S10 DIRECT REPLY- LETTER TO THE SECRETARY FROM CONSTITUENT RE REQUESTING THE DEPARTMENT ISSUE AN ACCELERATION REMEDY REGARDING THE REPAIR OF VEHICLES USING TAKATA AIRBAGS. *SMD 2014 TOYOTA AVALON. *JB
2014 Toyota Avalon
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 2014 Toyota Avalon do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 101.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Avalon years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
All reported categories
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
60 reports with mileage · 36 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.
- Forward Collision Avoidance. Review the 18 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Structure. Review the 12 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Electrical System. Review the 11 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
96 reportsWHILE TRAVELING AT HIGHWAY SPEED 50-70 MILES PER HOUR ENGINE SUDDENLY SLOWED TO IDLE SPEED. CAR WOULD NOT TAKE GAS EVEN AFTER PULLING TO SIDE OF ROAD. ENGINE WAS SHUT OFF AND RESTARTED AND HAD NO MORE PROBLEM.
WHILE TRAVELING IN THE LEFT LANE AT HIGHWAY SPEED WITH NO OTHER VEHICLES IN THE LANE IN FRONT OF US FOR AT LEAST 100-150 FEET, THE COLLISION AVOIDANCE SYSTEM RANDOMLY ENGAGED. THIS CAUSED THE VEHICLE TO BRAKE VERY HARD, WHICH CAUSED US TO DECELERATE RAPIDLY (LOSING 20-30 MPH IN A SHORT DISTANCE). THE WARNING BEEPS THAT ARE NOR…
Read full complaint
WHILE TRAVELING IN THE LEFT LANE AT HIGHWAY SPEED WITH NO OTHER VEHICLES IN THE LANE IN FRONT OF US FOR AT LEAST 100-150 FEET, THE COLLISION AVOIDANCE SYSTEM RANDOMLY ENGAGED. THIS CAUSED THE VEHICLE TO BRAKE VERY HARD, WHICH CAUSED US TO DECELERATE RAPIDLY (LOSING 20-30 MPH IN A SHORT DISTANCE). THE WARNING BEEPS THAT ARE NORMALLY ASSOCIATED WITH RAPIDLY APPROACHING ANOTHER VEHICLE/BARRIER IN FRONT OF THE VEHICLE ALSO WERE SOUNDING, AND A WARNING LIGHT CAME ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL. IN ADDITION, THE SEATBELTS ON BOTH FRONT SEAT OCCUPANTS LOCKED AND DREW US FORCEFULLY DOWN AND BACKWARDS INTO THE SEATS. THIS LAST APPROXIMATELY 2 SECONDS, AT WHICH TIME THE BEEPING STOPPED, THE EMERGENCY BRAKING STOPPED AND THE SEATBELTS LOOSENED. THE DRIVER WAS ABLE TO MAINTAIN STEERING INPUT THROUGHOUT AND THE VEHICLE CONTINUED DRIVING NORMALLY AFTERWARD. AT NO TIME DURING THIS EVENT WAS ANOTHER VEHICLE, ANIMAL OR BARRIER IN FRONT OF THE VEHICLE AND THERE WERE NO NEAR-COLLISIONS THAT WOULD OR SHOULD HAVE CAUSED THE SYSTEM TO ENGAGE.
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2014 TOYOTA AVALON. FIFTEEN MINUTES AFTER PARKING AND EXITING THE VEHICLE, THE CONTACT RETURNED TO FIND THE ENGINE RUNNING INDEPENDENTLY AND THE DOORS LOCKED. THE VEHICLE WAS DRIVEN TO THE CONTACT'S RESIDENCE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 4,000. THE VIN WAS…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2014 TOYOTA AVALON. FIFTEEN MINUTES AFTER PARKING AND EXITING THE VEHICLE, THE CONTACT RETURNED TO FIND THE ENGINE RUNNING INDEPENDENTLY AND THE DOORS LOCKED. THE VEHICLE WAS DRIVEN TO THE CONTACT'S RESIDENCE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 4,000. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE.
FUEL DOOR WOULD NOT OPEN NORMALLY (PRESSING CENTER REAR EDGE) NOR WHEN USING THE EMERGENCY RELEASE PULL CORD LOCATED INSIDE THE VEHICLE TRUNK WHILE PRESSING REAR CENTER EDGE. ALSO, FUEL DOOR COULD NOT BE OPENED WHILE PULLING EMERGENCY RELEASE CORD AND PULLING ON REAR CENTER DOOR SIMULTANEOUSLY. CAR WAS PLACED IN SERVICE IN FEBRU…
Read full complaint
FUEL DOOR WOULD NOT OPEN NORMALLY (PRESSING CENTER REAR EDGE) NOR WHEN USING THE EMERGENCY RELEASE PULL CORD LOCATED INSIDE THE VEHICLE TRUNK WHILE PRESSING REAR CENTER EDGE. ALSO, FUEL DOOR COULD NOT BE OPENED WHILE PULLING EMERGENCY RELEASE CORD AND PULLING ON REAR CENTER DOOR SIMULTANEOUSLY. CAR WAS PLACED IN SERVICE IN FEBRUARY 2015 AND HAS 2300 MILES. TOOK CAR TO AUTHORIZED SERVICE CENTER AND SERVICE WRITER COULD NOT OPEN FUEL DOOR WITH EMERGENCY RELEASE EITHER. CAR COULD NOT BE REFUELED WITHOUT DAMAGING DOOR OR LOCK MECHANISM.
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2014 TOYOTA AVALON. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE PRE-COLLISION SYSTEM FAILED TO WORK PROPERLY AND WAS ENGAGING AND DISENGAGING INDEPENDENTLY WHEN THERE WAS NO POTENTIAL CRASH. THE CONTACT MENTIONED THAT WHEN THE FAILURE OCCURRED, THE BRAKES ENGAGED, THE SEAT BELT TIGHTENED, AND THE VEHICLE DECELERATED WITHO…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2014 TOYOTA AVALON. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE PRE-COLLISION SYSTEM FAILED TO WORK PROPERLY AND WAS ENGAGING AND DISENGAGING INDEPENDENTLY WHEN THERE WAS NO POTENTIAL CRASH. THE CONTACT MENTIONED THAT WHEN THE FAILURE OCCURRED, THE BRAKES ENGAGED, THE SEAT BELT TIGHTENED, AND THE VEHICLE DECELERATED WITHOUT WARNING. THE DEALER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND WAS UNABLE TO SUPPLY A REMEDY. THE DEALER STATED THAT THE FEATURE WAS SET TO THE MANUFACTURER'S STANDARDS. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE AND PROVIDED NO REMEDY. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 6,572.
POST COLLISION SYSTEM (WITH AUTO-BRAKE) ACTIVATED (INCLUDING SEAT BELT TIGHTENING) WITH A CLEAR ROAD AHEAD. THIS COULD RESULT IN A MAJOR DISASTER IF IT HAPPENED AHEAD OF A TRACTOR TRAILER AT INTERSTATE SPEEDS.... UPDATED 06-18-15 *BF
CAR WENT INTO PANIC STOP (INCL TIGHTENING SAFETY BELTS) AT 50 MPH WITH NOTHING IN FRONT OF IT..SEE- EQ- 10724000...-....UPDATED 07/23/15 *BF THE POST COLLISION SYSTEM (WITH AUTO-BRAKE) ACTIVATED (INCLUDING THE SEAT BELT TIGHTENING) WITH A CLEAR ROAD AHEAD. THIS COULD HAVE BEEN A MAJOR DISASTER IF IT HAD HAPPENED AHEAD OF A TRA…
Read full complaint
CAR WENT INTO PANIC STOP (INCL TIGHTENING SAFETY BELTS) AT 50 MPH WITH NOTHING IN FRONT OF IT..SEE- EQ- 10724000...-....UPDATED 07/23/15 *BF THE POST COLLISION SYSTEM (WITH AUTO-BRAKE) ACTIVATED (INCLUDING THE SEAT BELT TIGHTENING) WITH A CLEAR ROAD AHEAD. THIS COULD HAVE BEEN A MAJOR DISASTER IF IT HAD HAPPENED AHEAD OF A TRACTOR TRAILER AT INTERSTATE SPEED.
DRIVER'S SIDE SEAT HAS EXCESSIVE WEAR SHOWING DISCOLORATION AND RIDGE / LUMP ON LEFT SIDE OF SEAT. SEATS ARE HEATED / AIR CONDITIONED AND ARE IVORY COLORED HOWEVER THE WEAR AND LUMP IN SEAT ARE SHOWING A DARKER COLOR ALMOST DARK GRAY. DON'T KNOW IF THE LUMP / RIDGE IN SEAT IS PART OF THE HEATING ELEMENT OR JUST IRREGULAR WEAR. …
Read full complaint
DRIVER'S SIDE SEAT HAS EXCESSIVE WEAR SHOWING DISCOLORATION AND RIDGE / LUMP ON LEFT SIDE OF SEAT. SEATS ARE HEATED / AIR CONDITIONED AND ARE IVORY COLORED HOWEVER THE WEAR AND LUMP IN SEAT ARE SHOWING A DARKER COLOR ALMOST DARK GRAY. DON'T KNOW IF THE LUMP / RIDGE IN SEAT IS PART OF THE HEATING ELEMENT OR JUST IRREGULAR WEAR. *TR
THE PRE-COLLISION SYSTEM ABRUPTLY AND FOR NO APPARENT REASON ACTIVATED ON A FREEWAY IN CHARLESTON, SC. NO CAR OR OTHER OBSTRUCTION WAS IN FRONT OF THE VEHICLE. A DISORIENTING LOUD ALARM BEGAN, THE SEAT BELTS FORCED US INTO OUR SEATS AND IMMOBILIZED US, AND THE VEHICLE DID A PANIC BRAKING MANEUVER-IT COULD NOT HAVE BRAKED MORE FO…
Read full complaint
THE PRE-COLLISION SYSTEM ABRUPTLY AND FOR NO APPARENT REASON ACTIVATED ON A FREEWAY IN CHARLESTON, SC. NO CAR OR OTHER OBSTRUCTION WAS IN FRONT OF THE VEHICLE. A DISORIENTING LOUD ALARM BEGAN, THE SEAT BELTS FORCED US INTO OUR SEATS AND IMMOBILIZED US, AND THE VEHICLE DID A PANIC BRAKING MANEUVER-IT COULD NOT HAVE BRAKED MORE FORCEFULLY. IF SOMEONE HAD BEEN BEHIND US WE WOULD HAVE BEEN KILLED.THE DEALERSHIP FOUND NO ANOMALY. THEY GAVE US A LIST OF 13 DIFFERENT HIGHWAY SITUATIONS THAT COULD CAUSE THIS. NONE OF THEM ARE UNCOMMON. THIS SYSTEM IS VERY DANGEROUS AND IS GOING TO GET SOMEONE KILLED. I HAVE DISABLED MINE. YOUR AGENCY SHOULD REQUIRE THAT THEY BE DISABLED AND NOT INSTALLED IN OTHER VEHICLES UNTIL THIS FATAL FLAW IS OVERCOME. *TR
Official recalls
420V024000 · Air Bags: Air Bag/restraint Control Module
Jan 17, 2020
Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing (Toyota) is recalling certain 2011-2019 Corolla, 2011-2013 Matrix, 2012-2018 Avalon, and 2013-2018 Avalon Hybrid vehicles. During certain crashes, the air bag electronic control unit (ECU) may malfunction, possibly disabling the deployment of the air bags and/or seat belt pretensioners.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: In the event of a crash, air bags and/or seat belt pretensioners that do not deploy as intended may increase the risk of injury.
Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the ECU and install a noise filter between the air bag control module and its wire harness, as necessary, free of charge. Owners were notified of the safety risk beginning March 2, 2020. A second letter notifying owners of the remedy repair will be mailed between March 16, 2020 and June 27, 2020. Owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-888-270-9371. Toyota's numbers for this recall are 20TB03, 20TA03 and 20TA05.
15V728000 · Forward Collision Avoidance: Crash Imminent Braking
Nov 3, 2015
Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing (Toyota) is recalling certain model year 2013-2015 Avalon and Avalon Hybrid vehicles manufactured October 19, 2012 to October 27, 2015 and 2013-2015 Lexus ES350 and ES300h vehicles manufactured June 18, 2012 to July 6, 2015. The affected vehicles are equipped with a Pre-Collision System (PCS) as optional equipment. In these vehicles, the PCS may unexpectedly activate and apply the brakes when the radar detects a steel joint or plate in the roadway as an object.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A vehicle that unexpectedly brakes increases the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will replace certain PCS components, free of charge. The recall began on July 28, 2016. Owners may contact Toyota at 1-888-270-9371. Toyota's numbers for this campaign are F1V and F2E.
14V715000 · Suspension:front:control Arm:lower Arm
Nov 7, 2014
Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing (Toyota) is recalling certain model year 2014 Toyota Camry, Camry HV, Avalon, and Avalon HV vehicles equipped with 16-inch and 17-inch rims. In the affected vehicles, the left-side front suspension lower arm may have been incorrectly manufactured. As a result, the left side lower arm may not have enough clamping surface area for one of the bolts that secures the lower arm to the lower ball joint.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: Because of the insufficient clamping force, the lower arm may separate from the ball joint, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will replace the left side lower arm, free of charge. The recall began on December 12, 2014. Owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-800-331-4331.
14V576000 · Fuel System, Gasoline:delivery:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings
Sep 19, 2014
Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing (Toyota) is recalling certain model year 2014 Toyota Avalon, Camry, Sienna, and Highlander and model year 2015 Lexus RX350 vehicles. Fuel may leak from the one of the fuel delivery pipes in the engine compartment.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A fuel leak in the presence of an ignition source increases the risk of a fire.
Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will replace any of the suspect fuel delivery pipes free of charge. The recall began November 17, 2014. Owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-800-331-4331.
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
1EA19001 · 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.
Illustration