an increased risk of a fire.
Remedy: Honda will notify owners, and dealers will replace the engine short block, free of charge. The recall began on March 27, 2015. Owners may contact Honda customer service at 1-888-234-2138. Honda's number for this recall is JP2 (for Accord models) and JP3 (for CR-V models).
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
2EA21002 · Desiccated Air Bag Inflator Rupture
Opened Sep 17, 2021 · No close date supplied
Status: open (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module; Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module
From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module
From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.
Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module
From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.
EA19001 · Electrical Overstress
Opened Apr 19, 2019 · Closed Sep 19, 2024
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags: Air Bag/restraint Control Module
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened this investigation to determine if the failure of airbags to deploy during severe crashes, in certain vehicles, was the result of a safety related defect. During the investigation a complex failure was studied that can result in non-deployment of subject vehicle air bags and other restraint system devices in severe crash events. The subject vehicles may be equipped with an airbag control unit (ACU) for the supplemental restraint system (SRS) Electronic Control Unit (ECU) manufactured by ZF-TRW. The ECU receives signals from crash sensors mounted in the vehicle and deploys the vehicle air bags and seat belt pretensioners in accordance with manufacturer design specifications. The ECU in the subject vehicles contains a model DS84 application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) which controls the communication of the crash sensor signal, firing commands (i.e., when to deploy the airbag(s) and/or pretensioners), and fault information (e.g., diagnostic trouble codes). In September 2016, FCA announced recall 16V-668 for certain model year (MY) 2010 to 2014 Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep products manufactured with the subject ZF-TRW ACU. In this recall, FCA discussed an EOS condition that resulted in a failure of the subject DS84 ASIC, which caused air bag non-deployment. FCA noted that the defect condition had only been observed in vehicles equipped with sensor harnessing routed across the front of the vehicle. Other FCA vehicles that also used the subject ACU, but were not equipped with cross-car harnessing, had not experienced EOS failures, despite similar time in service. During the course of this investigation, ODI sent two separate Information Request (IR) letters to six vehicle manufactures (including FCA, Hyundai, Honda, Kia, Mitsubishi, and Toyota) and one IR letter to ZF-TRW. These IR letters resulted in ODI receiving comprehensive data from these manufacturers and suppliers. Studies of this data found that the DS84 ASIC does not have sufficient protection against negative electrical transients or electrical overstress (“EOS”) that can be generated in certain severe crashes. An electrical transient occurs when the electrical power supplied to a circuit changes momentarily over a short duration of time. In these severe crash cases, the crash sensors and other powered wiring can be damaged and short circuited so as to create a negative electrical transient of sufficient intensity and duration (that are outside the vehicle manufacturer's specification) to damage the ASIC before the restraint device deployment signal is received by the SRS ECU. This damaged signal can lead to incomplete or nondeployment of the air bags and/or pretensioners. Airbag non-deployment and/or lack of pretensioner operation can increase the risk or severity of injury in a crash.A total of 8 fatalities and 14 injuries were associated with known EOS events. The common element in all investigated manufacturers vehicles is the SRS ECU containing a DS84 ASIC manufactured by ZF-TRW. The risk associated with the ASIC is equally shared among all OEMS involved in the investigation. The actual real-world risk can be mitigated by other factors which were assessed by ODI during this investigation. The first mitigating factor involves protections built into the ACU design which protect the DS84 ASIC from damage. There are multiple strategies and levels of protection employed by different OEMs that provide effective EOS mitigation. The two most common strategies at the ACU level are circuit protection diodes on the remote senor signal lines, and current limiting resistors that protect critical components. The second mitigating factor is found at the vehicle level and involves the location and routing of the wires leading from the crash sensors to the SRS ECU. If the wires are well protected in a crash and are not routed with other power wires carrying large currents, the risk for an EOS event is significantly reduced or eliminated. These design specific factors combine to produce a spectrum of risk for the vehicles equipped with ACUs using the DS84 ASIC. Given the many of years of field exposure, it is possible to divide the subject population into two groups; vehicles which have experienced EOS events, and vehicles which have not experienced EOS field events. Four of the six OEMs involved in this investigation have experienced EOS field events on at least one of their models equipped with a DS84 ASIC. All vehicle models (including the Toyota models identified in the Failure Report Summary of the opening resume for this investigation) with field events have been recalled. In an abundance of caution, ODI kept this investigation open five years to monitor field performance and did not identify any field events on vehicles not included in existing safety recalls. Given the spectrum of risk identified in this investigation and that all vehicles with a demonstrated unreasonable risk have been recalled, ODI is closing this investigation. ODI is closing this investigation with the following manufacturer safety recalls: 16V-668, 18E-043, 18V-137, 18V-363, and 20V-024. With the recall actions taken by the subject vehicle and equipment manufacturers, this investigation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exists on other model or model year vehicles outside of the recall scopes. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.