NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Vehicle Speed Control complaints
259 reportsClear category filter45,441 miles · Apr 23, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. CONSUMER STATES UNINTENDED ACCELERATION *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED WHEN SHE ENTERED A PARKING LOT, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED. SHE VEERED TO THE RIGHT AWAY FROM A BRICK BUILDING AND DROVE OVER A CURB, A SIDEWALK, A DROP DOWN TO GRASS AND ALONG SHRUBS AT THE BASE OF THE BUILDING. THE CONSUMER WAS ABLE TO …
Read full complaint
2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. CONSUMER STATES UNINTENDED ACCELERATION *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED WHEN SHE ENTERED A PARKING LOT, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED. SHE VEERED TO THE RIGHT AWAY FROM A BRICK BUILDING AND DROVE OVER A CURB, A SIDEWALK, A DROP DOWN TO GRASS AND ALONG SHRUBS AT THE BASE OF THE BUILDING. THE CONSUMER WAS ABLE TO BRING THE VEHICLE UNDER CONTROL. ALL TOGETHER, THE VEHICLE TRAVELED ABOUT 100 FEET OR MORE IN A CIRCLE IN A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME. THE CONSUMER STATED THE FIRST TIME THE INCIDENT HAPPENED WAS IN MAY 2006 WHEN THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED AS SHE WAS BACKING OUT OF A PARKING SPACE. THE VEHICLE HAD BEEN IDLING FOR A FEW MINUTES WITH THE AIR CONDITIONER ON BEFORE SHE PLACED THE GEAR IN REVERSE. THERE WAS NO PROPERTY DAMAGE AND THE POLICE WERE NOT CALLED IN EITHER INCIDENT. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10327427
50,000 miles · Apr 21, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY LE. WHILE DRIVING UP A HILL AT APPROXIMATELY 25 MPH, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED WHILE THE CONTACT HAD THE BRAKE PEDAL DEPRESSED. THE VEHICLE CRASHED INTO ANOTHER VEHICLE IN FRONT OF IT. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO TWO DIFFERENT DEALERSHIP BUT BOTH DEALERS WERE…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY LE. WHILE DRIVING UP A HILL AT APPROXIMATELY 25 MPH, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED WHILE THE CONTACT HAD THE BRAKE PEDAL DEPRESSED. THE VEHICLE CRASHED INTO ANOTHER VEHICLE IN FRONT OF IT. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO TWO DIFFERENT DEALERSHIP BUT BOTH DEALERS WERE UNABLE TO DIAGNOSE THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS THEN TAKEN TO A LOCAL MECHANIC FOR REPAIR. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 120,000. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 50,000. UPDATED 11/03/10. *LJ
NHTSA ODI #10326792
15,000 miles · Apr 16, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
MY WIFE DROVE HER 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY INTO A PARKING SPACE DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF A BEAUTY SHOP IN CANONSBURG, PA. AS SHE MOVED HER FOOT FROM THE ACCELERATOR TO THE GAS PEDAL, THE CAR ACCELERATED INTO THE FRONT OF THE SHOP. AT THE TIME EVERYONE, INCLUDING ME, ASSUMED SHE WAS WRONG AND THAT SHE HAD STEP ON THE ACCELERATOR BY MISTAK…
Read full complaint
MY WIFE DROVE HER 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY INTO A PARKING SPACE DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF A BEAUTY SHOP IN CANONSBURG, PA. AS SHE MOVED HER FOOT FROM THE ACCELERATOR TO THE GAS PEDAL, THE CAR ACCELERATED INTO THE FRONT OF THE SHOP. AT THE TIME EVERYONE, INCLUDING ME, ASSUMED SHE WAS WRONG AND THAT SHE HAD STEP ON THE ACCELERATOR BY MISTAKE. IN LIGHT OF THE RECENT REPORTS ABOUT TOYOTAS, I NOW BELIEVE HER. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10326033
47,000 miles · Apr 12, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 5 MPH WHEN SHE ATTEMPTED TO STOP. WHEN THE BRAKE PEDAL WAS DEPRESSED THE GEAR SELECTOR WAS SHIFTED INTO THE REVERSE POSITION. THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO ACCELERATE. THE ENGINE WAS TURNED OFF TO GAIN CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEAL…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 5 MPH WHEN SHE ATTEMPTED TO STOP. WHEN THE BRAKE PEDAL WAS DEPRESSED THE GEAR SELECTOR WAS SHIFTED INTO THE REVERSE POSITION. THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO ACCELERATE. THE ENGINE WAS TURNED OFF TO GAIN CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSTIC TESTING. THE DEALER STATED THAT THE THROTTLE BODY NEEDED TO BE REPLACED AT THE OWNER EXPENSE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 47,000. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 47,000.
NHTSA ODI #10325060
122,867 miles · Apr 4, 2010
Power TrainVehicle Speed ControlCrash
2003 TOYOTA CAMRY LE WAS RUNNING, SITTING IN DRIVEWAY, BUT IN PARK WITH EMERGENCY BRAKE ON. CAR "TOOK OFF" IN REVERSE, AND ONLY CAME TO A STOP WHEN DRIVER JUMPED INTO CAR, PUSHED HARD ON FOOT BRAKE, TURNED OFF IGNITION, AND CAR DOOR SLAMMED INTO ANOTHER PARKED VEHICLE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10323662
20,000 miles · Mar 30, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE ENTERING A PARKING SPACE WITH HIS FOOT ON THE BRAKE PEDAL AT SPEEDS OF LESS THAN 15 MPH, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED AND CRASHED INTO A RETAIL STORE. THERE WERE THREE PEOPLE INSIDE THE STORE THAT WERE SEVERELY INJURED AND TRANSPORTED TO A HOSPITAL. THE POLICE WERE ALSO CALLED TO THE SCE…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE ENTERING A PARKING SPACE WITH HIS FOOT ON THE BRAKE PEDAL AT SPEEDS OF LESS THAN 15 MPH, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED AND CRASHED INTO A RETAIL STORE. THERE WERE THREE PEOPLE INSIDE THE STORE THAT WERE SEVERELY INJURED AND TRANSPORTED TO A HOSPITAL. THE POLICE WERE ALSO CALLED TO THE SCENE AND A REPORT WAS FILED. NONE OF THE OCCUPANTS IN THE CONTACTS VEHICLE WERE INJURED. THE CONTACTS INSURANCE COMPANY HIRED AN OUTSIDE EXPERT TO ASSESS THE VEHICLE FAILURE. THE EXPERT STATED THAT THE FLOOR MAT WAS NOT PROPERLY SECURED ON THE DRIVER'S SIDE AND COULD HAVE CAUSED THE UNINTENDED ACCELERATION. THE INSURANCE COMPANY DEEMED THE CAUSE OF THE CRASH DUE TO A POSSIBLE DEFECT IN HOW THE VEHICLE WAS MANUFACTURED. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 20,000. UPDATED 05/25/10*BF UPDATED 06/02/10.*JB
NHTSA ODI #10322825
51,445 miles · Mar 27, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
RE: NOTIFICATION CASE #245324 DATED ON 03/17/2010 THE INCIDENT HAPPENED ON A BECHTEL-TOWER VISITOR PARKING IN HOUSTON, TX. I PASSED THE ENTRANCE GATE, MADE TWO 90 DEGREES TURNS AND POSITIONED CAR BETWEEN PARKING LINES. SUDDENLY, I HEARD A HORRIFIED SOUND COMING OUT FROM THE ENGINE: MOTOR WAS ROARING LIKE A WILD LION. I PRESSED …
Read full complaint
RE: NOTIFICATION CASE #245324 DATED ON 03/17/2010 THE INCIDENT HAPPENED ON A BECHTEL-TOWER VISITOR PARKING IN HOUSTON, TX. I PASSED THE ENTRANCE GATE, MADE TWO 90 DEGREES TURNS AND POSITIONED CAR BETWEEN PARKING LINES. SUDDENLY, I HEARD A HORRIFIED SOUND COMING OUT FROM THE ENGINE: MOTOR WAS ROARING LIKE A WILD LION. I PRESSED THE BRAKE BUT IT DID NOT PREVENT THE ACCIDENT. LIKE A ROCKET THE VEHICLE RAN OVER THE CURB AND LANDSCAPING COLLIDING INTO A LARGE THREE. THE SEAT BELT SAVED MY LIFE, HOWEVER THE WHOLE FRONT BODY OF THE VEHICLE WAS SMASHED AND THE ESTIMATED DAMAGE WAS NEAR $8,000. THE BECHTEL SECURITY GUARD OFFICER WAS CONTACTED IMMEDIATELY. THE INCIDENT HAS BEEN DOCUMENTED AND RECORDED IN BECHTEL SECURITY FILE. LATER THIS YEAR WHEN TOYOTA "UNINTENDED ACCELERATION" PROBLEM WAS REVEALED I CONTACTED THE TOYOTA MOTOR SALES DEPARTMENT. THEY INSPECTED THE VEHICLE AND DETERMINED THAT ALL TESTS PERFORMED SAFELY. FOR YOUR CONVENIENCE, THE FOLLOWING ATTACHMENTS HAVE BEEN MAILED TO YOUR OFFICE ON MARCH 24, 2010: A COPY OF MY LETTER SUBMITTED TO TOYOTA MOTOR SALES, U.S.A., TORRANCE, CA. THIS LETTER PERTAINS ALL EVENTS AND DETAILS RELATED TO THE INCIDENT. REPORT OF STERLING MCCALL TOYOTA TESTING PERFORMED ON FEBRUARY 10, 2010. I GREATLY APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION. UPDATED 04/20/10
NHTSA ODI #10322465
Mileage unknown · Mar 26, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
S10 APPROPRIATE HANDLING RE TOYOTA PROBLEMS, OWNER OF A 2003 CAMRY EXPERIENCE SUDDEN UNINTENDED ACCELERATION IN NOVEMBER 2008(PHOTOS INSIDE ENVELOPE) *TGW AS THE CONSUMERS MOTHER PULLED INTO HER GARAGE, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED AND CRASHED INTO THE WALL, CAUSING SIGNIFICANT DAMAGE TO THE BATHROOM THAT WAS ON THE OTHER S…
Read full complaint
S10 APPROPRIATE HANDLING RE TOYOTA PROBLEMS, OWNER OF A 2003 CAMRY EXPERIENCE SUDDEN UNINTENDED ACCELERATION IN NOVEMBER 2008(PHOTOS INSIDE ENVELOPE) *TGW AS THE CONSUMERS MOTHER PULLED INTO HER GARAGE, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED AND CRASHED INTO THE WALL, CAUSING SIGNIFICANT DAMAGE TO THE BATHROOM THAT WAS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE WALL. THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED AND THE CONSUMER WAS INFORMED THAT THE BRAKE AND ACCELERATING SYSTEMS WERE OPERATING AS DESIGNED. (DAUGHTER WROTE IN ON BEHALF OF MOTHER, OWNER OF THE CAMRY) *JB
NHTSA ODI #10323078
190,000 miles · Mar 26, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6) HELLO, I KNOW THE LAST THING YOU PEOPLE NEED IS YET ANOTHER COMPLAINT ABOUT TOYOTA, BUT I HAD AN INCIDENT LAST YEAR WHILE DRIVING MY FATHER'S 2003 CAMRY. I NEVER FILED A COMPLAINT WITH NHTSA OR TOYOTA, BECAUSE AFTER THE INCIDENT WH…
Read full complaint
INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6) HELLO, I KNOW THE LAST THING YOU PEOPLE NEED IS YET ANOTHER COMPLAINT ABOUT TOYOTA, BUT I HAD AN INCIDENT LAST YEAR WHILE DRIVING MY FATHER'S 2003 CAMRY. I NEVER FILED A COMPLAINT WITH NHTSA OR TOYOTA, BECAUSE AFTER THE INCIDENT WHEN I TOOK THE CAR TO THE LOCAL TOYOTA DEALER, THEY TRIED TO BELITTLE ME WHEN I INQUIRED ABOUT RUNNING A DIAGNOSTICS ON THE CAR'S BEHAVIOR. I REALLY THOUGHT IT WAS JUST ONE OF THOSE THINGS I COULDN'T GO UP AGAINST, SO I LET IT GO. I EXPERIENCED SUDDEN ACCELERATION WHILE PARKING THE CAR AND THE CAR SURGED FORWARD AND HIT ANOTHER CAR. NOBODY WAS HURT, THANKFULLY. WE GOT THE CAR FIXED, BUT SINCE THEN NOBODY WANTS TO DRIVE THE CAR. IT'S BEEN SITTING IN THE GARAGE, DRIVEN ABOUT 3X IN THE ENTIRE LAST YEAR. I AM 38 YEARS OLD, GREAT DRIVING RECORD, AND AM TOTALLY POSITIVE MY FOOT WAS ON THE BRAKE (AS WE WERE SLOWING TO A STOP). I HAVE READ OTHER INCIDENTS THAT ARE ALMOST IDENTICAL TO MINE. ANYWAYS, THAT'S IT. I AM MORE THAN HAPPY TO PROVIDE MORE INFORMATION IF NECESSARY. [XXX] *TR
NHTSA ODI #10322266
Mileage unknown · Mar 23, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
TL*THE CONTACT OWNED A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE SITTING IDLE AT A TRAFFIC STOP, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED AND PROCEEDED TO ACCELERATE THROUGH A RED LIGHT. THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO STOP THE VEHICLE WITHOUT INCIDENT. THE DEALER WAS CONTACTED AND HE ADVISED THE CONTACT THAT THERE WERE NO FAILURES WITH THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACT…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNED A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE SITTING IDLE AT A TRAFFIC STOP, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED AND PROCEEDED TO ACCELERATE THROUGH A RED LIGHT. THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO STOP THE VEHICLE WITHOUT INCIDENT. THE DEALER WAS CONTACTED AND HE ADVISED THE CONTACT THAT THERE WERE NO FAILURES WITH THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACT CONFIRMED SHE HAD EXPERIENCED UNINTENDED ACCELERATION IN THE VEHICLE ON FIVE SEPARATE OCCASIONS. THE DEALER WAS INFORMED AGAIN OF THE FAILURE AND THE VEHICLE WAS REPLACED. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE WHEN THE COMPLAINT WAS FILED. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE ALSO NOT AVAILABLE. UPDATED 05/13/2010. *LJ
NHTSA ODI #10321617
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.