IllustrationTRUNK LATCH RUBBER MELTS WHEN THE WEATHER IS HOT. HAPPENS REPEATEDLY EVERY SUMMER, UNTIL THE TRUNK LATCH IS UNUSABLE. THE TRUNK WILL NOT OPEN.
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 →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Prius years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
All reported categories
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
1410–25K
46225–50K
31850–75K
12875–100K
116100–150K
88150K+
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
Structure complaints
15 reportsTRUNK LATCH TO OPEN TRUNK WHILE STATIONARY NOW SERIOUSLY REDUCED FUNCTION. RUBBER HAS MELTED. NOW THE TRUNK IS VERY DIFFICULT TO OPEN. SOMETIMES, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT IS COLD OUT, TRUNK CANNOT BE OPENED AT ALL.
I WAS UNABLE TO OPEN THE REAR HATCH BECAUSE THE RUBBER/PLASTIC COVERING HAD HARDENED TO THE POINT THAT I COULDN'T CAUSE IT TO MAKE CONTACT AND OPEN. SINCE THEN, I HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO OPEN THE HATCH WHEN THE WEATHER IS COLD AND HAVE BEEN ABLE TO OPEN IT WHEN THE WEATHER IS WARM. A DEALER IN TENNESSEE TOLD ME THAT IT WOULD COST …
Read full complaint
I WAS UNABLE TO OPEN THE REAR HATCH BECAUSE THE RUBBER/PLASTIC COVERING HAD HARDENED TO THE POINT THAT I COULDN'T CAUSE IT TO MAKE CONTACT AND OPEN. SINCE THEN, I HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO OPEN THE HATCH WHEN THE WEATHER IS COLD AND HAVE BEEN ABLE TO OPEN IT WHEN THE WEATHER IS WARM. A DEALER IN TENNESSEE TOLD ME THAT IT WOULD COST $300 TO REPLACE THE WHOLE PART. I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A SAFETY HAZARD BECAUSE IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO ACCESS THE SPARE TIRE, FIRST AID KIT, OR TO OPEN THE HATCH IN EMERGENCIES TO ALLOW PASSENGERS TO ESCAPE IF OTHER DOORS ARE INOPERABLE. *TR
RUBBER COVER TO THE REAR HATCH SWITCH (HANDLE) HAS DETERIORATED OVER TIME (CAR WAS 4 YEARS OLD WHEN THIS FIRST BECAME NOTICEABLE). IT IS NOW 8 YEARS OLD WITH 81,000 MILES AND THE DETERIORATION IS SO DRASTIC TO THE POINT WHERE IT IS OFTEN DIFFICULT TO OPEN THE REAR HATCH, OR VICE-VERSA SOMETIMES THE HATCH WILL NOT LATCH CLOSE. …
Read full complaint
RUBBER COVER TO THE REAR HATCH SWITCH (HANDLE) HAS DETERIORATED OVER TIME (CAR WAS 4 YEARS OLD WHEN THIS FIRST BECAME NOTICEABLE). IT IS NOW 8 YEARS OLD WITH 81,000 MILES AND THE DETERIORATION IS SO DRASTIC TO THE POINT WHERE IT IS OFTEN DIFFICULT TO OPEN THE REAR HATCH, OR VICE-VERSA SOMETIMES THE HATCH WILL NOT LATCH CLOSE. STICKY GOOEY TAR ALWAYS GETS ON THE FINGERS UPON EVERY ATTEMPT TO OPEN THE HATCH. NUMEROUS OTHER PEOPLE HAVE NOTED THIS PROBLEM. I HAVE ONLY HAND-WASHED THE CAR WITH PLAIN WATER, AND I LIVE IN A VERY MILD CLIMATE (SAN DIEGO). OBVIOUSLY THIS IS A DEFECTIVE BATCH OF RUBBER USED BY TOYOTA. THIS PRESENTS A SAFETY PROBLEM IN THAT IT COULD BE IMPOSSIBLE TO ACCESS THE SPARE TIRE AND TOOLS TO CHANGE A FLAT TIRE IN AN EMERGENCY. THERE IS AN INTERNAL MECHANICAL RELEASE SWITCH, BUT THIS COULD BE IMPOSSIBLE TO ACCESS IF THERE ARE LARGE ITEMS STORED IN THE TRUNK. *TR
I BEGIN TO NOTICE BLACK MARKS ON MY FINGERS. IT TOOK ME AWHILE TO LEARN THAT THE LATCH COVER WAS DISINTEGRATING. I ASKED OUR LOCAL MECHANIC TO LOOK INTO GETTING IT REPLACED. HE REPORTED BACK THAT HE CALLED TWO TOYOTA DEALERSHIPS. ONE DEALER WANTED $500 FOR THE DEFECTIVE PART AND ANOTHER DEALER SAID THE PART WAS BEING CHANGE TO P…
Read full complaint
I BEGIN TO NOTICE BLACK MARKS ON MY FINGERS. IT TOOK ME AWHILE TO LEARN THAT THE LATCH COVER WAS DISINTEGRATING. I ASKED OUR LOCAL MECHANIC TO LOOK INTO GETTING IT REPLACED. HE REPORTED BACK THAT HE CALLED TWO TOYOTA DEALERSHIPS. ONE DEALER WANTED $500 FOR THE DEFECTIVE PART AND ANOTHER DEALER SAID THE PART WAS BEING CHANGE TO PLASTIC BECAUSE OF THIS PROBLEM AND WANTED $230 FOR THE PART. SINCE THIS SEEMS TO BE A DEFECT IN THE MATERIAL USED, I BELIEVE TOYOTA SHOULD RECALL THE CAR AND PAY FOR THE REPLACEMENT. CAN YOU ASSIST WITH MY REQUEST? [XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR
WHEN DRIVING AT NIGHT, THE DASHBOARD DISPLAYS SOME OF THE DASHBOARD ON THE FRONT WINDSHIELD, WHICH CAUSES YOU TO AVOID THAT AREA OF YOUR WINDSHIELD. THIS IS A DEFECT IN ALL 2006-2009 TOYOTA PRIUS CARS. WHAT HAPPENS IS THAT YOU START LOOKING AT THIS REFLECTION AND IT CREATES A SAFETY CONCERN. YOU ALSO DO NOT HAVE A CLEAR VIEW …
Read full complaint
WHEN DRIVING AT NIGHT, THE DASHBOARD DISPLAYS SOME OF THE DASHBOARD ON THE FRONT WINDSHIELD, WHICH CAUSES YOU TO AVOID THAT AREA OF YOUR WINDSHIELD. THIS IS A DEFECT IN ALL 2006-2009 TOYOTA PRIUS CARS. WHAT HAPPENS IS THAT YOU START LOOKING AT THIS REFLECTION AND IT CREATES A SAFETY CONCERN. YOU ALSO DO NOT HAVE A CLEAR VIEW THROUGH THE REFLECTION. IT IS EXTREMELY DISTRACTING. WHEN YOU ARE ON A COUNTRY RODE LATE AT NIGHT, WHERE THERE MAY NOT BE ANY STREET LIGHTS, IT IS EVEN WORSE. THIS PROBLEM WAS FIXED IN THE 2010 MODELS AND BEYOND WITH A LONGER EDGE ON THE DASHBOARD AT THE TOP. I HAVE TALKED TO TOYOTA ABOUT THIS, BUT HAVE GOTTEN NOWHERE. I FEEL THIS IS A BIG SAFETY CONCERN THAT MUST BE ADDRESSED AND I AM TURNING TO YOU FOR HELP. I COULD HAVE GOTTEN LAWYERS INVOLVED IN A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT, BUT I WANTED TO TRY AND RESOLVE THIS PROFESSIONALLY. I AM NOT LOOKING TO GET RICH OR MAKE MONEY OFF THIS PROBLEM. I JUST WANT MY CAR AND EVERYONE ELSE'S PRIUS FIXED. THIS ISSUE HAS ALWAYS BEEN AROUND. I HAVE NOTICED IT MORE LATELY WITH CLOUD COVER AND DRIVING ON BACK COUNTRY ROADS AT NIGHT. IT IS SCARY. *TR
I WAS DRIVING ON A HIGHWAY AND THE CAR ON THE RIGHT STARTED TO MOVE TO MY LANE WITHOUT TURNING ON TURN SIGNAL, HE PROBABLY DIDN'T NOTICE ME AS HE WAS MOVING ON ME, I STARTED TO BRAKE BUT BRAKE PEDAL STARTED TO WORK AT ONCE, IT STARTED TO WORK ONLY AFTER DELAY AND AFTER IT STARTED WORKING I LOST CONTROL OVER THE CAR, ABS SIGNAL T…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING ON A HIGHWAY AND THE CAR ON THE RIGHT STARTED TO MOVE TO MY LANE WITHOUT TURNING ON TURN SIGNAL, HE PROBABLY DIDN'T NOTICE ME AS HE WAS MOVING ON ME, I STARTED TO BRAKE BUT BRAKE PEDAL STARTED TO WORK AT ONCE, IT STARTED TO WORK ONLY AFTER DELAY AND AFTER IT STARTED WORKING I LOST CONTROL OVER THE CAR, ABS SIGNAL TURNED ON AND I STARTED TO MOVE TO THE LEFT. I TRIED TO PREVENT IT BUT CAR WAS TOTALLY OUT OF CONTROL AND THIS CAUSED THE ACCIDENT. THE SAME HAPPENED TO MY WIFE IN FEBRUARY WHEN SHE WAS DRIVING MY CAR ON HIGHWAY. SHE JUST COULDN'T STOP EVEN THOUGH THE DISTANCE TO THE NEXT CAR WAS LONG ENOUGH. BRAKE PEDAL STARTED TO WORK WITH THE DELAY AND SHE BUMPED INTO THE NEXT CAR. *TR
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WATER WAS LEAKING FROM THE CEILING AREA NEAR THE FRONT WINDSHIELD. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR INSPECTION BUT WAS NOT DIAGNOSED FRO THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 60,000. .. UPDATE…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WATER WAS LEAKING FROM THE CEILING AREA NEAR THE FRONT WINDSHIELD. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR INSPECTION BUT WAS NOT DIAGNOSED FRO THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 60,000. .. UPDATED 02-07-13 *BF THE CONSUMER REQUESTED TO DROP THE COMPLAINT. IT WAS ADVISED THAT THE WINDSHIELD WAS REPLACED PRIOR TO THE FAILURE AND WAS NOT INSTALLED CORRECTLY. UPDATED 02/13/2013 *JS
THE EXTERIOR HANDLE OF THE REAR HATCH ON OUR 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS, MELTED INTO A STICKY TARRY, RUBBERY, GOOEY SUBSTANCE. IT'S LIKE A VISCOUS BLACK GLOB LIKE ROOFING TAR. WHEN OPENING THE HATCH, IT IS SOFT AND GETS UNDER MY FINGERNAILS. I BELIEVE THIS MELTING PROCESS STARTED A COUPLE YEARS AGO, BUT IT'S BEEN WORSE THIS YEAR WITH TH…
Read full complaint
THE EXTERIOR HANDLE OF THE REAR HATCH ON OUR 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS, MELTED INTO A STICKY TARRY, RUBBERY, GOOEY SUBSTANCE. IT'S LIKE A VISCOUS BLACK GLOB LIKE ROOFING TAR. WHEN OPENING THE HATCH, IT IS SOFT AND GETS UNDER MY FINGERNAILS. I BELIEVE THIS MELTING PROCESS STARTED A COUPLE YEARS AGO, BUT IT'S BEEN WORSE THIS YEAR WITH THE TRIPLE-DIGIT TEMPS. MY DEALER, LOU FUSZ TOYOTA (IN MISSOURI) SAID THEY HAVE NOT HEARD OF THIS HAPPENING BEFORE, BUT WHEN I RESEARCH IT ON-LINE, I FOUND THAT THIS HAS HAPPENED TO SEVERAL CAR OWNERS. TOYOTA KNOWS ABOUT THIS, AND IS SELLING THE ENTIRE WIRING HARNESS FOR $250 PLUS REPAIR COSTS, AND HAS DONE NOTHING ABOUT RECALLING THIS. FROM A SAFETY PERSPECTIVE, THIS MEANS YOU CAN EXPERIENCE DIFFICULTY OPENING THE REAR HATCH (A LIFE SAFETY ACCESS POINT), AND WILL GET STICKY BLACK TAR ON YOU FROM THE MELTED DOWN RUBBER COVER OF THE EXTERIOR HATCH RELEASE HANDLE. TO ME, THIS IS BOTH A LIFE SAFETY ISSUE AND A QUALITY DEFECT THAT TOYOTA IS OPTING TO IGNORE, AND ONLY FIXING ON VEHICLES WITH EXTENDED WARRANTIES, SINCE THE FAILURE APPEARS TO OCCUR AT AROUND THE 4 YEAR MARK. I AM AWARE OF THE OUTSTANDING WORK DONE BY NHTSA ON OTHER SAFETY ISSUES, INCLUDING THE PROBLEM WITH RUSTY FRAMES ON 02 ISUZU AXIOMS, AND I FIND THIS PROBLEM TO BE SIMILAR IN NATURE, SO I AM ASKING FOR YOUR AGENCY TO TAKE A LOOK AT THESE INSTANCES AND ALSO TO INQUIRE FROM TOYOTA WHY THEY ARE NOT RECALLING THESE HANDLES THAT ARE MELTING IN THE SUN. I THINK A DOOR HANDLE OR HATCH HANDLE SHOULD BE MADE TO LAST MORE THAN 4 YEARS! *TR
AFTER ONLY ABOUT 4 YEARS USE, THE RUBBER COVER ON THE HATCH RELEASE HANDLE (THE EXTERIOR HANDLE OF THE REAR HATCH) OF OUR 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS, MELTED INTO A STICKY TARRY BLACK RUBBERY GOOEY MESS. I CAN BEST DESCRIBE IT AS BEING A VISCOUS BLACK GLOB LIKE ROOFING TAR. TO OPEN THE HATCH, YOU HAVE TO TOUCH THIS BLACK GOO EACH TIME, WH…
Read full complaint
AFTER ONLY ABOUT 4 YEARS USE, THE RUBBER COVER ON THE HATCH RELEASE HANDLE (THE EXTERIOR HANDLE OF THE REAR HATCH) OF OUR 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS, MELTED INTO A STICKY TARRY BLACK RUBBERY GOOEY MESS. I CAN BEST DESCRIBE IT AS BEING A VISCOUS BLACK GLOB LIKE ROOFING TAR. TO OPEN THE HATCH, YOU HAVE TO TOUCH THIS BLACK GOO EACH TIME, WHICH MAKES IT DIFFICULT TO OPERATE THE HATCH RELEASE. WE BELIEVE THIS MELTING PROCESS STARTED AT ABOUT THE 2 YR. MARK. I THOUGHT THAT THIS MIGHT BE A SINGULAR ISSUE, BUT HAVE FOUND THAT THIS HAS HAPPENED TO SEVERAL CAR OWNERS, PARTICULARLY IN FLORIDA. WE ALSO LIVE IN FLORIDA. TOYOTA KNOWS ABOUT THIS, AND IS SELLING THE ENTIRE WIRING HARNESS FOR $96 PLUS REPAIR COSTS(200.00), AND HAS DONE NOTHING ABOUT RECALLING THIS. FROM A SAFETY PERSPECTIVE, THIS MEANS YOU CAN EXPERIENCE EXTREME DIFFICULTY OPENING THE REAR HATCH (A LIFE SAFETY ACCESS POINT), AND WILL GET STICKY BLACK TAR ON YOU FROM THE MELTED DOWN RUBBER COVER OF THE EXTERIOR HATCH RELEASE HANDLE. TO ME, THIS IS BOTH A SERIOUS LIFE SAFETY ISSUE AND A SERIOUS QUALITY DEFECT THAT TOYOTA IS OPTING TO IGNORE AND ONLY FIXING ON VEHICLES WITH EXTENDED WARRANTIES, SINCE THE FAILURE APPEARS TO OCCUR AT AROUND THE 3 YEAR MARK (IE AFTER 3 YEARS OF EXPOSURE TO THE BRIGHT SUN IN FLORIDA FOR EXAMPLE). I AM AWARE OF THE OUTSTANDING WORK DONE BY NHTSA ON OTHER SAFETY ISSUES, INCLUDING THE PROBLEM WITH RUSTY FRAMES ON 02 ISUZU AXIOMS, AND I FIND THIS PROBLEM TO BE SIMILAR IN NATURE, SO I AM ASKING FOR YOUR AGENCY TO TAKE A LOOK AT THESE INSTANCES AND ALSO TO INQUIRE FROM TOYOTA WHY THEY ARE NOT RECALLING THESE HANDLES THAT ARE MELTING IN THE SUN!!! IT'S OUTRAGEOUS. I THINK A DOOR HANDLE OR HATCH HANDLE SHOULD BE MADE TO LAST MORE THAN 3 YEARS. PLEASE REVIEW THESE FORUM COMMENTS OF OTHER INCIDENTS: *TR
Official recalls
612V536000 · 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
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.