← 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

Service Brakes complaints

73 reports
Clear category filter
128,780 miles · Dec 12, 2015
Service BrakesVehicle Speed ControlCrash

WHILE DRIVING 20 M/H VEHICLE SUDDENLY ECCELERATED AND I HIT THE GUARD RAIL WHEN EXPERIENCING UNINTENDED ACCELERATITION

NHTSA ODI #10809851

100,000 miles · Dec 6, 2015
Electrical SystemService Brakes

THE COMBINATION METER ON MY 2006 PRIUS HAS AN INTERMITTENT ELECTRICAL SHORT. THIS RESULTS IN THE DASHBOARD LIGHTS GOING OUT WHILE THE CAR IS MOVING. THIS PROBLEM WITH THE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM ON THE PRIUS CAN RESULT IN THE BRAKES ON THE CAR FAILING. IN ADDITION THE CAR OFTEN CONTINUES TO STAY ON AFTER WE TURN IT OFF. THIS IS AL…

Read full complaint

THE COMBINATION METER ON MY 2006 PRIUS HAS AN INTERMITTENT ELECTRICAL SHORT. THIS RESULTS IN THE DASHBOARD LIGHTS GOING OUT WHILE THE CAR IS MOVING. THIS PROBLEM WITH THE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM ON THE PRIUS CAN RESULT IN THE BRAKES ON THE CAR FAILING. IN ADDITION THE CAR OFTEN CONTINUES TO STAY ON AFTER WE TURN IT OFF. THIS IS ALSO A SAFETY HAZARD. TOYOTA HAS REFUSED OUR REQUEST TO REPLACE THE DEFECTIVE COMBINATION METER, EVEN THOUGH THIS IS A WIDESPREAD PROBLEM.

NHTSA ODI #10808630

103,000 miles · Sep 21, 2015
Fuel/propulsion SystemService BrakesVehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury

MY WIFE [XXX] HAD A SERIOUS ACCIDENT IN THE PARKING LOT OF THE VICTORIAN ON MAIN ST IN SANTA MONICA ON WEDNESDAY SEPTEMBER 2. FROM STANDSTILL, HER 2006 PRIUS SUDDENLY ACCELERATED TO A VERY HIGH RATE ON ITS OWN AND THE CAR'S BRAKES WERE COMPLETELY NON-RESPONSIVE. IN THIS RELATIVELY CONFINED PARKING AREA, AFTER A FRIGHTENING PERIO…

Read full complaint

MY WIFE [XXX] HAD A SERIOUS ACCIDENT IN THE PARKING LOT OF THE VICTORIAN ON MAIN ST IN SANTA MONICA ON WEDNESDAY SEPTEMBER 2. FROM STANDSTILL, HER 2006 PRIUS SUDDENLY ACCELERATED TO A VERY HIGH RATE ON ITS OWN AND THE CAR'S BRAKES WERE COMPLETELY NON-RESPONSIVE. IN THIS RELATIVELY CONFINED PARKING AREA, AFTER A FRIGHTENING PERIOD OF TRYING TO REGAIN CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE, SHE MADE A SPLIT-SECOND DECISION TO CRASH INTO A TREE AT A RELATIVELY HIGH SPEED IN ORDER TO AVOID STEERING THE CAR ONTO MAIN ST. AND CAUSING A MUCH MORE SERIOUS ACCIDENT THAT WOULD HAVE IMPACTED MANY PEOPLE, AUTOMOBILES AND PUBLIC AND PRIVATE PROPERTY AND POSSIBLY RESULTED IN MULTIPLE DEATHS AND MULTIPLE SERIOUS INJURIES. SHE SUSTAINED A BROKEN FOOT. HER PASSENGER SUSTAINED BRUISING. BOTH WERE TAKEN BY AMBULANCE TO ST. JOHN'S HOSPITAL. BOTH AIRBAGS DEPLOYED. THE 2 OCCUPANTS WERE WEARING SEAT BELTS. AS A RESULT, AND ONLY BECAUSE OF [XXX] QUICK THINKING AND POTENTIALLY SACRIFICIAL ACTION, [XXX], HER PASSENGER AND MANY OTHER NON-SUSPECTING PEOPLE ARE ALIVE TODAY. IT IS APPARENTLY WELL-ESTABLISHED THAT THE PRIUS CAN ACCELERATE IN THIS MANNER. IN THIS CASE, THE CIRCUMSTANCES WOULD APPEAR TO BE STRAIGHT FORWARD: A CAR PARKED IN A PARKING LOT AND STARTED SUDDENLY ACCELERATES ON IT'S OWN AND REFUSES TO ALLOW THE DRIVER CONTROL. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

NHTSA ODI #10766471

128,000 miles · May 19, 2015
Service BrakesFire

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING AT 20 MPH, THE CONTACT HEARD A WARNING WHISTLE AND A BURNING PLASTIC ODOR. IN ADDITION, THE CONTACT HAD TO APPLY EXCESSIVE FORCE TO THE BRAKE PEDAL IN ORDER TO STOP THE VEHICLE. THE GENERAL EMERGENCY, ABS AND BRAKE WARNING LIGHTS ILLUMINATED. THE FAILURE RECURRED ON NUMEROU…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING AT 20 MPH, THE CONTACT HEARD A WARNING WHISTLE AND A BURNING PLASTIC ODOR. IN ADDITION, THE CONTACT HAD TO APPLY EXCESSIVE FORCE TO THE BRAKE PEDAL IN ORDER TO STOP THE VEHICLE. THE GENERAL EMERGENCY, ABS AND BRAKE WARNING LIGHTS ILLUMINATED. THE FAILURE RECURRED ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER. THE TECHNICIAN DIAGNOSED THAT THE RELAYS, FRONT BRAKE ROTORS, BRAKE PADS, AND BRAKE ACTUATORS NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 128,000.

NHTSA ODI #10717313

198,000 miles · Nov 16, 2014
Service BrakesCrash

WHILE PRESSING ON BRAKE WHILE GOING LOW SPEED TO STOP AT A RED LIGHT, THE CAR ACCELERATED BEFORE BRAKING. A FEW MINUTES LATER, I WAS ATTEMPTING TO PARK IN A PARKING GARAGE. WHILE PULLING INTO THE PARKING SPOT I APPLIED THE BRAKE TO COME TO A COMPLETE STOP. INSTEAD OF DECELERATING, THE CAR AGGRESSIVELY ACCELERATED INTO THE CEMENT…

Read full complaint

WHILE PRESSING ON BRAKE WHILE GOING LOW SPEED TO STOP AT A RED LIGHT, THE CAR ACCELERATED BEFORE BRAKING. A FEW MINUTES LATER, I WAS ATTEMPTING TO PARK IN A PARKING GARAGE. WHILE PULLING INTO THE PARKING SPOT I APPLIED THE BRAKE TO COME TO A COMPLETE STOP. INSTEAD OF DECELERATING, THE CAR AGGRESSIVELY ACCELERATED INTO THE CEMENT BARRIER AT THE HEAD OF THE PARKING SPOT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10655260

81,689 miles · Jun 3, 2014
Power TrainService BrakesSteering

I AM REQUESTING THAT NHTSA INVESTIGATE EXPANDING/ADDING-TO THE RECALL OF TOYOTA PRIUS COOLANT INVERTER PUMP FAILURES* TO INCLUDE COOLANT STORAGE PUMP FAILURES BLOWING A MAIN FUSE CAUSING DANGEROUS LOSS OF ALL POWER AND CONTROL. *TR ON MAY 31ST, 2014, WHILE TRAVELING AT ABOUT 60MPH, WITHOUT ANY WARNING, THE CAR INSTANTLY SHUT…

Read full complaint

I AM REQUESTING THAT NHTSA INVESTIGATE EXPANDING/ADDING-TO THE RECALL OF TOYOTA PRIUS COOLANT INVERTER PUMP FAILURES* TO INCLUDE COOLANT STORAGE PUMP FAILURES BLOWING A MAIN FUSE CAUSING DANGEROUS LOSS OF ALL POWER AND CONTROL. *TR ON MAY 31ST, 2014, WHILE TRAVELING AT ABOUT 60MPH, WITHOUT ANY WARNING, THE CAR INSTANTLY SHUT DOWN: NO DRIVE POWER, NO POWER STEERING, NO POWER BRAKES, NO FRONT PANEL DISPLAY. THIS WAS A DANGEROUS SITUATION. AFTER DIAGNOSIS, THE TOYOTA DEALER WITH ASSISTANCE FROM TOYOTA CORPORATE CONCLUDED THAT THE "COOLANT STORAGE PUMP" (NOT THE COOLANT INVERTER PUMP AS IN THE RECALL) WAS THE CAUSE OF THIS BLOWN "AM-2" 15-AMP FUSE WHICH SHUT DOWN THE HYBRID SYSTEM, POWER STEERING, BRAKES, ETC. THEY INDICATED THAT THE COOLANT STORAGE PUMP FAULT WAS A KNOWN CAUSE. THIS CAR IS WELL-MAINTAINED, DEALER MAINTAINED. IT HAD ALL THE RECENT RECALL UPDATES INSTALLED. IT WAS A MILD DAY ~75DEG. WE'D BEEN DRIVING ABOUT 10 MINS AFTER A 30 MINUTE STOP. VEHICLE LOAD WAS NOT A FACTOR -- TWO SLIM ADULTS, NO CARGO LOAD. NO ELECTRICAL CHARGING LOADS. I AM VERY CONCERNED WITH THE SAFETY IMPLICATIONS OF IMMEDIATELY LOSING ALL POWER, POWER BRAKES, POWER STEERING, WITHOUT WARNING, BECAUSE OF A SINGLE COOLANT PUMP FAULT. CAN YOU PLEASE INVESTIGATE THIS. I HOPE THEY FIXED MY VEHICLE. AND I HOPE IF ANYONE ELSE HAS THIS PROBLEM ITS NOT DEADLY. THANK YOU, * RECALL OF INVERTER COOLANT PUMP 12V536000: "...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." PS I FOUND ANOTHER COMPLAINT THAT MIGHT BE RELATED (..SHUT OFF IN TRAFFIC, SIMILAR VIN, NHTSA ID NUMBER: 10567158). THOUGH THIS COMPLAINT SEEMS TO BE FOCUSED ON THE COSTS REPLACING ADDITIONAL PUMPS.

NHTSA ODI #10595945

123,000 miles · Apr 20, 2014
Service Brakes

THE ASSISTED HYDRAULIC BRAKE PUMP SEEMS TO NOT BE WORKING CORRECTLY, THERE'S A PUMP NOISE THAT KEEPS COMING ON IN THE CABIN, LIKE THE BRAKE PUMP CANNOT KEEP PRESSURE. IT'S A RATTLING NOISE THAT IS COMING ON AND IT'S EVERY FEW SECONDS. LIKE IT'S TRYING TO BUILD PRESSURE TO ASSIST BRAKING. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10583752

48,219 miles · Mar 14, 2014
Service Brakes

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS HB. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE ATTEMPTING TO START THE VEHICLE, SHE NOTICED THAT THE EMERGENCY BRAKE LIGHT WOULD NOT DISENGAGE AFTER RELEASING THE BRAKE. THE CONTACT CONTINUED TO DRIVE THE VEHICLE HOWEVER SHE NOTICED THERE WAS AN INCREASE IN BRAKING TIME WHEN APPLIED. THE VEHICLE WAS T…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS HB. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE ATTEMPTING TO START THE VEHICLE, SHE NOTICED THAT THE EMERGENCY BRAKE LIGHT WOULD NOT DISENGAGE AFTER RELEASING THE BRAKE. THE CONTACT CONTINUED TO DRIVE THE VEHICLE HOWEVER SHE NOTICED THERE WAS AN INCREASE IN BRAKING TIME WHEN APPLIED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER, WHO STATED THAT THE STROKE SENSOR RETENTION LOGIC FAILED AND THE SPEED CONTROL ECU WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED. THE MANUFACTURE WAS NOT CONTACTED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 48,219.

NHTSA ODI #10569390

92,020 miles · Sep 10, 2013
Service BrakesCrash

ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 2013 AT ABOUT 8:10 A.M., I WAS DRIVING ON HOLCOMBE IN HOUSTON. THERE WAS TRAFFIC. AT ONE POINT, I NEEDED TO STOP FROM A FAIRLY LOW SPEED (PERHAPS 10 MPH), AS THE CAR IN FRONT OF ME HAD STOPPED FOR A LIGHT. I BRAKE USING THE FLOOR PEDAL. BUT THE BRAKES DID NOT ENGAGE AT ALL; IT WAS AS THOUGH I HAD NO…

Read full complaint

ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 2013 AT ABOUT 8:10 A.M., I WAS DRIVING ON HOLCOMBE IN HOUSTON. THERE WAS TRAFFIC. AT ONE POINT, I NEEDED TO STOP FROM A FAIRLY LOW SPEED (PERHAPS 10 MPH), AS THE CAR IN FRONT OF ME HAD STOPPED FOR A LIGHT. I BRAKE USING THE FLOOR PEDAL. BUT THE BRAKES DID NOT ENGAGE AT ALL; IT WAS AS THOUGH I HAD NOT EVEN TOUCHED THE BRAKE. THE CAR DIDN'T HESITATE OR DIE; IT JUST CONTINUED MOVING UNTIL IT HIT THE CAR AHEAD OF ME. FORTUNATELY I WAS NOT TRAVELING AT A HIGH SPEED AND NEITHER THE DRIVER OF THE CAR I HIT NOR I HAVE APPARENTLY BEEN INJURED. BUT HAD THIS HAPPENED AT A HIGHER SPEED THE OUTCOME COULD HAVE BEEN QUITE DIFFERENT. MY PRIUS HAS BEEN THE SUBJECT OF SEVERAL SAFETY RECALLS, ALL OF WHICH I'VE HAD PERFORMED. AND ONLY A FEW DAYS BEFORE THE ACCIDENT, THE CAR HAD PASSED ITS ANNUAL STATE SAFETY INSPECTION. FROM THIS AND BECAUSE IT WAS CLEAR THAT THE BRAKES DID NOT ENGAGE AT ALL WHEN I BRAKED BEFORE THE ACCIDENT, IT APPEARS TO ME THAT THIS ACCIDENT WAS A FUNCTION OF A BRAKE DEFECT IN THE PRIUS, PERHAPS A SHORT SOMEWHERE IN THE SYSTEM. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10542886

119,000 miles · Jun 10, 2013
Electrical SystemEngineService Brakes

THE VEHICLE UNEXPECTEDLY SHUTDOWN WHILE DRIVING. THERE WAS NO POWER AND THE BRAKES WERE BOGGY. THE RED TRIANGLE WARNING LIGHT CAME AS WELL AS THE ABS AND ENGINE WARNING LIGHTS. AFTER PULLING OVER THE CAR RESTARTED AND DROVE FINE BUT THE RED TRIANGLE REMAINED ON. THE NEXT DAY IT WAS WORKING FINE. TOYOTA WAS UNABLE TO FIND AN…

Read full complaint

THE VEHICLE UNEXPECTEDLY SHUTDOWN WHILE DRIVING. THERE WAS NO POWER AND THE BRAKES WERE BOGGY. THE RED TRIANGLE WARNING LIGHT CAME AS WELL AS THE ABS AND ENGINE WARNING LIGHTS. AFTER PULLING OVER THE CAR RESTARTED AND DROVE FINE BUT THE RED TRIANGLE REMAINED ON. THE NEXT DAY IT WAS WORKING FINE. TOYOTA WAS UNABLE TO FIND ANYTHING EXCEPT A LOW VOLTAGE WARNING. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10516128

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.