← New search

2006 Toyota Prius

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most Prius years

Owner complaints for the 2006 Toyota Prius are substantially higher than the model-year median of 164.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

1,253 reports with mileage · 186 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.

  • Exterior Lighting. Review the 941 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Electrical System. Review the 152 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 94 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

82 crash reports5 fire reports38 injury reports

Exterior Lighting complaints

941 reports
Clear category filter
68,000 miles · Aug 15, 2012
Exterior Lighting

ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS BOTH HEADLIGHTS HAVE SPONTANEOUSLY GONE DARK WHILE DRIVING AT NIGHT, EITHER SINGLY OR IN TANDEM. OTHER TIMES THEY FAIL TO COME ON AT THE START OF A TRIP, BUT ONE OR BOTH WILL BE ON AT THE DESTINATION. IT ONLY SEEMS TO AFFECT THE MAIN HEADLAMPS, NOT THE AMBER LIGHTS OR THE SMALL ROUND LIGHTS BELOW THEM. WHEN…

Read full complaint

ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS BOTH HEADLIGHTS HAVE SPONTANEOUSLY GONE DARK WHILE DRIVING AT NIGHT, EITHER SINGLY OR IN TANDEM. OTHER TIMES THEY FAIL TO COME ON AT THE START OF A TRIP, BUT ONE OR BOTH WILL BE ON AT THE DESTINATION. IT ONLY SEEMS TO AFFECT THE MAIN HEADLAMPS, NOT THE AMBER LIGHTS OR THE SMALL ROUND LIGHTS BELOW THEM. WHEN IT FIRST HAPPENED WE REPLACED THE BULB IN ONE HEADLAMP, BUT THAT HAD NO EFFECT ON THE PROBLEM. IT'S FRIGHTENING WHEN DRIVING HOME FROM WORK AT MIDNIGHT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10470838

Mileage unknown · Aug 8, 2012
Exterior Lighting

UPON ARRIVING HOME, I WAS INFORMED THE LEFT HAND HEADLIGHT WAS NOT WORKING. BY SWITCHING THE LIGHT OFF AND THEN ON, I WAS ABLE TO GET THE LIGHT TO WORK. THIS HAS HAPPENED INTERMITTENTLY ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS SINCE THAT TIME, ALTHOUGH NOT JUST THE LEFT LIGHT. THE RIGHT HAND SIDE WILL ALSO FLICKER OFF AND THEN THE HEADLIGHT STA…

Read full complaint

UPON ARRIVING HOME, I WAS INFORMED THE LEFT HAND HEADLIGHT WAS NOT WORKING. BY SWITCHING THE LIGHT OFF AND THEN ON, I WAS ABLE TO GET THE LIGHT TO WORK. THIS HAS HAPPENED INTERMITTENTLY ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS SINCE THAT TIME, ALTHOUGH NOT JUST THE LEFT LIGHT. THE RIGHT HAND SIDE WILL ALSO FLICKER OFF AND THEN THE HEADLIGHT STALK HAS TO BE TURNED OFF AND ON TO GET THE LIGHT TO ILLUMINATE AGAIN. THIS ISSUE CANNOT BE DUPLICATED BY ME, AS THE LIGHTS SEEM TO HAVE A LIFE OF THEIR OWN. WHAT FRIGHTENS ME IS THAT THE LIGHTS WILL ALSO GO THROUGH THIS ERRATIC BEHAVIOR WHILE I AM DRIVING THE VEHICLE AT NIGHT, NOT ONLY WHEN THE CAR IS STATIONARY. I DID RECEIVE INFO ON GETTING TOYOTA TO ASSIST IN THE COST OF BULB REPLACEMENT, BUT SINCE I WORK CONSTANTLY IN REAL ESTATE SALES, I DID NOT HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO BRING THE VEHICLE TO MY DEALER, AND HAD NOT USED AN OUTSIDE MECHANIC TO MAKE REPAIRS. ALSO I HAD BEEN ABLE TO GET THE HEADLIGHTS TO WORK WITH THE RE-SWITCHING PROCESS. BECAUSE THE SITUATION HAS ESCALATED AND I FIND IT OCCURRING MORE FREQUENTLY, I VISITED THE DEALER THIS MORNING ONLY TO BE TOLD THEY HAD NO LIABILITY AFTER THE EXTENDED 50000 MILE LIMIT, AND MY CAR NOW HAS 85000 MILES! IT SEEMS TO ME TOYOTA KNOWS THEY HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE ECU WHICH CONTROLS THIS HEADLIGHT FUNCTION, BUT ARE NOT GOING TO RECTIFY THE SITUATION UNTIL THE NHTSA FORCES THEM. THIS IS A VERY DANGEROUS PROBLEM AND I DO NOT WANT TO END UP TRYING TO DRIVE WITH NO LIGHTS IN THE DARK!! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10469631

80,000 miles · Jun 30, 2012
Exterior Lighting

I WAS DRIVING HOME ON SUBURBAN SURFACE STREETS AT DUSK, FOLLOWING A FRIEND TO MY HOME. MY CELL PHONE RANG, AND I ANSWERED USING THE BLUETOOTH FEATURE OF THE VEHICLE. IT WAS MY FRIEND, CALLING TO LET ME KNOW THAT MY LEFT HEADLIGHT WAS OUT. IT HAD BEEN FLICKERING AND HAVING ISSUES OVER THE PAST FEW WEEKS, AND WE THOUGHT THE BUL…

Read full complaint

I WAS DRIVING HOME ON SUBURBAN SURFACE STREETS AT DUSK, FOLLOWING A FRIEND TO MY HOME. MY CELL PHONE RANG, AND I ANSWERED USING THE BLUETOOTH FEATURE OF THE VEHICLE. IT WAS MY FRIEND, CALLING TO LET ME KNOW THAT MY LEFT HEADLIGHT WAS OUT. IT HAD BEEN FLICKERING AND HAVING ISSUES OVER THE PAST FEW WEEKS, AND WE THOUGHT THE BULB MIGHT BE LOOSE. WE TOOK THE CAR TO OUR MECHANIC ON JUNE 19TH, 2012 TO HAVE THE SERPENTINE BELT REPLACED AND THE HEADLIGHT LOOKED AT. HE INDICATED IT WAS THE BULB, AND THAT IT WOULD COST $350 TO REPLACE. COINCIDENTALLY, A RELATIVE SAW A NEWS STORY THE OTHER DAY ABOUT MANY SIMILAR COMPLAINTS MADE TO YOUR ORGANIZATION AND TO THE TOYOTA COMPANY, SO I DID SOME ONLINE RESEARCH. I WAS VERY DISHEARTENED TO READ AN INVESTIGATION MADE BY KCTV5 OUT OF KANSAS CITY WHICH EXPLAINED YOUR FAILURE THUS FAR TO DEMAND A RECALL, DESPITE AMPLE EVIDENCE THAT THE SYSTEM FLAW HAS BEEN CORRECTED IN THE 2010 AND NEWER PRIUS MODELS. PLEASE DEMAND A RECALL BEFORE SOMEONE IS INJURED OR KILLED! AS THE DAUGHTER OF A RETIRED HIGHWAY PATROL OFFICER, I UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR ON-THE-ROAD SAFETY. AT THIS POINT, I AM AFRAID TO DRIVE MY VEHICLE AT NIGHT, AND IT IS MY FAMILY'S ONLY VEHICLE. PLEASE DO SOMETHING! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10463656

58,000 miles · Jun 20, 2012
Exterior Lighting

THE FIRST INCIDENT HAPPENED AS I WAS DRIVING THE HIGHWAY BOTH OF MY HEADLIGHTS COMPLETELY FAILED. THE HEADLIGHTS WOULD COME BACK ON AFTER TURNING THEM OFF AND BACK ON. FIRST TOYOTA TOLD ME IT WAS CAUSED BY A BAD AUXILIARY BATTERY AND CHARGED ME OVER $200 FOR THE BATTERY. BUT THAT VERY NIGHT I HAD THE SAME ISSUE AGAIN,TOYOTA T…

Read full complaint

THE FIRST INCIDENT HAPPENED AS I WAS DRIVING THE HIGHWAY BOTH OF MY HEADLIGHTS COMPLETELY FAILED. THE HEADLIGHTS WOULD COME BACK ON AFTER TURNING THEM OFF AND BACK ON. FIRST TOYOTA TOLD ME IT WAS CAUSED BY A BAD AUXILIARY BATTERY AND CHARGED ME OVER $200 FOR THE BATTERY. BUT THAT VERY NIGHT I HAD THE SAME ISSUE AGAIN,TOYOTA TRIED TO TELL ME THAT THE BULBS ARE JUST BURNT OUT. I AM NOT AN IDIOT, LIGHT BULBS DO NOT BURNOUT AT THE EXACT SAME TIME AND A BURNTOUT LIGHTBULB DOES NOT COME BACK ON. AFTER FIGHTING WITH TOYOTA AND THEM WANTING TO CHARGE ME ALMOST $2000 TO FIX THIS ISSUE (I HAVE A 100,000 MILE WARRANTY) THEY REPAIRED IT FREE. NOW 2 YEARS AND 24,000 MILES LATER THEY ARE GOING OUT AGAIN. I HAVE FIVE DAYS LEFT ON MY WARRANTY THAT I HAD TO FIGHT TO GET TO COVER IT BEFORE. IT IS EXTREMELY DANGEROUS DRIVING AT NIGHT AND HAVING BOTH YOUR HEADLIGHTS GO OUT ON YOU! *JS

NHTSA ODI #10462427

8,000 miles · Jun 14, 2012
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

BOTH HEADLIGHTS GO OUT ON A RANDOM BASIS WHILE DRIVING. THIS MAY OCCUR 30 - 50 TIMES IN 5 MILE TRIP.

NHTSA ODI #10461768

89,000 miles · May 24, 2012
Exterior Lighting

MY HEADLIGHTS KEEP GOING OUT WITH NO WARNING. I AM DRIVING AND LIGHTS WILL GO OUT -- DASHBOARD SIGNAL INDICATES LIGHTS ARE ON. I HAVE BEEN STOPPED TWICE BY POLICE FOR DRIVING WITHOUT LIGHTS (SOMETIMES HARD TO DETECT WHEN DRIVING IN WELL LIT AREA). IF I TURN LIGHTS ON AND OFF THEY COME BACK ON. I FIRST STARTED SEEING THIS PRO…

Read full complaint

MY HEADLIGHTS KEEP GOING OUT WITH NO WARNING. I AM DRIVING AND LIGHTS WILL GO OUT -- DASHBOARD SIGNAL INDICATES LIGHTS ARE ON. I HAVE BEEN STOPPED TWICE BY POLICE FOR DRIVING WITHOUT LIGHTS (SOMETIMES HARD TO DETECT WHEN DRIVING IN WELL LIT AREA). IF I TURN LIGHTS ON AND OFF THEY COME BACK ON. I FIRST STARTED SEEING THIS PROBLEM OVER A YEAR AGO BUT IT HAS BEEN MORE PRONOUNCED IN PAST FEW MONTHS. I HAVE BROUGHT THE CAR TO DEALER AND THEY HAVE NOT SEEN A PROBLEM ALTHOUGH NOW I AM READING THAT THERE IS AN ISSUE WITH THE NIH LIGHTS. NO LIGHTS, NO WARNING THAT THERE ARE NO LIGHTS ... THIS IS A SAFETY ISSUE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10459501

54,400 miles · Mar 12, 2012
Exterior Lighting

UPON PURCHASE OF VEHICLE FROM A USED CAR LOT, I IMMEDIATELY NOTICED THE HEADLIGHTS WOULD BE WORK AT TIMES BUT AT OTHER TIMES THEY WOULD BE VERY DIM TO NON-EXISTENT. TURNING THE LIGHT ON AND OFF WOULD SEEM TO TEMPORARILY FIX THIS PROBLEM. UPON RESEARCHING THIS ISSUE THROUGH THE INTERNET, IT WAS REVILED THIS WAS A COMMON ISSUE AM…

Read full complaint

UPON PURCHASE OF VEHICLE FROM A USED CAR LOT, I IMMEDIATELY NOTICED THE HEADLIGHTS WOULD BE WORK AT TIMES BUT AT OTHER TIMES THEY WOULD BE VERY DIM TO NON-EXISTENT. TURNING THE LIGHT ON AND OFF WOULD SEEM TO TEMPORARILY FIX THIS PROBLEM. UPON RESEARCHING THIS ISSUE THROUGH THE INTERNET, IT WAS REVILED THIS WAS A COMMON ISSUE AMONG PRIUS OWNERS IN MODEL YEARS 2006-2009 WHERE TOYOTA CHOOSE TO USE HID LIGHT BULBS. NOT ONLY WAS THIS COMMON, BUT FOR SOME OWNERS, THE ISSUE APPEAR TO RE-OCCUR AND THE LIFE EXPECTANCY OF HID BULBS APPEARS TO BE VERY LOW AND INFERIOR TO VIRTUALLY ANY OTHER TYPE OF BULB. FORTUNATELY, THE DEALER EXTENDED A HELPING HAND AND PROVIDED THE LABOR TO INSTALL THESE HARD TO GET TO BULBS. DUE TO POOR DESIGN, THE LIGHTS ARE VERY HARD TO GET TO WITHOUT TAKING THE BUMPER OFF. I AM VERY DISAPPOINTED IN THE LIFE EXPECTANCY AND DESIGN THAT TOYOTA CHOSE IN THIS MODEL OF PRIUS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10451298

Mileage unknown · Mar 8, 2012
Exterior Lighting

CPSC#I1230059. 2006 TOYOTA PRUIS COMPUTER ASSEMBLY. CONSUMER STATED THE HID HEAD LAMPS AND ASSOCIATED CONTROLLER COMPUTER USED ON THE TOYOTA PRUIS HAVE A DESIGN FLAW THAT MAKES THEM ITERMITTENTLY, AND WITHOUT WARNING, QUIT WORKING. *LN THE CONSUMER STATED HE EXPERIENCED THE FAILURE THREE TIMES WHILE DRIVING AT NIGHT

NHTSA ODI #10450991

52,000 miles · Mar 5, 2012
Exterior Lighting

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE HEADLIGHTS WOULD INTERMITTENTLY FAIL. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHO WAS UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE FAILURE BUT REPLACED THE HEADLIGHTS. THE REMEDY FAILED TO REPAIR THE PROBLEM. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE WHO DID NOT OFFER ANY ASSISTA…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE HEADLIGHTS WOULD INTERMITTENTLY FAIL. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHO WAS UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE FAILURE BUT REPLACED THE HEADLIGHTS. THE REMEDY FAILED TO REPAIR THE PROBLEM. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE WHO DID NOT OFFER ANY ASSISTANCE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT FURTHER REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 52,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 57,000.

NHTSA ODI #10450320

110,000 miles · Feb 29, 2012
Exterior Lighting

MULTIPLE HID HEADLIGHT FAILURES STARTED APPEARING AFTER 5.5 YEARS AND 110000 MILES. DEALER WANTED $500 PER BULB (FRONTIER TOYOTA) TO REPLACE THE BULBS WITH NO GUARANTEE THAT WOULD FIX THE PROBLEM. AFTER RESEARCHING BULB CHANGING PROCEDURES I FOUND THE FRONT END DOES NOT REQUIRE REMOVAL IF YOU HAVE SMALL ENOUGH HANDS AND SOME PA…

Read full complaint

MULTIPLE HID HEADLIGHT FAILURES STARTED APPEARING AFTER 5.5 YEARS AND 110000 MILES. DEALER WANTED $500 PER BULB (FRONTIER TOYOTA) TO REPLACE THE BULBS WITH NO GUARANTEE THAT WOULD FIX THE PROBLEM. AFTER RESEARCHING BULB CHANGING PROCEDURES I FOUND THE FRONT END DOES NOT REQUIRE REMOVAL IF YOU HAVE SMALL ENOUGH HANDS AND SOME PATIENCE. I PURCHASED 2 NEW AFTERMARKET HID BULBS FOR $55 AND REPLACED THE "OLD" BULBS. THE NEW BULBS LASTED ABOUT 3 COMMUTES BEFORE ONE, THEN THE OTHER STARTED TURNING OFF ON ME. NOW THE HEADLIGHTS ACT THE SAME AS BEFORE, HEADLIGHTS RANDOMLY TURNING OFF AFTER 2-5 MINUTES ON THE DARK ROAD. RE-CYCLING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH BRINGS THEM BACK TO LIFE FOR ANOTHER 3-5 MINUTES. NOW I AM FACED WITH REPLACING ONE OR BOTH BALLAST UNITS THAT DRIVE THE BULBS. THIS WILL REQUIRED REMOVING BOTH HEADLIGHT ASSEMBLIES TO ACCESS THE BALLAST BOXES WHICH ARE MOUNTED TO THE SIDES OF THE ASSEMBLIES FACING OUTWARD TOWARDS THE FENDERS ! THIS WILL REQUIRE BUMPER FACIA REMOVAL TO REMOVE THE LIGHT ASSYS. LOVELY & EXPENSIVE. IF AFTER REPLACING BOTH BALLAST ASSEMBLIES DOESN'T WORK, I WILL BE FORCED TO REPLACE THE VEHICLE'S ECU, OR BRAIN ! ANOTHER EXPENSIVE CHECKLIST ITEM. GOOD THING I AM CAPABLE OF DOING THIS MYSELF AS I CAN SAVE THE GREEDY LABOR CHARGES, BUT ITS NOT RIGHT THAT TOYOTA GETS OFF SCOTT FREE. THEY SHOULD RECALL ALL PRIUS' NO MATTER THE MILEAGE OR AGE. THIS IS A HIGHWAY SAFETY MATTER AND THE LATEST OLIVE BRANCH FROM THE JUDGE WAS NOTHING MORE THAN A WRIST SLAP. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10449684

Official recalls

6

12V536000 · Engine And Engine Cooling; Hybrid Propulsion System: Inverter

Nov 14, 2012

Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.

Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Hybrid Propulsion System: Inverter

Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.

Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.

Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.

Engine And Engine Cooling

Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.

Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.

Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.

12V537000 · Steering; Steering:gear Box:shaft Sector

Nov 14, 2012

Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.

Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Steering:gear Box:shaft Sector

Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.

Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.

Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.

Steering

Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.

Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.

Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.

10V036000 · Equipment:other:labels

Feb 3, 2010

SOUTHEAST TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2005-2011 PASSENGER VEHICLES FOR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 110, "TIRE SELECTION AND RIMS." THESE VEHICLES WERE SOLD WITHOUT THE REQUISITE LOAD CARRYING CAPACITY MODIFICATION LABELS.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: A DRIVER MAY OVERLOAD A VEHICLE WHICH MAY INCREASE THE RISK OF A CRASH.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL MAIL TO CONSUMERS THE CORRECTED LABEL OR THE CUSTOMER WILL HAVE THE OPTION FOR DEALERS TO INSTALL THE LABEL FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON MAY 27, 2010. OWNERS MAY CONTACT SOUTHEAST TOYOTA AT 1-800-301-6859.

09V388000 · Vehicle Speed Control:accelerator Pedal

Oct 5, 2009

TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2004-2010 PASSENGER VEHICLES. THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL CAN GET STUCK IN THE WIDE OPEN POSITION DUE TO ITS BEING TRAPPED BY AN UNSECURED OR INCOMPATIBLE DRIVER'S FLOOR MAT.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: A STUCK OPEN ACCELERATOR PEDAL MAY RESULT IN VERY HIGH VEHICLE SPEEDS AND MAKE IT DIFFICULT TO STOP THE VEHICLE, WHICH COULD CAUSE A CRASH, SERIOUS INJURY OR DEATH.

Remedy: TOYOTA FILED AN AMENDED DEFECT REPORT ON NOVEMBER 25, 2009, STATING THAT DEALERS WILL MODIFY THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL AND, ON CERTAIN VEHICLES, ALTER THE SHAPE OF THE FLOOR SURFACE UNDER THE PEDAL. THESE CHANGES ADDRESS THE RISK OF PEDAL ENTRAPMENT DUE TO INTERFERENCE WITH THE FLOOR MAT. REDESIGNED ACCELERATOR PEDALS WILL BECOME AVAILABLE BEGINNING IN APRIL 2010 AND DEALERS WILL REPLACE ANY MODIFIED PEDAL WITH THE NEW PEDAL IF DESIRED. ALSO, DEALERS WILL REPLACE ANY GENUINE TOYOTA OR LEXUS ALL-WEATHER FLOOR MATS WITH REDESIGNED ALL-WEATHER MATS, OR REPURCHASE THE PREVIOUS MATS FROM OWNERS WHO DO NOT WANT THE NEW ONES. ADDITIONALLY, SOFTWARE MODIFICATIONS WILL BE INSTALLED ON CAMRY, AVALON AND LEXUS ES 350, IS 350 AND IS 250 MODELS THAT WILL ENSURE THAT THE BRAKE OVERRIDES THE ACCELERATOR IN THE EVENT BOTH BRAKE AND ACCELERATOR PEDALS ARE APPLIED. TOYOTA WILL BEGIN MAILING LETTERS TO OWNERS ON DECEMBER 31, 2009. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331, LEXUS AT 1-800-255-3987.

06V188000 · Steering:electric Power Assist System

May 31, 2006

THE INTERMEDIATE SHAFT AND SLIDING YOKE IN THE ELECTRIC POWER STEERING SYSTEM CAN CRACK WHEN LARGE FORCES ARE APPLIED AND THE CONNECTION MAY SEPARATE OR THE SLEEVE MAY FRACTURE.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: THIS COULD RESULT IN A LOSS OF STEERING CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE.

Remedy: TOYOTA WILL REPLACE THE STEERING INTERMEDIATE SHAFT AND INSPECT THE SLIDING YOKE AND REPLACE IT IF NECESSARY. THE RECALL BEGAN ON JUNE 9, 2006. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331.

06V096000 · Air Bags

Apr 3, 2006

ON CERTAIN VEHICLES, DUE TO IMPROPER ASSEMBLY OF THE AIR BAG INFLATOR, WHICH IS USED IN THE SIDE AIR BAG, THE CURTAIN SHIELD AIR BAG, AND THE KNEE AIR BAG ASSEMBLY, SOME INFLATORS WERE PRODUCED WITH AN INSUFFICIENT AMOUNT OF THE HEATING AGENTS NECESSARY FOR PROPER AIR BAG DEPLOYMENT. IN THIS CONDITION, THE EXPANSION FORCE OF THE GAS MAY BE INSUFFICIENT TO PROPERLY INFLATE THE AIR BAG WHEN THE SRS SYSTEM IS ACTIVATED DURING A CRASH.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: THIS MAY INCREASE THE RISK OF INJURY TO THE OCCUPANT IN THE INVOLVED SEATING POSITION IN THE EVENT OF A CRASH.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE SPECIFIC SRS AIR BAG. THE RECALL BEGAN ON APRIL 6, 2006. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-888-270-9371, SCION AT 1-866-548-1851, OR LEXUS AT 1-800-255-3987.

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

3

DP22005 · Pedestrian Alert Sounds

Opened Jan 27, 2023 · Closed Aug 7, 2023

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Electrical System:propulsion System

NHTSA received a petition on or about July 18, 2022, requesting that Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 141 be applied to all electric and hybrid vehicles operating in the United States. The petition can be reviewed at NHTSA.gov under ODI Number 11486072. FMVSS 141 establishes performance requirements for pedestrian alert sounds for motor vehicles. The standard applies to hybrid and electric vehicles that have a gross vehicle weight rating of 4,536 KG or less or are defined as low-speed vehicles. The standard became fully applicable to all such vehicles manufactured on or after March 1, 2021.On January 27, 2023, NHTSA opened Defect Petition (DP) 22-005 to evaluate the subject matter described in the petition. On June 24, 2023 and as supplemented on June 25, 2023, the petitioner notified NHTSA he was withdrawing his petition. The petitioner indicated that, based on his review of data, there is no justification for asserting potential benefits that could be derived from actions sought by my petition. Based on the petitioner's withdrawal, DP22-005 is closed. Closure of this DP does not represent a determination by NHTSA regarding the subject matter of the petition.

DP13001 · Intermediate Steering Shaft Separation

Opened Feb 21, 2013 · Closed Apr 8, 2020

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Steering; Steering:column; Steering:linkages

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, 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. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606

Additional source detail variants (3)

Steering:column

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, 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. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606

Steering:linkages

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, 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. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606

Steering

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, 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. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606

PE09019 · Headlight Failure

Opened Apr 17, 2009 · Closed Aug 27, 2009

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Exterior Lighting; Exterior Lighting:headlights

ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION AFTER RECEIVING REPORTS THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS WOULD GO OUT, OR EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH HIGH INTENSITY DISCHARGE (HID) HEADLAMPS THAT OPERATE ON INDEPENDENT LAMPS AND ECU'S (ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNITS) FOR EACH HEADLIGHT, MEANING THAT EACH HEADLIGHT RUNS INDEPENDENTLY OF THE OTHER, AND A FAILURE IN ONE LAMP OR ECU DOES NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN A FAILURE OF THE OTHER.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, A RANDOM SAMPLE OF FORTY CONSUMERS WAS CONTACTED BY ODI IN A TELEPHONE SURVEY TO VERIFY THEIR EXPERIENCES.THE CONSUMERS STATED IN COMPLAINTS TO TOYOTA THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS FAILED AT THE SAME TIME.ODI DISCOVERED THROUGH TALKING WITH THESE COMPLAINANTS THAT IN FACT ONE HEADLIGHT WOULD BEGIN TO FLICKER AND THEN CUT OFF.THE OTHER HEADLIGHT WOULD STILL BE OPERATIONAL.IN A FEW CASES WHERE NO ACTION WAS TAKEN, SOME COMPLAINANTS STATED THAT AFTER A FEW MONTHS BOTH HEADLAMPS WOULD BEGIN TO FAIL RESULTING IN NO HEADLIGHTS; HOWEVER NONE REPORTED THAT BOTH LAMPS FAILED SIMULTANEOUSLY.COMPLAINANTS ALSO STATED THAT THEY COULD TOGGLE THE HEADLAMP SWITCH ON AND OFF TO TEMPORARILY RESTORE LIGHTING WHEN THIS CONDITION OCCURRED, EVEN IN CASES WERE BOTH HEADLAMPS WERE EXTINGUISHED.THE RESULTS OF THIS SURVEY ARE LARGELY CONSISTENT WITH ODI'S ASSESSMENT OF THE REPORTS AND WARRANTY DATA.TOYOTA SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER THAT, GENERALLY SPEAKING, ONLY ONE LAMP FAILED AT A TIME, AND THAT TOGGLING THE SWITCH RESTORED THE LAMP.TOYOTA REQUESTED A MEETING WITH ODI AND ON AUGUST 6, 2009, PRESENTED THEIR ASSESSMENT OF HEADLAMP FAILURE.TOYOTA CONFIRMED THAT A HEADLAMP COULD EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING DUE TO A BULB FAILURE, AND THAT IT COULD BE TEMPORARILY RESTORED BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH ON AND OFF, AND THAT SIMULTANEOUS FAILURE OF BOTH HEADLAMPS WAS RARE AND UNLIKELY.TOYOTA ALSO BRIEFLY DISCUSSED THEIR INTENTION TO CONDUCT A CUSTOMER SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO ADDRESS CONSUMER DISSATISFACTION WITH HID BULB FAILURES.SINCE THERE IS STILL ONE HEADLIGHT OPERATING WHEN THE OTHER ONE CUTS OFF, THERE IS STILL LIGHTING AVAILABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR FACILITY.THUS, A SAFETY 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.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Exterior Lighting:headlights

ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION AFTER RECEIVING REPORTS THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS WOULD GO OUT, OR EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH HIGH INTENSITY DISCHARGE (HID) HEADLAMPS THAT OPERATE ON INDEPENDENT LAMPS AND ECU'S (ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNITS) FOR EACH HEADLIGHT, MEANING THAT EACH HEADLIGHT RUNS INDEPENDENTLY OF THE OTHER, AND A FAILURE IN ONE LAMP OR ECU DOES NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN A FAILURE OF THE OTHER.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, A RANDOM SAMPLE OF FORTY CONSUMERS WAS CONTACTED BY ODI IN A TELEPHONE SURVEY TO VERIFY THEIR EXPERIENCES.THE CONSUMERS STATED IN COMPLAINTS TO TOYOTA THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS FAILED AT THE SAME TIME.ODI DISCOVERED THROUGH TALKING WITH THESE COMPLAINANTS THAT IN FACT ONE HEADLIGHT WOULD BEGIN TO FLICKER AND THEN CUT OFF.THE OTHER HEADLIGHT WOULD STILL BE OPERATIONAL.IN A FEW CASES WHERE NO ACTION WAS TAKEN, SOME COMPLAINANTS STATED THAT AFTER A FEW MONTHS BOTH HEADLAMPS WOULD BEGIN TO FAIL RESULTING IN NO HEADLIGHTS; HOWEVER NONE REPORTED THAT BOTH LAMPS FAILED SIMULTANEOUSLY.COMPLAINANTS ALSO STATED THAT THEY COULD TOGGLE THE HEADLAMP SWITCH ON AND OFF TO TEMPORARILY RESTORE LIGHTING WHEN THIS CONDITION OCCURRED, EVEN IN CASES WERE BOTH HEADLAMPS WERE EXTINGUISHED.THE RESULTS OF THIS SURVEY ARE LARGELY CONSISTENT WITH ODI'S ASSESSMENT OF THE REPORTS AND WARRANTY DATA.TOYOTA SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER THAT, GENERALLY SPEAKING, ONLY ONE LAMP FAILED AT A TIME, AND THAT TOGGLING THE SWITCH RESTORED THE LAMP.TOYOTA REQUESTED A MEETING WITH ODI AND ON AUGUST 6, 2009, PRESENTED THEIR ASSESSMENT OF HEADLAMP FAILURE.TOYOTA CONFIRMED THAT A HEADLAMP COULD EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING DUE TO A BULB FAILURE, AND THAT IT COULD BE TEMPORARILY RESTORED BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH ON AND OFF, AND THAT SIMULTANEOUS FAILURE OF BOTH HEADLAMPS WAS RARE AND UNLIKELY.TOYOTA ALSO BRIEFLY DISCUSSED THEIR INTENTION TO CONDUCT A CUSTOMER SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO ADDRESS CONSUMER DISSATISFACTION WITH HID BULB FAILURES.SINCE THERE IS STILL ONE HEADLIGHT OPERATING WHEN THE OTHER ONE CUTS OFF, THERE IS STILL LIGHTING AVAILABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR FACILITY.THUS, A SAFETY 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.

Exterior Lighting

ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION AFTER RECEIVING REPORTS THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS WOULD GO OUT, OR EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH HIGH INTENSITY DISCHARGE (HID) HEADLAMPS THAT OPERATE ON INDEPENDENT LAMPS AND ECU'S (ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNITS) FOR EACH HEADLIGHT, MEANING THAT EACH HEADLIGHT RUNS INDEPENDENTLY OF THE OTHER, AND A FAILURE IN ONE LAMP OR ECU DOES NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN A FAILURE OF THE OTHER.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, A RANDOM SAMPLE OF FORTY CONSUMERS WAS CONTACTED BY ODI IN A TELEPHONE SURVEY TO VERIFY THEIR EXPERIENCES.THE CONSUMERS STATED IN COMPLAINTS TO TOYOTA THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS FAILED AT THE SAME TIME.ODI DISCOVERED THROUGH TALKING WITH THESE COMPLAINANTS THAT IN FACT ONE HEADLIGHT WOULD BEGIN TO FLICKER AND THEN CUT OFF.THE OTHER HEADLIGHT WOULD STILL BE OPERATIONAL.IN A FEW CASES WHERE NO ACTION WAS TAKEN, SOME COMPLAINANTS STATED THAT AFTER A FEW MONTHS BOTH HEADLAMPS WOULD BEGIN TO FAIL RESULTING IN NO HEADLIGHTS; HOWEVER NONE REPORTED THAT BOTH LAMPS FAILED SIMULTANEOUSLY.COMPLAINANTS ALSO STATED THAT THEY COULD TOGGLE THE HEADLAMP SWITCH ON AND OFF TO TEMPORARILY RESTORE LIGHTING WHEN THIS CONDITION OCCURRED, EVEN IN CASES WERE BOTH HEADLAMPS WERE EXTINGUISHED.THE RESULTS OF THIS SURVEY ARE LARGELY CONSISTENT WITH ODI'S ASSESSMENT OF THE REPORTS AND WARRANTY DATA.TOYOTA SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER THAT, GENERALLY SPEAKING, ONLY ONE LAMP FAILED AT A TIME, AND THAT TOGGLING THE SWITCH RESTORED THE LAMP.TOYOTA REQUESTED A MEETING WITH ODI AND ON AUGUST 6, 2009, PRESENTED THEIR ASSESSMENT OF HEADLAMP FAILURE.TOYOTA CONFIRMED THAT A HEADLAMP COULD EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING DUE TO A BULB FAILURE, AND THAT IT COULD BE TEMPORARILY RESTORED BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH ON AND OFF, AND THAT SIMULTANEOUS FAILURE OF BOTH HEADLAMPS WAS RARE AND UNLIKELY.TOYOTA ALSO BRIEFLY DISCUSSED THEIR INTENTION TO CONDUCT A CUSTOMER SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO ADDRESS CONSUMER DISSATISFACTION WITH HID BULB FAILURES.SINCE THERE IS STILL ONE HEADLIGHT OPERATING WHEN THE OTHER ONE CUTS OFF, THERE IS STILL LIGHTING AVAILABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR FACILITY.THUS, A SAFETY 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.