NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic complaints
94 reportsClear category filterMileage unknown · Feb 25, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
ALMOST IMMEDIATELY AFTER PURCHASING THE VEHICLE, I WENT OVER A POTHOLE AND THE CAR LURCHED FORWARD BRIEFLY. UNSURE IF AN ACCELERATION ISSUE OR A BRAKING ISSUE. IT HAS HAPPENED NUMEROUS TIMES, BUT HAS BEEN MINOR. I HAVE REPORTED THIS TO TOYOTA, BUT THEY IGNORED MOST OF MY EMAILS TO MY SURPRISE AND DISAPPOINTMENT. TODAY, I…
Read full complaint
ALMOST IMMEDIATELY AFTER PURCHASING THE VEHICLE, I WENT OVER A POTHOLE AND THE CAR LURCHED FORWARD BRIEFLY. UNSURE IF AN ACCELERATION ISSUE OR A BRAKING ISSUE. IT HAS HAPPENED NUMEROUS TIMES, BUT HAS BEEN MINOR. I HAVE REPORTED THIS TO TOYOTA, BUT THEY IGNORED MOST OF MY EMAILS TO MY SURPRISE AND DISAPPOINTMENT. TODAY, I TURNED THE CORNER AND HIT A SMALL POTHOLE. I FELT IT LURCH, BUT THE BRAKES DID NOT WORK. I PUMPED THEM AND NO BRAKES. I PUSHED THE ON/OFF BUTTON AND HELD IT FOR THE 3 SECONDS THEY RECOMMEND AND IT DID NOT TURN OFF THE CAR. IT TOOK OVER 5 SECONDS BEFORE FINALLY TURNING OFF AND I COASTED TO A STOP. IT WAS TERRIFYING!!! ONCE I CALMED DOWN AND TRIED TO START THE CAR, IT WOULD NOT TURN ON AND THEN ONCE IT DID, IT WOULD NOT GO INTO DRIVE ... ONLY NEUTRAL. THIS HAPPENED 4 OR 5 TIMES BEFORE I WAS FINALLY ABLE TO GET IT INTO DRIVE TO GET HOME. I IMMEDIATELY CALLED TOYOTA ON AMHERST DR. IN SPRINGFIELD, VA AND SPOKE. HE SAID IT WAS NOT UNDER WARRANTY AND THAT I WOULD HAVE TO PAY FOR A RENTAL CAR. I LET HIM KNOW HOW DISPLEASED I WAS AND HE WAS KIND AND SAID HE'LL TALK TO HIS BOSS IN THE MORNING. I HAVE TOLD TOYOTA THAT I AM AFRAID OF MY CAR ........ UPGRADE THAT TO TERRIFIED! THIS WAS A VERY SCARY EVENT. THE 2010 CAR OWNERS SHOULD NOT BE MORE IMPORTANT THAN THOSE OF USE WITH AN EARLIER MODEL OF THIS CAR. IT'S NOT THE FLOOR MATS. IT'S NOT THE STICKY ACCELERATOR PEDAL. IT'S THEIR COMPUTER SYSTEM AND I NEED TO HAVE TOYOTA RESPECT MY SAFETY TOO AND SUPPORT THIS DANGEROUS CAR THAT I'M STUCK WITH. I WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR HELP. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10314412
49,000 miles · Feb 25, 2010
Engine And Engine CoolingService Brakes, HydraulicCrash
I AM A RURAL MAIL CARRIER WITH WELL OVER 350,000 MILES DRIVEN ON MY ROUTE WITHOUT INCIDENT. I DRIVE IN ALL ROAD CONDITIONS ON GRAVEL AND PAVED ROADS. I WAS DRIVING MY 2006 PRIUS ON A WET BUT NOT MUDDY GRAVEL ROAD AT ABOUT 38 MPH. THE BACK END BEGAN TO SLIDE A LITTLE. I LET UP ON THE GAS WITH NO RESPONSE. I PRESSED THE BRAKE…
Read full complaint
I AM A RURAL MAIL CARRIER WITH WELL OVER 350,000 MILES DRIVEN ON MY ROUTE WITHOUT INCIDENT. I DRIVE IN ALL ROAD CONDITIONS ON GRAVEL AND PAVED ROADS. I WAS DRIVING MY 2006 PRIUS ON A WET BUT NOT MUDDY GRAVEL ROAD AT ABOUT 38 MPH. THE BACK END BEGAN TO SLIDE A LITTLE. I LET UP ON THE GAS WITH NO RESPONSE. I PRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL WITH NO RESPONSE. I WENT INTO A DEEP DITCH FILLED WITH 3 FT TALL GRASS. I STEERED TO DRIVE THE CENTER OF THE DITCH AND CONTINUED WITH THE BRAKE FULLY DEPRESSED FOR ABOUT 15-20 FT, RIPPING THE TALL GRASS OUT BY THE ROOT AS I WENT. THE CAR TRAVELED OVER A DRIVEWAY APPROACH, STILL AT 35 MPH, STRIKING THE APPROACH WITH THE LEFT FRONT CORNER WITH ENOUGH FORCE TO BEND THE FRAME AND DO OTHER SERIOUS DAMAGE, BUT WITH NO AIRBAG DEPLOYMENT. I CONTINUED OVER THE APPROACH AND DOWN THE DITCH, STILL AT 35 MPH, FOR ANOTHER 30 OR MORE FEET. I WAS PRESSING AND HOLDING THE BRAKE AND LIFTING THE GAS PEDAL WITH MY TOE. THE GAS PEDAL WAS NOT STUCK AND THE ENGINE'S RPMS WERE LOW. ONLY WHEN I PUT THE CAR IN NEUTRAL DID IT SLOW TO STOP. IT TOOK SEVERAL ATTEMPTS TO GET THE CAR OUT OF THIS DITCH AS THE TRACTION CONTROL KEPT LURCHING AND STALLING. I WAS ABLE TO DRIVE THE CAR OUT AND HOME WITHOUT INCIDENT. IT HAD TO BE TOWED TO A DEALERSHIP FOR OVER $4000 IN REPAIRS. THIS WAS IN MID-2008 AND I DON'T KNOW IF ANY CORRECTIONS MADE OR WERE EVEN KNOWN AT THAT TIME. THIS WAS AN ABSOLUTELY TERRIFYING SITUATION. THE CAR DID NOT RESPOND TO ANY ACTION I TOOK. I HAD NO CONTROL WHAT SO EVER. THE CAR IS NO LONGER DRIVEN.. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10314069
18 miles · Feb 23, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
WHEN DRIVING OVER A BUMPY ROAD OR A POTHOLE WHILE BRAKING THERE IS A SUDDEN LOSS OF BRAKING FEEL BEFORE IT RETURNS, SEEMS TO BE A SLIGHTLY LESS THAN A SECOND DELAY WHERE THE BRAKES JUST CUT OUT. THIS SOUNDS TO BE RELATED TO THE ISSUE TOYOTA AND NHTSA ARE INVESTIGATING WITH THE 2010 PRIUS, BUT MINE IS A 2006 AND SEEMS TO EXPERIEN…
Read full complaint
WHEN DRIVING OVER A BUMPY ROAD OR A POTHOLE WHILE BRAKING THERE IS A SUDDEN LOSS OF BRAKING FEEL BEFORE IT RETURNS, SEEMS TO BE A SLIGHTLY LESS THAN A SECOND DELAY WHERE THE BRAKES JUST CUT OUT. THIS SOUNDS TO BE RELATED TO THE ISSUE TOYOTA AND NHTSA ARE INVESTIGATING WITH THE 2010 PRIUS, BUT MINE IS A 2006 AND SEEMS TO EXPERIENCE THE SAME SYMPTOMS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10313053
Mileage unknown · Feb 22, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
WE HAVE A 2006 PRIUS AND HAVE HAD SEVERAL TIMES THAT THE BRAKES FEEL THAT THEY GIVE OUT WHEN A BUMP IS HIT. OUR DEALER SAYS THAT TOYOTA SAYS TO PUSH HARDER ON THE PEDAL. THIS HAS HAPPEN ABOUT 8 OR 10 TIMES IN THE LAST YEAR. THE CAR DOES STOP BUT YOUR AREN'T SURE IT WILL. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10312893
10,000 miles · Feb 21, 2010
Air BagsService Brakes, HydraulicCrash
ACCIDENT OCCURRED IN 2007. I WAS DRIVING IN MODERATE TRAFFIC ON A TWO LANE ROAD. A CAR, TWO CARS AHEAD OF ME, SLAMMED ON THEIR BRAKES, AND FORCED EVERYONE ELSE TO QUICKLY BRAKE. I ALSO SLAMMED ON MY BRAKES, TO AVOID A COLLISION. MY BRAKES FAILED TO RESPOND IN TIME, AND RESULTED IN MY REAR ENDING AN SUV IN FRONT OF ME. THE A…
Read full complaint
ACCIDENT OCCURRED IN 2007. I WAS DRIVING IN MODERATE TRAFFIC ON A TWO LANE ROAD. A CAR, TWO CARS AHEAD OF ME, SLAMMED ON THEIR BRAKES, AND FORCED EVERYONE ELSE TO QUICKLY BRAKE. I ALSO SLAMMED ON MY BRAKES, TO AVOID A COLLISION. MY BRAKES FAILED TO RESPOND IN TIME, AND RESULTED IN MY REAR ENDING AN SUV IN FRONT OF ME. THE ACCIDENT CAUSED SEVERAL THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS WORTH OF DAMAGE TO THE FRONT END OF THE CAR. NO AIR BAGS WERE DEPLOYED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10312581
Mileage unknown · Feb 19, 2010
Service Brakes, HydraulicVehicle Speed Control
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS WHICH WAS PURCHASED IN SEPTEMBER 2006. HE STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING AT SPEEDS OF LESS THAN 40 MPH APPROACHING A STOP SIGN HE REMOVED HIS FOOT FROM THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL, INSTEAD OF SLOWING DOWN THE VEHICLE MAINTAINED THE SPEED IT WAS TRAVELING. HE THEN DEPRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL AND THE BRA…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS WHICH WAS PURCHASED IN SEPTEMBER 2006. HE STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING AT SPEEDS OF LESS THAN 40 MPH APPROACHING A STOP SIGN HE REMOVED HIS FOOT FROM THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL, INSTEAD OF SLOWING DOWN THE VEHICLE MAINTAINED THE SPEED IT WAS TRAVELING. HE THEN DEPRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL AND THE BRAKES WOULD NOT RESPOND. THERE WAS NO RESISTANCE IN THE BRAKE PEDAL AND IT THEN IT EXTENDED TO THE FLOORBOARD. THE SPEED DECREASED SLOWLY AND HE CONTINUED TO PUSH THE BRAKE PEDAL INTO THE FLOORBOARD UNTIL THE VEHICLE EVENTUALLY CAME TO A STOP. THE DEALER ADVISED HIM THAT THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE PEDAL OR THE BRAKES AND THAT HE SHOULD REMOVE THE FLOOR MATS FROM THE VEHICLE. THE FLOOR MATS WERE NOT CLOSE ENOUGH TO THE BRAKE OR ACCELERATOR PEDAL WHEN THE FAILURE OCCURRED. NO REPAIRS HAVE BEEN MADE TO THE VEHICLE. ON TWO ADDITIONAL OCCASIONS, THE CONTACT EXPERIENCED THE SAME FAILURE. HE ALSO RECEIVED A LETTER FROM TOYOTA IN REGARDS TO A RECALL CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER: 09V388000, VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL ACCELERATOR PEDAL, HOWEVER, HE WAS NOT AWARE IF HIS VEHICLE WAS INCLUDED IN THE RECALL OR NOT. THE VIN WAS NOT ACCEPTED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS UNKNOWN AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 70,000.
NHTSA ODI #10312132
8,035 miles · Feb 18, 2010
Service Brakes, HydraulicSteering
1) STEERING WHEEL/SHAFT APPEARS TO BE IMPROPERLY SUPPORTED; FEELS LOOSE WHEN TURNING LOCK TO LOCK SINCE NEW. HAVE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF FOUR (4) TOYOTA DEALERS WHEN SERVICE PERFORMED (HAVE TAKEN TO TOYOTA FOR ALL SERVICE WORK SINCE NEW), ALL HAVE ADVISED THAT THERE IS "NOTHING WRONG" WITH THE VEHICLE. IT IS THE ONLY VEHICL…
Read full complaint
1) STEERING WHEEL/SHAFT APPEARS TO BE IMPROPERLY SUPPORTED; FEELS LOOSE WHEN TURNING LOCK TO LOCK SINCE NEW. HAVE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF FOUR (4) TOYOTA DEALERS WHEN SERVICE PERFORMED (HAVE TAKEN TO TOYOTA FOR ALL SERVICE WORK SINCE NEW), ALL HAVE ADVISED THAT THERE IS "NOTHING WRONG" WITH THE VEHICLE. IT IS THE ONLY VEHICLE WE HAVE EVER OWNED THAT HAS THIS SENSE OF DISCONNECT AND POTENTIAL FOR A MUCH MORE SERIOUS ISSUE WERE THERE EVER A STEERING FAILURE. 2) OVER ROUGH ROADS (WHEN VEHICLE WAS DRIVEN IN SEATTLE AND BELLEVUE, WA) WHEN STOPPING, THE ABS SYSTEM SEEMS TO ACTIVATE PREMATURELY AND INCREASE STOPPING DISTANCES. WE HAVE OTHER VEHICLES WITH ABS BRAKES WHICH DO NOT ACTIVATE SO READILY AND STOP SO SLOWLY. AS IT RELATES TO INCIDENT DATE(S): SINCE NEW, VEHICLE PURCHASED NOVEMBER 2005. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10311820
24,400 miles · Feb 18, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
I WAS TRAVELING ABOUT 25 MPH ON A SIDE STREET DURING BROAD DAYLIGHT. I APPLIED MY BRAKES TO STOP BUT THE CAR CONTINUED TO ROLL FORWARD. THE BRAKE PEDAL DID NOT DEPRESS TO THE FLOOR - RATHER IT JUST REMAINED IN THE NORMAL DEPRESSED CONDITION AND DID NOT STOP THE CAR AT ALL. I THEN PUMPED THE BRAKE AND IT FINALLY ENGAGED ON THE…
Read full complaint
I WAS TRAVELING ABOUT 25 MPH ON A SIDE STREET DURING BROAD DAYLIGHT. I APPLIED MY BRAKES TO STOP BUT THE CAR CONTINUED TO ROLL FORWARD. THE BRAKE PEDAL DID NOT DEPRESS TO THE FLOOR - RATHER IT JUST REMAINED IN THE NORMAL DEPRESSED CONDITION AND DID NOT STOP THE CAR AT ALL. I THEN PUMPED THE BRAKE AND IT FINALLY ENGAGED ON THE THIRD TRY ALTHOUGH I WAS ALREADY THRU THE STOP SIGN AND INTO THE INTERSECTION. LUCKILY, THERE WERE NO CARS AHEAD OF ME NOR WAS THERE ANY CROSS TRAFFIC AT THE INTERSECTION. THERE WAS NO SNOW OR ICE ON THE GROUND. MY CAR IS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS WITH 24,400 MILES TRAVELED AT THE TIME OF THE INCIDENT. IT WAS PURCHASED IN JULY OF 2006. A FOLLOW UP CHECK OF THE BRAKES ON TUESDAY AT A LOCAL TOYOTA DEALER ON THE 16TH RESULTED IN THE FOLLOWING" "CHECKED FOR DIAGNOSTIC CODES - EVERYTHING FINE." HARDLY CALMING. THE PAD WEAR INDICATOR WAS NOT DISPLAYED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10311800
3,000 miles · Feb 17, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
NHTSA ID: 193333 I UNDERSTAND THAT THE JAPANESE GOVERNMENT IS INVESTIGATING A BRAKING ISSUE ON 2010 PRIUSES -- INVOLVING SLIPPING OR SURGING FORWARD WHEN THE BRAKES ARE APPLIED. THIS IS NOT UNIQUE TO THE 2010 MODEL; OUR 2006 PRIUS SLIPS IN THE SAME WAY, UNDER THE SAME CIRCUMSTANCES: WHEN THE DRIVER BRAKES AT SLOW SPEE…
Read full complaint
NHTSA ID: 193333 I UNDERSTAND THAT THE JAPANESE GOVERNMENT IS INVESTIGATING A BRAKING ISSUE ON 2010 PRIUSES -- INVOLVING SLIPPING OR SURGING FORWARD WHEN THE BRAKES ARE APPLIED. THIS IS NOT UNIQUE TO THE 2010 MODEL; OUR 2006 PRIUS SLIPS IN THE SAME WAY, UNDER THE SAME CIRCUMSTANCES: WHEN THE DRIVER BRAKES AT SLOW SPEEDS ON A WET SURFACE LIKE A LIGHT RAIL TRACK, OR GOES OVER BUMPS OR INTO POTHOLES WHILE BRAKING. IT FEELS AS IF THERE ARE NO BRAKES, AND THE CAR LURCHES FORWARD. THIS HAS HAPPENED ONLY ON FLAT STREETS -- NEVER ON HILLS. THE PROBLEM OCCURS ABOUT TWICE A MONTH. IN CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THIS PROBLEM, THE TOYOTA DEALER TELLS ME ANY VEHICLE WILL DO THIS, BUT THE ANOMALY IS ONE I HAVE NEVER EXPERIENCED IN ANY OTHER CAR I'VE OWNED, INCLUDING 2 TOYOTAS. IN OTHER WORDS, NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE TO ADDRESS THIS SITUATION, BECAUSE THE DEALERS SAY THERE IS NO DEFECT. "APPROXIMATE INCIDENT DATE" QUESTION BELOW MAKES NO SENSE, BECAUSE THIS IS A RECURRING PROBLEM. ALSO, "MILEAGE" INFORMATION IS USELESS, SINCE THIS HAS HAPPENED DOZENS OF TIMES. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10311449
35,700 miles · Feb 17, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS WHICH WAS PURCHASED BRAND NEW. WHILE DRIVING AT VARIOUS SPEEDS MORE THAN 5 MPH OVER RUMBLE STRIPS IN THE ROAD, IF THE BRAKES WERE DEPRESSED, THEY WOULD NOT RESPOND IMMEDIATELY. THE FAILURE WOULD ALSO OCCUR DURING RAINY WEATHER CONDITIONS. AN UNKNOWN WARNING SYMBOL BRIEFLY ILLUMINATED ON TH…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS WHICH WAS PURCHASED BRAND NEW. WHILE DRIVING AT VARIOUS SPEEDS MORE THAN 5 MPH OVER RUMBLE STRIPS IN THE ROAD, IF THE BRAKES WERE DEPRESSED, THEY WOULD NOT RESPOND IMMEDIATELY. THE FAILURE WOULD ALSO OCCUR DURING RAINY WEATHER CONDITIONS. AN UNKNOWN WARNING SYMBOL BRIEFLY ILLUMINATED ON THE INSTRUMENT CONTROL PANEL, THE CONTACT ASSUMED THAT THIS WAS A NORMAL OCCURRENCE FOR HER BRAKING SYSTEM. NEITHER THE DEALER NOR MANUFACTURER WERE CONTACTED TO REPORT THE FAILURES. THERE WERE NO REPAIRS MADE TO THE VEHICLE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE APPROXIMATELY 35,700.
NHTSA ODI #10311338
Official recalls
6Nov 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
3DP22005 · 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.
Illustration