NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Vehicle Speed Control complaints
259 reportsClear category filter42,155 miles · Feb 20, 2007
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT PUT THE VEHICLE IN REVERSE AND IT ACCELERATED ON ITS OWN WITHOUT WARNING. THE CONTACT STATED THAT HIS FOOT REMAINED ON THE BRAKE PEDAL AND THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO ACCELERATE, IT LUNGED FORWARD OVER A CURB AND HIT A TREE. THE REAR AXLES WERE DAMAGED. THE VEHICLE WAS T…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT PUT THE VEHICLE IN REVERSE AND IT ACCELERATED ON ITS OWN WITHOUT WARNING. THE CONTACT STATED THAT HIS FOOT REMAINED ON THE BRAKE PEDAL AND THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO ACCELERATE, IT LUNGED FORWARD OVER A CURB AND HIT A TREE. THE REAR AXLES WERE DAMAGED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED. THERE WERE NO INJURIES. A POLICE REPORT WAS TAKEN, AND THE CONTACT HAD PHOTOS OF THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE HAS NOT BEEN DIAGNOSED AT THIS TIME.*AK THE VEHICLE LUNGED IN REVERSE, ONTO A MANIN STREET, JUMPED THE CURB AND HIT A TREE. UPDATED 03/19/07. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10183019
26,950 miles · Feb 6, 2007
Vehicle Speed Control
SUDDEN ACCELERATION OF 2003 CAMRY WITH 27,000 MILES ON IT. I WAS PARKED, HAD FOOT ON BRAKE, TURNED CAR ON . PUT CAR IN DRIVE WHILE FOOT STILL ON BRAKE AND CAR SURGED FORWARD. THIS WAS SO FRIGHTENING AS A MOM AND CHILD WERE WALKING IN FRONT OF MY CAR. I SMASHED MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE, PUT CAR IN PARK AND TURNED MOTOR OFF TO MAK…
Read full complaint
SUDDEN ACCELERATION OF 2003 CAMRY WITH 27,000 MILES ON IT. I WAS PARKED, HAD FOOT ON BRAKE, TURNED CAR ON . PUT CAR IN DRIVE WHILE FOOT STILL ON BRAKE AND CAR SURGED FORWARD. THIS WAS SO FRIGHTENING AS A MOM AND CHILD WERE WALKING IN FRONT OF MY CAR. I SMASHED MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE, PUT CAR IN PARK AND TURNED MOTOR OFF TO MAKE IT STOP. *JB SEE ALSO 10184772. *DSY
NHTSA ODI #10181803
24,610 miles · Dec 12, 2006
Vehicle Speed Control
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED ON THREE SEPARATE OCCASIONS THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED WITHOUT WARNING WHEN PLACED INTO GEAR. THE VEHICLE WAS DRIVEN TO THE DEALER BOTH TIMES HOWEVER THE PROBLEM COULD NOT BE DUPLICATED. UPDATED 01/30/07. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10175962
41,235 miles · Jun 20, 2006
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE BRAKE PEDAL AND THE ACCELERATOR WERE TOO CLOSE TOGETHER, AND THE BRAKE PEDAL MOVES DOWN TOO FAR. THE POSITION OF THE BRAKE PEDAL AND ACCELERATOR CAUSED A COLLISION WHILE BACKING OUT OF A PARKING SPOT. THE ACCELERATOR WAS ACCIDENTALLY DEPRESSED CAUSING THE VEHICLE TO INCREASE IN SPEED AND COLLI…
Read full complaint
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE BRAKE PEDAL AND THE ACCELERATOR WERE TOO CLOSE TOGETHER, AND THE BRAKE PEDAL MOVES DOWN TOO FAR. THE POSITION OF THE BRAKE PEDAL AND ACCELERATOR CAUSED A COLLISION WHILE BACKING OUT OF A PARKING SPOT. THE ACCELERATOR WAS ACCIDENTALLY DEPRESSED CAUSING THE VEHICLE TO INCREASE IN SPEED AND COLLIDE WITH ANOTHER PARKED VEHICLE WHICH SUBSEQUENTLY PUSHED THAT VEHICLE INTO A THIRD. THERE WERE NO INJURIES. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED, AND THERE WERE NO MECHANICS CONSULTED.
NHTSA ODI #10160264
12,200 miles · Jun 16, 2006
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING 7 MPH IN HEAVY STOP AND GO TRAFFIC WITH THE BRAKES APPLIED, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED INTO THE REAR OF ANOTHER VEHICLE. THE CONTACT WAS WEARING A SEAT BELT AND NO INJURIES WERE SUSTAINED. MINOR DAMAGE WAS SUSTAINED TO THE VEHICLE. THE POLICE WERE ON THE SCENE AND A REPORT WAS TAKEN. THE …
Read full complaint
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING 7 MPH IN HEAVY STOP AND GO TRAFFIC WITH THE BRAKES APPLIED, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED INTO THE REAR OF ANOTHER VEHICLE. THE CONTACT WAS WEARING A SEAT BELT AND NO INJURIES WERE SUSTAINED. MINOR DAMAGE WAS SUSTAINED TO THE VEHICLE. THE POLICE WERE ON THE SCENE AND A REPORT WAS TAKEN. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT INSPECTED BY A DEALER. UPDATED 7/13/2006 - THIS ACCELERATION PROBLEM OCCURRED 6-7 TIME PRIOR TO THIS ACCIDENT. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10160012
44,805 miles · May 30, 2006
Air BagsVehicle Speed ControlCrash
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING SLOWLY AT 1 MPH WIT FOOT ON THE BRAKE PEDAL, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED SUDDENLY CAUSING AN ACCIDENT. THE VEHICLE CRASHED INTO THREE OTHER VEHICLE'S CAUSING PROPERTY DAMAGE. THE SEAT BELTS WERE IN USE AT THE TIME. THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. THERE WERE NO PROBLEMS PRIOR TO THIS ACCIDENT. …
Read full complaint
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING SLOWLY AT 1 MPH WIT FOOT ON THE BRAKE PEDAL, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED SUDDENLY CAUSING AN ACCIDENT. THE VEHICLE CRASHED INTO THREE OTHER VEHICLE'S CAUSING PROPERTY DAMAGE. THE SEAT BELTS WERE IN USE AT THE TIME. THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. THERE WERE NO PROBLEMS PRIOR TO THIS ACCIDENT. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO LOCAL DEALERSHIP WHERE THEY WERE UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM. THE VEHICLE HAS BEEN INSPECTED BY TOYOTA. THE POLICE WERE ALERTED TO THE SCENE AND A REPORT WAS FILED. UPDATED 6/19/2006 - *NM
NHTSA ODI #10158514
21,000 miles · May 12, 2006
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
I WAS DRIVING INTO THE AUTOMATIC CAR WASH, SLOWED TO GO UP SLIGHT RAMP TO TOP. GAVE THE CAR A LITTLE GAS AND IT STARTED REVING, DID NOT STOP WHEN BRAKE PEDAL PUSHED, JUMPED THE TRACK AND HIT THE SIDE OF THE CAR WASH. THE CAR WAS ABLE TO BE MOVED TO OUTSIDE CARWASH, STILL REVING BUT WAS ABLE TO STOP AND TURN OFF THE ENGINE. TH…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING INTO THE AUTOMATIC CAR WASH, SLOWED TO GO UP SLIGHT RAMP TO TOP. GAVE THE CAR A LITTLE GAS AND IT STARTED REVING, DID NOT STOP WHEN BRAKE PEDAL PUSHED, JUMPED THE TRACK AND HIT THE SIDE OF THE CAR WASH. THE CAR WAS ABLE TO BE MOVED TO OUTSIDE CARWASH, STILL REVING BUT WAS ABLE TO STOP AND TURN OFF THE ENGINE. THE FRONT BUMPER AND DRIVER'S SIDE FRONT FENDER WERE REPLACED, AND SUSPENSION DAMAGE REPAIRED. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10157467
32,824 miles · May 5, 2006
SuspensionVehicle Speed ControlCrash
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING 25 MPH DEPRESSING THE BRAKE PEDAL THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED. THIS OCCURRED FOUR TIMES. THE FIRST 3 TIMES THE VEHICLE WAS STOPPED WITH EXCESSIVE PRESSURE TO THE BRAKE PEDAL. THE LAST TIME THE VEHICLE STRUCK A POLE. THERE WAS A POLICE REPORT TAKEN AT THE SCENE OF THE ACCIDENT. THE VEHICLE …
Read full complaint
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING 25 MPH DEPRESSING THE BRAKE PEDAL THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED. THIS OCCURRED FOUR TIMES. THE FIRST 3 TIMES THE VEHICLE WAS STOPPED WITH EXCESSIVE PRESSURE TO THE BRAKE PEDAL. THE LAST TIME THE VEHICLE STRUCK A POLE. THERE WAS A POLICE REPORT TAKEN AT THE SCENE OF THE ACCIDENT. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT REPAIR SHOP FOR BODY REPAIRS CAUSED BY THE CRASH. WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED THE FIRST THREE TIMES DIAGNOSTIC TESTING DID NOT IDENTIFY ANY CODES. ALSO, WHILE CARRYING 125 POUNDS OF BIRD SEED IN THE TRUNK, THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO VEER TO THE LEFT ON A SLUSHY ROAD. WHEN THE BIRD SEED WAS MOVED TO THE FRONT PASSENGER SEAT THE VEHICLE OPERATED NORMALLY. THE MANUFACTURER WAS ALERTED. UPDATED 7/11/2006 - THE CONSUMER REPORTED THESE INCIDENTS TO THE DEALER BUT THEY TOLD THE CONSUMER THAT NOTHING WAS WRONG. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10156846
17,157 miles · Apr 4, 2006
Vehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
I WAS PARKED IN A STRIP MALL WHERE I HAD JUST PICKED UP SOME DRY CLEANING. I ENTERED MY CAR, A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY XLE, AND STARTED THE ENGINE. I THEN PUT THE CAR IN REVERSE GEAR, AND REMOVED MY FOOT FROM THE BRAKE. THE CAR SUDDENLY ACCELERATED IN REVERSE,,AND WENT TOTALLY OUT OF CONTROL, HITTING ANOTHER CAR PARKED ACROSS FROM M…
Read full complaint
I WAS PARKED IN A STRIP MALL WHERE I HAD JUST PICKED UP SOME DRY CLEANING. I ENTERED MY CAR, A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY XLE, AND STARTED THE ENGINE. I THEN PUT THE CAR IN REVERSE GEAR, AND REMOVED MY FOOT FROM THE BRAKE. THE CAR SUDDENLY ACCELERATED IN REVERSE,,AND WENT TOTALLY OUT OF CONTROL, HITTING ANOTHER CAR PARKED ACROSS FROM MINE AND CONTINUED IN A SOMEWHAT CIRCULAR PATH UNTIL I WAS ABLE TO APPLY THE BRAKE AND COME TO A STOP. I HAVE CALLED NHTSA TODAY AND WAS TOLD THAT THERE HAVE BEEN 83 PREVIOUS COMPLAINTS FOR THIS VEHICLE UNDER "VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL," AND 15 COMPLAINTS UNDER "VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL, ACCELERATOR PEDAL." I HAVE ALSO CALLED TOYOTA MOTOR SALES (1 800 331-4331) AND WAS TOLD THAT THEY WOULD MAKE AN APPOINTMENT WITH A NEARBY TOYOTA DEALER TO HAVE MY CAR INSPECTED FOR ANY DEFECTS. I HAVE ALSO GONE TO A AUTO BODY SHOP WHERE THE DAMAGES TO MY CAR HAVE BEEN ESTIMATED AT $3,879.13. IN ADDITION, THE POLICE ARRIVED AT THE SCENE AND I WAS CITED FOR "CARELESS DRIVING," AND PAID A FINE OF $107.70. I AM ALSO BEEN REQUIRED TO ATTEND A 4 HOUR TRAFFIC SCHOOL WHERE THE FEE IS $35.95. I WISH TO HAVE THIS MATTER INVESTIGATED.
NHTSA ODI #10154549
Mileage unknown · Mar 27, 2006
Vehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
2003 CAMRY ACCELERATED OUT OF CONTROL CAUSING CONSUMER TO CRASH INTO A WALL. *TS THE CONSUMER WANTED TO KNOW IF ANY ACTION WILL BE TAKEN REGARDING HER COMPLAINT. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10154137
NHTSA investigations
3DP06003 · Engine Surging
Opened Sep 14, 2006 · Closed Apr 3, 2007
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control; Vehicle Speed Control:accelerator Pedal
THE PETITIONER OWNS A MY 2006 TOYOTA CAMRY WITH A 4-CYLINDER ENGINE THAT WAS PURCHASED NEW IN JANUARY 2006. THE PETITIONER ALSO PREVIOUSLY OWNED A MY 2005 CAMRY. HE ALLEGES THAT BOTH VEHICLES EXHIBITED VEHICLE ENGINE SURGING, WHICH HE DESCRIBED AS A SHORT DURATION (1 TO 2 SECOND) INCREASE IN ENGINE SPEED OCCURRING WHILE THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL IS NOT DEPRESSED. IN AN INITIAL INTERVIEW, THE PETITIONER ESTIMATED THAT 6 TO 8 SURGE INCIDENTS, OF VARYING SEVERITY, OCCURRED IN THE MY 2006 VEHICLE OVER THE COURSE OF 10,000 MILES AND 7 MONTHS OF OWNERSHIP. THE PETITIONER REPORTS THAT THE BRAKE SYSTEM IS EFFECTIVE AT OVERCOMING THE SURGE. HOWEVER, HE IS CONCERNED ABOUT REPORTS FILED WITH NHTSA ALLEGING UNCONTROLLEDSURGING IN MY 2002 TO 2006 CAMRY VEHICLES BRINGING THOSE VEHICLES TO A HIGH RATE OF SPEED (IN SOME CASES, PURPORTEDLY, WITH THE BRAKES APPLIED).AFTER REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF THE AVAILABLE INFORMATION, ODI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED A VEHICLE-BASED DEFECT THAT WOULD HAVE PRODUCED THE ALLEGED ENGINE SURGE IN THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE, NOR WAS IT ABLE TO WITNESS SUCH AN EVENT WHEN ROAD TESTING THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE.EVALUATION OF A SUSPECT THROTTLE ACTUATOR REMOVED FROM THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE DID NOT REVEAL A COMPONENT PROBLEM. WARRANTY AND PARTS SALES OF THE ACTUATOR ARE UNREMARKABLE.THESE DATA DO NOT SUPPORT THE EXISTENCE OF A WIDE-SPREAD DEFECT OR ONGOING CONCERN. THE FAULT DETECTION AND REACTION STRATEGY DESCRIBED IN TOYOTA?S TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS INDICATES THAT A LOSS OF THROTTLE CONTROL DUE TO A COMPONENT OR SYSTEM FAILURE WOULD BE DETECTED WITHIN A ONE SECOND PERIODAFTER WHICH ENGINE POWER WOULD BE LIMITED. THE PETITIONER?S MY 2006 VEHICLE BRAKE SYSTEM OVERCOMES FULL ENGINE POWER AT EASILY ACHIEVABLE BRAKE PEDAL FORCES. BASED ON THE ANALYSIS CONDUCTED, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.CONSEQUENTLY, 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.PLEASE SEE THE MARCH 9, 2007 FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE FOR FURTHER DETAILS.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Vehicle Speed Control:accelerator Pedal
THE PETITIONER OWNS A MY 2006 TOYOTA CAMRY WITH A 4-CYLINDER ENGINE THAT WAS PURCHASED NEW IN JANUARY 2006. THE PETITIONER ALSO PREVIOUSLY OWNED A MY 2005 CAMRY. HE ALLEGES THAT BOTH VEHICLES EXHIBITED VEHICLE ENGINE SURGING, WHICH HE DESCRIBED AS A SHORT DURATION (1 TO 2 SECOND) INCREASE IN ENGINE SPEED OCCURRING WHILE THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL IS NOT DEPRESSED. IN AN INITIAL INTERVIEW, THE PETITIONER ESTIMATED THAT 6 TO 8 SURGE INCIDENTS, OF VARYING SEVERITY, OCCURRED IN THE MY 2006 VEHICLE OVER THE COURSE OF 10,000 MILES AND 7 MONTHS OF OWNERSHIP. THE PETITIONER REPORTS THAT THE BRAKE SYSTEM IS EFFECTIVE AT OVERCOMING THE SURGE. HOWEVER, HE IS CONCERNED ABOUT REPORTS FILED WITH NHTSA ALLEGING UNCONTROLLEDSURGING IN MY 2002 TO 2006 CAMRY VEHICLES BRINGING THOSE VEHICLES TO A HIGH RATE OF SPEED (IN SOME CASES, PURPORTEDLY, WITH THE BRAKES APPLIED).AFTER REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF THE AVAILABLE INFORMATION, ODI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED A VEHICLE-BASED DEFECT THAT WOULD HAVE PRODUCED THE ALLEGED ENGINE SURGE IN THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE, NOR WAS IT ABLE TO WITNESS SUCH AN EVENT WHEN ROAD TESTING THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE.EVALUATION OF A SUSPECT THROTTLE ACTUATOR REMOVED FROM THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE DID NOT REVEAL A COMPONENT PROBLEM. WARRANTY AND PARTS SALES OF THE ACTUATOR ARE UNREMARKABLE.THESE DATA DO NOT SUPPORT THE EXISTENCE OF A WIDE-SPREAD DEFECT OR ONGOING CONCERN. THE FAULT DETECTION AND REACTION STRATEGY DESCRIBED IN TOYOTA?S TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS INDICATES THAT A LOSS OF THROTTLE CONTROL DUE TO A COMPONENT OR SYSTEM FAILURE WOULD BE DETECTED WITHIN A ONE SECOND PERIODAFTER WHICH ENGINE POWER WOULD BE LIMITED. THE PETITIONER?S MY 2006 VEHICLE BRAKE SYSTEM OVERCOMES FULL ENGINE POWER AT EASILY ACHIEVABLE BRAKE PEDAL FORCES. BASED ON THE ANALYSIS CONDUCTED, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.CONSEQUENTLY, 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.PLEASE SEE THE MARCH 9, 2007 FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE FOR FURTHER DETAILS.
Vehicle Speed Control
THE PETITIONER OWNS A MY 2006 TOYOTA CAMRY WITH A 4-CYLINDER ENGINE THAT WAS PURCHASED NEW IN JANUARY 2006. THE PETITIONER ALSO PREVIOUSLY OWNED A MY 2005 CAMRY. HE ALLEGES THAT BOTH VEHICLES EXHIBITED VEHICLE ENGINE SURGING, WHICH HE DESCRIBED AS A SHORT DURATION (1 TO 2 SECOND) INCREASE IN ENGINE SPEED OCCURRING WHILE THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL IS NOT DEPRESSED. IN AN INITIAL INTERVIEW, THE PETITIONER ESTIMATED THAT 6 TO 8 SURGE INCIDENTS, OF VARYING SEVERITY, OCCURRED IN THE MY 2006 VEHICLE OVER THE COURSE OF 10,000 MILES AND 7 MONTHS OF OWNERSHIP. THE PETITIONER REPORTS THAT THE BRAKE SYSTEM IS EFFECTIVE AT OVERCOMING THE SURGE. HOWEVER, HE IS CONCERNED ABOUT REPORTS FILED WITH NHTSA ALLEGING UNCONTROLLEDSURGING IN MY 2002 TO 2006 CAMRY VEHICLES BRINGING THOSE VEHICLES TO A HIGH RATE OF SPEED (IN SOME CASES, PURPORTEDLY, WITH THE BRAKES APPLIED).AFTER REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF THE AVAILABLE INFORMATION, ODI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED A VEHICLE-BASED DEFECT THAT WOULD HAVE PRODUCED THE ALLEGED ENGINE SURGE IN THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE, NOR WAS IT ABLE TO WITNESS SUCH AN EVENT WHEN ROAD TESTING THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE.EVALUATION OF A SUSPECT THROTTLE ACTUATOR REMOVED FROM THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE DID NOT REVEAL A COMPONENT PROBLEM. WARRANTY AND PARTS SALES OF THE ACTUATOR ARE UNREMARKABLE.THESE DATA DO NOT SUPPORT THE EXISTENCE OF A WIDE-SPREAD DEFECT OR ONGOING CONCERN. THE FAULT DETECTION AND REACTION STRATEGY DESCRIBED IN TOYOTA?S TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS INDICATES THAT A LOSS OF THROTTLE CONTROL DUE TO A COMPONENT OR SYSTEM FAILURE WOULD BE DETECTED WITHIN A ONE SECOND PERIODAFTER WHICH ENGINE POWER WOULD BE LIMITED. THE PETITIONER?S MY 2006 VEHICLE BRAKE SYSTEM OVERCOMES FULL ENGINE POWER AT EASILY ACHIEVABLE BRAKE PEDAL FORCES. BASED ON THE ANALYSIS CONDUCTED, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.CONSEQUENTLY, 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.PLEASE SEE THE MARCH 9, 2007 FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE FOR FURTHER DETAILS.
DP05002 · Vehicle Speed Control
Opened Aug 5, 2005 · Closed Jan 5, 2006
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control
IN A LETTER DATED JULY 8, 2005, AND AFTER EXPERIENCING TWO INCIDENTS (AND ONE CRASH) WHERE HE ALLEGES HIS MODEL YEAR (MY) 2002 CAMRY ACCELERATED WITHOUT DRIVER INPUT, MR. JORDAN ZIPRIN PETITIONED THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION?S (NHTSA) OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI) TO COMMENCE A PROCEEDING TO DETERMINE THE EXISTENCE OF A DEFECT WITHIN THE ETC SYSTEM IN MY 2002 TO 2005 TOYOTA AND LEXUS VEHICLES, OR TO REOPEN A PRIOR INVESTIGATION PRELIMINARY EVALUATION (PE) 04-021.IN A LETTER DATED AUGUST 18, 2005, MR. ZIPRIN AMENDED HIS PETITION TO INCLUDE ALLEGATIONS OF INTERRELATED BRAKE AND ACCELERATION PROBLEMS THAT ALLEGEDLY RESULT IN INAPPROPRIATE AND UNCONTROLLABLE VEHICLE ACCELERATIONS.THE 1172 VEHICLE OWNER QUESTIONNAIRE REPORTS CITED BY THE PETITIONER INVOLVE 4 LEXUS AND 15 TOYOTA MODELS DEFINING A POPULATION OF 7 MILLION VEHICLES.THE REPORTS TYPICALLY ALLEGED A DEFECT IN THE BRAKE SYSTEM, THE THROTTLE CONTROL SYSTEM, OR A COMBINATION OF BOTH SYSTEMS.IN ITS REVIEW OF THE REPORTS, ODI A) FAILED TO FIND EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE EXISTENCE OF A BRAKE RELATED DEFECT IN THE CITED MODELS, AND B) DETERMINED THAT MANY CITED PRODUCTS WERE NOT EQUIPPED WITH ETC.ACCORDINGLY, ODI RESTRICTED ITS ANALYSIS TO THE 432 PETITIONER REPORTS INVOLVING MY 2002 TO 2005 CAMRY, SOLARA, AND ES MODELS (ALL EQUIPPED WITH ETC) THAT ALLEGED AN ABNORMAL THROTTLE CONTROL EVENT (SEE THE JANUARY 3, 2006 FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE FOR FURTHER DETAILS).ABOUT 40% OF THE 432 REPORTS INVOLVE A DRIVEABILITY CONCERN WHERE THE OPERATOR INTENTIONALLY APPLIES THE THROTTLE PEDAL, IN EXPECTATION THAT THE VEHICLE WILL ACCELERATE, AND THEN EXPERIENCES A DELAY OR HESITATION IN VEHICLE RESPONSE.THESE REPORTS INVOLVE VEHICLE RESPONSE TO INTENTIONAL DRIVER COMMANDS WHICH ODI CONSIDERS UNRELATED TO THE ALLEGATIONS RAISED BY THE PETITIONER.THEREFORE, THE REPORTS DO NOT PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED.ABOUT 20% OF THE REPORTS INVOLVE INCIDENTS WHERE OPERATORS ALLEGE VEHICLE ACCELERATION WITHOUT DRIVER INPUT AND AN INABILITY OF THE BRAKE SYSTEM TO CONTROL THE VEHICLE WHEN APPLIED.NEITHER THE REPORTS, NOR THE INTERVIEWS CONDUCTED BY ODI, IDENTIFIED ANY VEHICLE-BASED CAUSE TO EXPLAIN THE INCIDENTS OR DISCLOSED EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THAT A FAILURE OF THE BRAKE OR THROTTLE CONTROL SYSTEM HAD OCCURRED.BECAUSE THESE REPORTS DO NOT INDICATE A DISTINCT SAFETY DEFECT FOR INVESTIGATION, THE REPORTS DO NOT PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED BY THE PETITIONERTHE REMAINING REPORTS (~ 40%, SIMILAR TO THE PETITIONER?S AND THOSE OF PE04-021) TYPICALLY DESCRIBE INCIDENTS WHERE A VEHICLE IS BEING MANEUVERED AT SLOW SPEED IN A CLOSE QUARTER SITUATION AT WHICH POINT THE OPERATOR ALLEGES THAT THE VEHICLE ACCELERATES WITHOUT DRIVER INPUT AND CRASHES.IN THE AFTERMATH, OPERATORS ARE UNSURE OF WHETHER THE BRAKES WERE APPLIED OR NOT, SOMETIMES STATING THERE WAS INSUFFICIENT TIME TO USE THE BRAKE; A CRASH OCCURRED AND THE OPERATOR BELIEVES AN UNCOMMANDED ACCELERATION CAUSED IT.IN SPITE OF THE EFFORT EXPENDED DURING PE04-021 AND DURING THIS ANALYSIS, ODI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED ANY VEHICLE-BASED CAUSE TO EXPLAIN THE REPORTS, OR UNCOVERED ANY EVIDENCE TO INDICATE THAT A THROTTLE CONTROL SYSTEM FAILURE OCCURRED.THEREFORE, THE REPORTS HAVE AMBIGUOUS SIGNIFICANCE AND DO NOT CONSTITUTE A BASIS ON WHICH ANY FURTHER INVESTIGATIVE ACTION IS WARRANTED.BASED ON THE ANALYSIS CONDUCTED, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT THE NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.CONSEQUENTLY, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES T
PE04021 · Throttle Control System
Opened Mar 3, 2004 · Closed Jul 22, 2004
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control
THE LEXUS MODELS WERE THE SUBJECT OF DEFECT PETITION (DP) 04-003.TWELVE ODI COMPLAINTS ARE DUPLICATIVE TO TOYOTA REPORTS, INCLUDING THE TWO MINOR CRASHES.THE V6 EQUIPPED SOLARA MODELS HAVE BEEN EXCLUDED BECAUSE THEY DO NOT CONTAIN THE SUBJECT THROTTLE CONTROL SYSTEM.TOYOTA INTRODUCED ELECTRONIC THROTTLE CONTROL (ETC) ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES BEGINNING IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2002.ODI OPENED THE INVESTIGATION TO DETERMINE IF THE SYSTEM COULD BE THE CAUSE OF COMPLAINTS ALLEGING THE ENGINE SPEED INCREASED, OR FAILED TO DECREASE, (FOR A SHORT DURATION) WHEN THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WAS NOT DEPRESSED (THE ALLEGED DEFECT).DURING THE COURSE OF THE INVESTIGATION, ODI ANALYZED AGENCY DATA AND REVIEWED VEHICLE OWNER QUESTIONNAIRE (VOQ) REPORTS, CONDUCTED INTERVIEWS INVOLVING 113 VOQ AND 36 TOYOTA REPORTS, INSPECTED TWO COMPLAINANT VEHICLES, REVIEWED RELEVANT TOYOTA SERVICE AND NEW CAR FEATURE DOCUMENTATION, REVIEWED AND ANALYZED TOYOTA?S RESPONSES TO ODI?S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER, CONDUCTED A LIMITED CONTROL PEDAL ASSESSMENT, AND ATTENDED A TOYOTA TECHNICAL PRESENTATION THAT INCLUDED THE ASSESSMENT OF TWO DEMONSTRATION VEHICLES.THROUGH INTERVIEWS, ODI IDENTIFIED 14 VOQ AND 6 TOYOTA REPORTS (20 UNIQUE VEHICLES) WHERE COMPLAINANTS REPORT MULTIPLE OCCURRENCES OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT.IN SOME CASES THE CONDITION WAS EXPERIENCED BY DIFFERENT VEHICLE OPERATORS OR WAS WITNESSED BY OTHER OCCUPANTS.ODI WAS UNABLE TO MAKE A DETERMINATION AS TO THE CAUSE OF 9 TOYOTA AND AN ADDITIONAL 37 VOQ REPORTS (WHICH DESCRIBE 28 UNIQUE INCIDENTS) DUE TO INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION.THE REMAINING COMPLAINANTS INTERVIEWED (62 VOQ, 21 TOYOTA) DESCRIBED CONDITIONS NOT CAUSED BY A FAILURE OF THE THROTTLE CONTROL SYSTEM AND WERE THUS CONSIDERED UNRELATED TO THE INVESTIGATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS INTERVIEWED REPORTED A COMPONENT FAILURE (OR OTHER INDICATOR OF A SYSTEM FAILURE) AS THE POTENTIAL CAUSE OF INCIDENTS RELEVANT TO THIS INVESTIGATION.IN MANY CASES, THE COMPLAINT VEHICLES WERE SUBSEQUENTLY INSPECTED BY DEALERSHIP OR MANUFACTURER REPRESENTATIVES WHO ALSO FAILED TO IDENTIFY A FAULT WITHIN THE VEHICLE.TOYOTA IDENTIFIED 43 RELATED WARRANTY CLAIMS, 24 OF WHICH WERE FOR DIAGNOSTIC PURPOSES ONLY (NO REPAIRS PERFORMED).ODI FOUND NOTHING ABNORMAL IN THE CONTROL PEDAL CONFIGURATION OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.A 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.SEE THE ATTACHED SUMMARY FOR FURTHER DETAIL.