NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Structure complaints
32 reportsClear category filterMileage unknown · Mar 14, 2022
Air BagsStructureWheelsCrashInjury
My daughter was driving my car on the interstate the airbags deployed and hit her in the face, filled the car up with smoke, she couldn’t see anything she hit the iron poles that are together by cables. My car is totaled. My back tire broke completely off of the car. These cars aren’t built safe. I owned my car and now I’m witho…
Read full complaint
My daughter was driving my car on the interstate the airbags deployed and hit her in the face, filled the car up with smoke, she couldn’t see anything she hit the iron poles that are together by cables. My car is totaled. My back tire broke completely off of the car. These cars aren’t built safe. I owned my car and now I’m without a car. Has anyone else ever had this happen? Air bags deploying for no reason?
NHTSA ODI #11456649
107,316 miles · Apr 1, 2021
StructureCrashInjury
I WAS AT A COMPLETE STOP, WHEN I WAS REAR ENDED BY A DRIVER GOING APPROXIMATELY 40MPH. THE IMPACT SHOVED ME INTO THE CAR IN FRONT OF ME AS WELL. NONE OF MY AIRBAGS WENT OFF AND THE INSURANCE ADJUSTERS BELIEVE THE CAR IS TOTALED. I HAD A PREVIOUS ACCIDENT WHERE I WAS T-BONED IN DRIVERS SIDE AND NONE OF THE AIRBAGS WENT OFF AT THA…
Read full complaint
I WAS AT A COMPLETE STOP, WHEN I WAS REAR ENDED BY A DRIVER GOING APPROXIMATELY 40MPH. THE IMPACT SHOVED ME INTO THE CAR IN FRONT OF ME AS WELL. NONE OF MY AIRBAGS WENT OFF AND THE INSURANCE ADJUSTERS BELIEVE THE CAR IS TOTALED. I HAD A PREVIOUS ACCIDENT WHERE I WAS T-BONED IN DRIVERS SIDE AND NONE OF THE AIRBAGS WENT OFF AT THAT TIME EITHER
NHTSA ODI #11405982
Mileage unknown · Sep 13, 2020
Structure
THE INTERIOR HAS A SILVER DECORATIVE ACCESSORIES NEAR THE DASH THAT REFLECT THE SUNLIGHT. THE REFLECTION CAN PRODUCE PROBLEMS IN THE VISION ABILITIES, PROVOKING YOU NEED CLOSE YOUR EYES AND KEEP OUT THE LOOK IN THE ROAD.
NHTSA ODI #11354785
140,000 miles · May 30, 2020
Air BagsService BrakesStructure
MULTIPLE ISSUES WITH THE DEALERSHIP OVER A TIMEFRAME OF A FEW YEARS THAT CONTINUES TO DETERIORATE. MOST RECENTLY, LACK OF DEALERSHIP NOTIFICATION OF SAFETY RECALL, DEALERSHIP INABILITY TO RESPOND TO SAFETY RECALL WHEN NOTIFIED FROM A 3RD PARTY SITE, DEALERSHIP VEHICULAR INSPECTION INCOMPLETE AND/OR INDICATIONS OF UNRESOLVED ISS…
Read full complaint
MULTIPLE ISSUES WITH THE DEALERSHIP OVER A TIMEFRAME OF A FEW YEARS THAT CONTINUES TO DETERIORATE. MOST RECENTLY, LACK OF DEALERSHIP NOTIFICATION OF SAFETY RECALL, DEALERSHIP INABILITY TO RESPOND TO SAFETY RECALL WHEN NOTIFIED FROM A 3RD PARTY SITE, DEALERSHIP VEHICULAR INSPECTION INCOMPLETE AND/OR INDICATIONS OF UNRESOLVED ISSUES, VIOLATION OF PERSONAL PROPERTY BUT DEALERSHIP EMPTYING CENTER CONSOLE CONTENTS INTO PASSENGER SEAT UNNECESSARILY (NO BUSINESS REASON TO DO SO), INSPECTION RESULTS OF MOST RECENT VISIT ENTAILED VIDEO INSPECTION OF RUST ACCUMULATION NEAR NOTATED BRAKE AREA WITH NO DIRECTION OR INSTRUCTION - BEYOND THE DRIVER NOTICING A DRIVING PROBLEM OF VIBRATION - TO WHICH THE INSTRUCTION WAS A DEALERSHIP PROCESS OF RUST BUILD UP REMOVAL BY A MACHINE (NO INTERNAL COMMUNICATION WITHIN DEALERSHIP OF ISSUE, NOTIFICATION TO DRIVER OR THOSE SERVING THE DRIVER TO SHARE ISSUE AND RECOMMENDATIONS, PROMPTING WAS THE RESULT OF DRIVER REQUESTING CLARIFICATION AT DEALERSHIP). THE SAFETY RECALL FOR THIS VEHICLE CAME THROUGH CARFAX (NOT FROM THE DEALERSHIP OR DEALERSHIP MEANS - BUT AS A RESULT OF ATTEMPTING TO SELL THE VEHICLE). THE SAFETY RECALL INVOLVED AN ISSUE WITH THE SEAT BELT & AIR BAG DEPLOYMENT, AND WHEN DRIVER CONTACTED LOCAL DEALERSHIP MONTHS AGO- DEALERSHIP STATED THAT THERE WAS NO REMEDY, AND WAS NOT NOTIFIED WHEN ONE BECAME AVAILABLE. THE MOST RECENT OIL CHANGE VISIT "CLAIMS" TO HAVE ADDRESSED THE PROBLEM, AT THE REQUEST OF DRIVER. THIS INCIDENT REQUEST IS THREE-FOLD: (1) ADDRESS SAFETY RECALL COMMUNICATION AND PROCESS WITH DEALERSHIP; (2) ADDRESS VEHICULAR MAINTENANCE, OIL CHANGE, SERVICE, AND INSPECTION PROCESS AND INTERACTION WITH DRIVERS; AND (3) RECOMMEND TO ME (THE PERSON COMPLETING THIS COMPLAINT) A SPECIFIC MOTOR VEHICLE LOCATION (INCLUDING COMPANY NAME, MANAGEMENT, AND MECHANIC) WHERE THE VEHICLE CAN BE ADEQUATELY ASSESSED FOR SAFE DRIVING. *TR
NHTSA ODI #11326640
30,000 miles · Dec 30, 2019
Structure
CAR STARTED HAVING PAINT PROBLEMS AT 3 YEARS OLD. PAINT MISSING ON CERTAIN PROTECTED AREAS OF CAR, WITH PRIMER ONLY (TRUNK AND HOOD AREA.) PAINT ON DRIVERS SIDE DOOR FORMED BUBBLES ON THE EDGE. PAINT SCRATCHING EASILY ON THE HOOD OF THE CAR. FIRST CAR I HAVE OWNED THAT WAS HAVING PAINT ISSUES AFTER ONLY 3 YEARS. NORMAL DR…
Read full complaint
CAR STARTED HAVING PAINT PROBLEMS AT 3 YEARS OLD. PAINT MISSING ON CERTAIN PROTECTED AREAS OF CAR, WITH PRIMER ONLY (TRUNK AND HOOD AREA.) PAINT ON DRIVERS SIDE DOOR FORMED BUBBLES ON THE EDGE. PAINT SCRATCHING EASILY ON THE HOOD OF THE CAR. FIRST CAR I HAVE OWNED THAT WAS HAVING PAINT ISSUES AFTER ONLY 3 YEARS. NORMAL DRIVING CONDITIONS NO DIFFERENT THAN OTHER CARS I'VE OWNED. ALWAYS WELL MAINTAINED AND REGULARLY WASHED.
NHTSA ODI #11292083
106,461 miles · Aug 8, 2019
Air BagsStructureCrashInjury
WAS IN A ROLL-OVER ACCIDENT. A DEER JUMPED OUT IN FRONT OF ME SO I LOCKED UP THE BREAKS AND THE REAR END OF THE CAR CAME OUT FROM BEHIND ME AND I WENT INTO A DITCH AND ROLLED 3 TIMES.
NHTSA ODI #11242422
106,461 miles · Aug 8, 2019
Air BagsStructureCrash
WAS IN A ROLL-OVER CRASH. THE VEHICLE WAS IN MOTION. NONE OF THE SIDE AIRBAGS WENT OFF ON EITHER SIDE OF THE CAR AND THE CAR ROLLED THREE TIMES DURING THE ACCIDENT.
NHTSA ODI #11242420
Mileage unknown · Mar 23, 2019
Electrical SystemStructure
LOCK ACTUATOR FAILURE. THE ELMOR TOYOTA DEALERSHIP IN HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA TOLD ME WITH OUT PERFORMING ANY DIAGNOSTIC THAT MY DRIVER AND PASSENGER LOCK ACTUATOR IS FAILING AND DUE TO THE USE OF GEL AIR FRESHENERS.. WHICH I DO NOT USE.. BOTH FROM DRIVER AND PASSENGER SIDE DOORS DO NOT LOCK AND UNLOCK WITH KEY FOB OR PANEL…
Read full complaint
LOCK ACTUATOR FAILURE. THE ELMOR TOYOTA DEALERSHIP IN HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA TOLD ME WITH OUT PERFORMING ANY DIAGNOSTIC THAT MY DRIVER AND PASSENGER LOCK ACTUATOR IS FAILING AND DUE TO THE USE OF GEL AIR FRESHENERS.. WHICH I DO NOT USE.. BOTH FROM DRIVER AND PASSENGER SIDE DOORS DO NOT LOCK AND UNLOCK WITH KEY FOB OR PANEL INSIDE THE CAR DOOR. THEY DO NOT LOCK EITHER WHEN THE CAR IS IN MOTION. THEY ONLY UNLOCK WITH MY MECHANICALLY USE THE KEY FROM THE FOB OR I HAVE TO FLIP THE DOOR OPEN FROM INSIDE THE CAR.
NHTSA ODI #11191146
60,000 miles · Dec 8, 2018
Electrical SystemExterior LightingStructureFire
TRUNK FIRE UNKNOWN CAUSE, CAR WAS PARKED
NHTSA ODI #11157027
11,000 miles · Aug 5, 2018
Air BagsEngineStructureCrashInjury
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 35 MPH, THE VEHICLE'S RPMS MALFUNCTIONED. AFTER RELEASING THE BRAKE PEDAL, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED RAPIDLY ON ITS OWN. THE CONTACT DEPRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL TO SLOW DOWN THE VEHICLE. BIG ISLAND TOYOTA (811 KANOELEHUA AVE, HILO, HAWAII 96720, (808) 935-2920) …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 35 MPH, THE VEHICLE'S RPMS MALFUNCTIONED. AFTER RELEASING THE BRAKE PEDAL, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED RAPIDLY ON ITS OWN. THE CONTACT DEPRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL TO SLOW DOWN THE VEHICLE. BIG ISLAND TOYOTA (811 KANOELEHUA AVE, HILO, HAWAII 96720, (808) 935-2920) WAS NOTIFIED, BUT COULD NOT DIAGNOSE THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 11,000.
NHTSA ODI #11115857
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.