← 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
37,701 miles · Jun 9, 2008
Exterior Lighting

INTERMITTENT FUNCTIONING OF DRIVER'S SIDE HEADLIGHT ON 2006 PRIUS AFTER 37,000 MILES. DEALER/SERVICE SAYS IT NEEDS TO BE REPLACED AND WILL COST $420 FOR THE ONE LIGHT. I EXPECT THAT THE OTHER WILL FOLLOW SUIT AND I'LL BE OUT ANOTHER $420 SOON. THIS IS A RIDICULOUS AMOUNT TO HAVE TO PAY FOR A HEADLIGHT, AND NOT GETTING IT FIXE…

Read full complaint

INTERMITTENT FUNCTIONING OF DRIVER'S SIDE HEADLIGHT ON 2006 PRIUS AFTER 37,000 MILES. DEALER/SERVICE SAYS IT NEEDS TO BE REPLACED AND WILL COST $420 FOR THE ONE LIGHT. I EXPECT THAT THE OTHER WILL FOLLOW SUIT AND I'LL BE OUT ANOTHER $420 SOON. THIS IS A RIDICULOUS AMOUNT TO HAVE TO PAY FOR A HEADLIGHT, AND NOT GETTING IT FIXED IS, OBVIOUSLY, ILLEGAL AND A SAFETY HAZARD. SINCE IT IS NEAR IMPOSSIBLE TO REPLACE ONESELF, THEY SEEM TO HAVE "CORNERED THE MARKET" AND CAN THUS CHARGE WHATEVER THEY LIKE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10230377

36,000 miles · Jun 8, 2008
Exterior Lighting

IN JANUARY OF THIS YEAR, THE DRIVER SIDE HEADLAMP ON OUR 2006 PRIUS BEGAN SHUTTING OFF AFTER A FEW MINUTES OF OPERATION. IT WOULD COME BACK ON IF THE SWITCH IS CYCLED BUT WOULD THEN SHUT OFF AGAIN AT WHAT APPEARED TO BE A RANDOM INTERVAL. THE DEALER REPLACED THE LAMP UNDER WARRANTY IN JANUARY. NOW THE PASSENGER SIDE IS DOING …

Read full complaint

IN JANUARY OF THIS YEAR, THE DRIVER SIDE HEADLAMP ON OUR 2006 PRIUS BEGAN SHUTTING OFF AFTER A FEW MINUTES OF OPERATION. IT WOULD COME BACK ON IF THE SWITCH IS CYCLED BUT WOULD THEN SHUT OFF AGAIN AT WHAT APPEARED TO BE A RANDOM INTERVAL. THE DEALER REPLACED THE LAMP UNDER WARRANTY IN JANUARY. NOW THE PASSENGER SIDE IS DOING THE SAME THING. AFTER SEVERAL VISITS TO THE DEALER, WE WERE TOLD THAT THIS IS A "KNOWN PROBLEM" BUT IT IS NOT BEING COVERED BY TOYOTA NOR UNDER OUR EXTENDED WARRANTY. THE PRICE TO REPLACE THE HEADLAMP IS IN EXCESS OF $700! THIS IS A KNOWN DEFECT WITH SIGNIFICANT SAFETY IMPLICATIONS. THE DEALER TELLS US IT AFFECTS 2006+ PRIUS HEADLAMPS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10230283

45,000 miles · Jun 4, 2008
Exterior Lighting

IT BEGAN WITH THE DRIVER SIDE HEADLIGHT GOING OUT EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE... THE DEALERSHIP DIDN'T BELIEVE US SINCE WHEN WE BROUGHT THE CAR IN, IT WAS WORKING. WE STILL DEALT WITH THE PROBLEM AND FOUND THAT BY TURNING THE LIGHTS OFF AND THEN BACK ON THAT BOTH LIGHTS WOULD THEN WORK FOR A PERIOD. IT'S A BIT DAUNTING TO DO THIS IN…

Read full complaint

IT BEGAN WITH THE DRIVER SIDE HEADLIGHT GOING OUT EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE... THE DEALERSHIP DIDN'T BELIEVE US SINCE WHEN WE BROUGHT THE CAR IN, IT WAS WORKING. WE STILL DEALT WITH THE PROBLEM AND FOUND THAT BY TURNING THE LIGHTS OFF AND THEN BACK ON THAT BOTH LIGHTS WOULD THEN WORK FOR A PERIOD. IT'S A BIT DAUNTING TO DO THIS IN THE NIGHT WHEN IT IS DARK AND YOU ARE DRIVING AND HAVE TO TURN OFF YOUR LIGHTS TO GET THEM TO WORK. AFTER THE POLICE ISSUED US A CITATION FOR THE LIGHT NOT WORKING, WE HAD TO PAY FOR THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP TO 'DIAGNOSE' THE PROBLEM. $1000.00 DOLLARS LATER WE HAVE A NEW ECU AND A NEW DRIVERSIDE HEADLIGHT. THE VERY NEXT DAY, THE PASSENGER HEADLIGHT WENT OUT AND IS DOING THE SAME THING. WE ARE BACK TO TURNING THE LIGHTS OFF TO GET THEM BOTH 'ON.' THE DEALERSHIP SAYS IT'S NOT COVERED UNDER WARRANTY AND WE HAVE TO PAY ANOTHER 400 DOLLARS FOR THE PASSENGER SIDE LIGHT. THERE IS SOMETHING VERY WRONG AND VERY DANGEROUS WITH THIS SITUATION. THIS IS A 2006 PRIUS AND THESE HEADLIGHTS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE LONG-LASTING. TOYOTA DOES NOT SEEM WILLING TO HELP OUT AND CUSTOMERS ARE PAYING THE PRICE. THIS IS A SERIOUS SAFETY ISSUE THAT TOYOTA NEEDS TO ACKNOWLEDGE AND DEAL WITH. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10229935

45,000 miles · Jun 2, 2008
Exterior Lighting

THE DRIVER SIDE HEADLIGHT ON OUR 2006 PRIUS HAS BEEN INTERMITTENTLY WORKING SINCE JUNE 2007. TAKING IT IN TO THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP IN VA WHERE WE PURCHASED THE CAR, WE WERE TOLD THAT SINCE IT HAPPENED TO BE WORKING AT THAT TIME, THERE WAS NOTHING THAT CAN BE DONE. SINCE MOVING TO NORTH CAROLINA IN JULY 2007, THIS PROBLEM HAS GOT…

Read full complaint

THE DRIVER SIDE HEADLIGHT ON OUR 2006 PRIUS HAS BEEN INTERMITTENTLY WORKING SINCE JUNE 2007. TAKING IT IN TO THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP IN VA WHERE WE PURCHASED THE CAR, WE WERE TOLD THAT SINCE IT HAPPENED TO BE WORKING AT THAT TIME, THERE WAS NOTHING THAT CAN BE DONE. SINCE MOVING TO NORTH CAROLINA IN JULY 2007, THIS PROBLEM HAS GOTTEN WORSE. A DEALERSHIP HERE, TOLD MY HUSBAND AND I THE SAME THING - THAT THE HEADLIGHT WAS ON WHEN WE BROUGHT IT IN SO THEY ASSUMED IT WAS FINE. AFTER BEING PULLED OVER BY THE POLICE IN EARLY MAY 2008 BECAUSE OUR HEADLIGHT WAS OUT, WE BROUGHT THE CAR BACK TO THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP. WE WERE TOLD BY THE POLICE THAT THIS IS A MAJOR SAFETY ISSUE AND WE NEEDED TO GET IT REPAIRED IMMEDIATELY. THIS TIME, AFTER PAYING NEARLY $100.00 FOR THE PROBLEM TO BE DIAGNOSED AT THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP, WE SPENT ALMOST $500.00 FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF THE COMPUTER (ECU)AND WERE TOLD THE HEADLIGHT WOULD NOW WORK. THE NEXT DAY THE HEADLIGHT WENT OUT AGAIN. WE BROUGHT IT BACK IN AND WERE TOLD THAT BECAUSE OF SOMETHING HAVING TO DO WITH THE HEAT CAUSED BY THE ECU THAT HAD BEEN REPLACED, OUR HEADLIGHT HAD NOW FULLY BLOWN OUT AND WE WOULD HAVE TO PAY ALMOST $400.00 FOR A NEW HID LIGHT. WE PAID, GOT A NEW DRIVER SIDE HEADLIGHT, AND WENT HOME. THE VERY NEXT MORNING (5/30/08), THE PASSENGER SIDE HEADLIGHT WENT OUT. THERE SEEMS TO BE SOMETHING VERY WRONG WITH THE HEADLIGHTS ON THIS VEHICLE. THERE ARE PAGES AND PAGES ONLINE OF DISCUSSIONS OF 2006 PRIUS OWNERS WHO HAVE THE EXACT SAME PROBLEM WITH THEIR HEADLIGHTS. THIS IS A MAJOR SAFETY CONCERN, AND IT IS ILLEGAL TO DRIVE WITH HEADLIGHTS OUT! I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY TOYOTA IS NOT STANDING BEHIND IT'S VEHICLES AND KEEPING IT'S CUSTOMERS SAFE. THERE IS SURELY A DEFECT IN THE DESIGN. THESE LIGHTS ARE SUPPOSED TO LAST UP TO EIGHT YEARS... BUT OURS HAVE NOT MADE IT EVEN THREE YEARS. WE ARE BECOMING VERY FRUSTRATED WITH THE SERVICE WE HAVE RECEIVED AND WITH THE LACK OF SUPPORT BY TOYOTA IN HELPING US WITH THIS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10229672

50,000 miles · May 30, 2008
EquipmentExterior Lighting

MY DRIVER SIDE HEADLIGHT WOULD INTERMITTENTLY TURN OFF. THIS OCCURRED ALMOST EVERYTIME I TURNED IT ON AND BY THE TIME I GOT TO DESTINATION (IT WOULD BE OFF). TURNING HEADLIGHT OFF AND THEN BACK ON WOULD WORK ONLY TEMPORARILY, UNTIL I DROVE FURTHER AND NOTICE IT OFF AGAIN BASED ON REFLECTION FROM CAR IN FRONT OF ME. THE IGNITE…

Read full complaint

MY DRIVER SIDE HEADLIGHT WOULD INTERMITTENTLY TURN OFF. THIS OCCURRED ALMOST EVERYTIME I TURNED IT ON AND BY THE TIME I GOT TO DESTINATION (IT WOULD BE OFF). TURNING HEADLIGHT OFF AND THEN BACK ON WOULD WORK ONLY TEMPORARILY, UNTIL I DROVE FURTHER AND NOTICE IT OFF AGAIN BASED ON REFLECTION FROM CAR IN FRONT OF ME. THE IGNITER ASSEMBLY WAS REPLACED BY DEALER YESTERDAY, BUT PROBLEM STILL EXIST. CAR IS CURRENTLY AT THE DEALER AGAIN FOR FURTHER DIAGNOSIS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10229292

44,000 miles · May 29, 2008
Exterior Lighting

I HAVE A TOYOTA 2006 PRIUS THAT THE HID HEADLIGHTS FAIL AFTER A VARIABLE AMOUNT OF TIME. FAILURE VARIES FROM JUST ONE LIGHT (BOTH PASSENGER AND DRIVER SIDE SHOW SYMPTOM) TO BOTH LIGHTS FAILING AT THE SAME TIME. CURRENT SOLUTION IS TO TURN LIGHTS COMPLETELY OFF AND TURN THEM BACK ON. THIS SOLVES THE PROBLEM TEMPORARILY ALTHOUGH …

Read full complaint

I HAVE A TOYOTA 2006 PRIUS THAT THE HID HEADLIGHTS FAIL AFTER A VARIABLE AMOUNT OF TIME. FAILURE VARIES FROM JUST ONE LIGHT (BOTH PASSENGER AND DRIVER SIDE SHOW SYMPTOM) TO BOTH LIGHTS FAILING AT THE SAME TIME. CURRENT SOLUTION IS TO TURN LIGHTS COMPLETELY OFF AND TURN THEM BACK ON. THIS SOLVES THE PROBLEM TEMPORARILY ALTHOUGH THE LIGHT(S) WILL EVENTUALLY GO OUT AGAIN. SO FAR I HAVE NOT CRASHED INTO ANYTHING ONCE MY HEADLIGHT(S) FAIL BUT THAT IS OBVIOUSLY A CONCERN I NOW HAVE WHEN DRIVING AT NIGHT. CURRENT REPAIR RECOMMENDATION IS TO REPLACE BOTH BULBS AND COST FOR ~$1000. THE CAR IS JUST OVER 2 YEARS OLD AND HAS 44,000 MILES ON IT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10229185

38,000 miles · May 28, 2008
Exterior Lighting

I HAVE A 2006 PRIUS WITH HID HEADLIGHTS WHICH WILL NOT STAY ON. WHEN I AM DRIVING, ONE, OR BOTH, OF MY HEADLIGHTS WILL GO OUT. I WILL NOTICE THIS WHEN I'M AT A STOP AND I LOOK FOR THE REFLECTION OF MY LIGHTS IN THE CAR IN FRONT OF ME, OR WHEN I GET HOME AND I LOOK TO SEE IF BOTH HEADLIGHTS ARE SHINING ON MY GARAGE DOOR. IF I …

Read full complaint

I HAVE A 2006 PRIUS WITH HID HEADLIGHTS WHICH WILL NOT STAY ON. WHEN I AM DRIVING, ONE, OR BOTH, OF MY HEADLIGHTS WILL GO OUT. I WILL NOTICE THIS WHEN I'M AT A STOP AND I LOOK FOR THE REFLECTION OF MY LIGHTS IN THE CAR IN FRONT OF ME, OR WHEN I GET HOME AND I LOOK TO SEE IF BOTH HEADLIGHTS ARE SHINING ON MY GARAGE DOOR. IF I TURN THE LIGHTS OFF AND THEN RIGHT BACK ON AGAIN, THE HEADLIGHTS COME BACK ON. I HAVE GOOGLED THIS AND MANY OTHER PRIUS OWNERS ARE HAVING THE SAME PROBLEM. MY INDEPENDENT MECHANIC SAID THAT TOYOTA IS NOT EVEN SELLING A HEADLIGHT FOR MY VIN NUMBER. I TOOK MY CAR TO THE DEALER I PURCHASED IT FROM AND THEY ARE TELLING ME THAT TO REPLACE THE HEADLIGHTS WILL COST $1,050 AND IF THE ECUS WHICH CONTROL THE HEADLIGHTS ARE BAD, THEY WILL COST AN ADDITIONAL $650. I SAID THAT I FELT THIS WAS A SAFETY ISSUE THAT TOYOTA SHOULD PAY FOR. THEY OFFERED ME HALF OFF THE COST OF THE PARTS, BUT WANT ME TO COMMIT TO PAYING ALL THE LABOR. I AM GOING TO GO PICK UP MY CAR FROM THE DEALER AND PLAN ON FILING A COMPLAINT WITH TOYOTA USA. I THINK A PROBLEM LIKE THIS WITH A CAR LESS THAN TWO YEARS OLD SHOULD NOT BE MY RESPONSIBILITY TO PAY FOR. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10229057

38,000 miles · May 27, 2008
Exterior Lighting

HEADLIGHT FAILURE ON 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. CAR WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WITH APPROXIMATELY 38,000 MILES AND THE DEALER BEAT ON THE HEADLIGHT UNIT AND ADVISED ME THAT IT NOW WORKED. AS THE MONTHS HAVE GONE BY, BOTH HEADLIGHT HAVE BEEN SHUTTING DOWN AT SEPARATE TIMES AND BY TURNING THE LIGHTS ON AND OFF THE HEADLIGHTS RETURN TO NORM…

Read full complaint

HEADLIGHT FAILURE ON 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. CAR WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WITH APPROXIMATELY 38,000 MILES AND THE DEALER BEAT ON THE HEADLIGHT UNIT AND ADVISED ME THAT IT NOW WORKED. AS THE MONTHS HAVE GONE BY, BOTH HEADLIGHT HAVE BEEN SHUTTING DOWN AT SEPARATE TIMES AND BY TURNING THE LIGHTS ON AND OFF THE HEADLIGHTS RETURN TO NORMAL. THE DEALER NOW ADVISES ME THAT HE "THINKS" THE BULBS NEED TO BE REPLACED AT A COST OF ABOUT $400 EACH. I SEE ON THE INTERNET THAT THIS IS A VERY COMMON PROBLEM ON THE 2006 PRIUS AND TOYOTA HAS DONE NOTHING TO PROTECT THE OWNERS FROM THIS POTENTIALLY LIFE THREATENING ISSUE. I BELIEVE IT IS MANDATORY THAT TOYOTA MAKE A RECALL OF ALL 2006 PRIUS MODELS ASAP TO REPAIR THIS PROBLEM BEFORE SERIOUS INJURY OR LOSS OF LIFE IS CAUSED BY LOSING THESE LIGHTS DURING BOTH NIGHT DRIVING AND DAY DRIVING WHEN USED AS AN EFFECTIVE MEANS OF LETTING OTHER DRIVERS SEE YOUR POSITION. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10229026

30,000 miles · May 19, 2008
Exterior Lighting

IN JUNE OF 2007 I HAD MY HEAD LIGHT REPLACE IN MY 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. I WOULD BE DRIVING AND IT WOULD RANDOMLY GO OFF AND ON. WARRANTY COVERED THE COST. IT IS APRIL OF 2008 AND BOTH HEADLIGHTS ARE GOING ON AND OFF AGAIN. AT FIRST THE RIGHT ONE WAS RANDOMLY ON AND OFF AND NOW BOTH RIGHT AND LEFT, AGAIN ARE ON AN OFF AND ON OC…

Read full complaint

IN JUNE OF 2007 I HAD MY HEAD LIGHT REPLACE IN MY 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. I WOULD BE DRIVING AND IT WOULD RANDOMLY GO OFF AND ON. WARRANTY COVERED THE COST. IT IS APRIL OF 2008 AND BOTH HEADLIGHTS ARE GOING ON AND OFF AGAIN. AT FIRST THE RIGHT ONE WAS RANDOMLY ON AND OFF AND NOW BOTH RIGHT AND LEFT, AGAIN ARE ON AN OFF AND ON OCCASION I WILL BE DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD AND BOTH GO OFF. THIS IS NOT A LIGHT BULB PROBLEM. IT WAS DIAGNOSED AS AN ELECTRONIC PROBLEM WITH THE WIRING BEHIND THE LIGHT. MY CAR IS ONLY 2 YEARS OLD AND SHOULD NOT BE HAVING ELECTRONIC PROBLEMS, HEAD LIGHTS FLICKERING ON AND OFF. MECHANICSVILLE TOYOTA FIXED THE FIRST ELECTRONIC PROBLEM WITH WARRANTY. NOW NO ONE WANTS TO HEAR MY PROBLEM AND I BELIEVE THIS IS HAPPENING TO OTHERS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10228148

39,000 miles · May 19, 2008
Exterior Lighting

MY 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS INTERMITTENTLY LOSES ONE OR BOTH OF THE HID HEADLIGHTS. TURNING OFF THE LIGHTS, AND BACK ON, WILL USUALLY BRING BOTH OF THE LIGHTS BACK ON... FOR A LITTLE WHILE. THIS HAS CAUSED ME TO HAVE ONE 'NEAR-MISS' ACCIDENT WHEN GOING AROUND A CURVE, IN UNFAMILIAR AREAS. BOTH OF THE HEADLIGHTS FAILED WITHIN A FEW T…

Read full complaint

MY 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS INTERMITTENTLY LOSES ONE OR BOTH OF THE HID HEADLIGHTS. TURNING OFF THE LIGHTS, AND BACK ON, WILL USUALLY BRING BOTH OF THE LIGHTS BACK ON... FOR A LITTLE WHILE. THIS HAS CAUSED ME TO HAVE ONE 'NEAR-MISS' ACCIDENT WHEN GOING AROUND A CURVE, IN UNFAMILIAR AREAS. BOTH OF THE HEADLIGHTS FAILED WITHIN A FEW TENTHS OF A SECOND, HELPING ME TO RUN OFF OF THE ROAD. NO DAMAGE WAS DONE TO THE CAR, BUT IT WAS A VERY FRIGHTENING EXPERIENCE, THAT I DON'T WANT TO REPEAT. IT SEEMS APPARENT FROM THE THIS SITE, THAT IT IS A WIDE-SPREAD PROBLEM THAT TOYOTA DOES NOT WANT TO ADMIT TO. EVEN MY TOYOTA BRAND PLATINUM WARRANTY DOESN'T COVER THIS, SINCE THEY SAY THAT 'LIGHT' BULBS ARE AN 'EXPENDABLE' ITEM... THEY MEANT 'EXPENSIVE' ITEM... THAT THEY DO NOT WANT TO PAY FOR. MY LOCAL DEALER STATES THAT THEY WANT TO 'TROUBLESHOOT' IT FOR A FEW HOURS AT ABOUT $90/HR... THEN 'PROBABLY' CHECK THE BULBS, AT 1.5 HOURS/EACH, SINCE THEY SAY THE FRONT BUMPER MUST BE REMOVED TO REMOVE/REPLACE THE LIGHTS. THEN, ORDER THE BULBS AT $359/EACH, AND A WEEK OR SO LATER (AFTER THEY ORDER THE BULBS/RECEIVE THEM), INSTALL THEM FOR ABOUT 1.5HOURS/EACH. THIS IS TOTALING WELL OVER $1000 FOR A CAR ONLY ABOUT 15.5 MONTHS OLD, AND JUST BARELY OUT OF WARRANTY (AT THE TIME ABOUT 39,000 MILES). WITH ALL OF THE COMPLAINTS ESTABLISHED ON THIS SITE, AS WELL AS THE DEALERSHIP(S) RECORDS OF 'TROUBLESHOOTING' AND /OR REPAIR EFFORTS, TOYOTA NEEDS TO BE FORCED INTO A RECALL FOR REPAIRS TO THIS SAFETY RELATED PROBLEM THAT THEY ARE CURRENTLY CHOOSING TO IGNORE. I HAVE REQUESTED TO SPEAK TO A REGIONAL TOYOTA SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE, BUT THOSE EFFORTS WERE APPARENTLY IGNORED, SINCE SEVERAL MONTHS HAVE ELAPSED, WITHOUT ANY CONTACT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10228139

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.