← 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

Vehicle Speed Control complaints

84 reports
Clear category filter
52,000 miles · Nov 7, 2011
Electrical SystemPower TrainVehicle Speed Control

COMBINATION METER FAILED, THERE WAS NO DASH DISPLAY, NO SPEED DISPLAY, AND VEHICLE WOULD NOT SHUT DOWN. FORTUNATELY WE WERE NOT OUT OF TOWN SO WE DROVE THE VEHICLE TO OUR REGULAR TOYOTA DEALER,OURISMAN FAIRFAX TOYOTA, FAIRFAX, VA, AND LEFT IT THERE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10434430

95,000 miles · Dec 20, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 5 MPH AND TRYING TO PARK HER VEHICLE IT SUDDENLY ACCELERATED FORWARD AND CRASHED INTO STEEL CABLES. THE VEHICLE THEN SHIFTED INTO REVERSE AND CRASHED INTO THE STEEL CABLES AGAIN. THE CONTACT WAS NOT INJURED FROM THE CRASH. THE VEHICLE WA…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 5 MPH AND TRYING TO PARK HER VEHICLE IT SUDDENLY ACCELERATED FORWARD AND CRASHED INTO STEEL CABLES. THE VEHICLE THEN SHIFTED INTO REVERSE AND CRASHED INTO THE STEEL CABLES AGAIN. THE CONTACT WAS NOT INJURED FROM THE CRASH. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED AWAY FROM THE SCENE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 99,000. THE VIN WAS UNAVAILABLE.

NHTSA ODI #10371794

182,000 miles · Nov 3, 2010
Electrical SystemVehicle Speed Control

2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. CONSUMER STATES UNINTENDED ACCELERATION *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED THE VEHICLE WAS ON CRUISE CONTROL, WHEN THE ENGINE SUDDENLY REVVED. HE NOTICED THE SPEED HAD INCREASED FROM 72 MPH TO 74 MPH. HE RELEASED THE CRUISE CONTROL AND THE ENGINE STOPPED REVVING. HE THEN SET THE CRUISE CONTROL AGAIN, AND IT HAPPENED A…

Read full complaint

2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. CONSUMER STATES UNINTENDED ACCELERATION *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED THE VEHICLE WAS ON CRUISE CONTROL, WHEN THE ENGINE SUDDENLY REVVED. HE NOTICED THE SPEED HAD INCREASED FROM 72 MPH TO 74 MPH. HE RELEASED THE CRUISE CONTROL AND THE ENGINE STOPPED REVVING. HE THEN SET THE CRUISE CONTROL AGAIN, AND IT HAPPENED AGAIN. THE CONSUMER ALSO STATED HE NOTICED THE LCD SCREEN HAD FROZE AND IT WAS GIVING FALSE INFORMATION. THE CONSUMER HAS SINCE SOLD THE VEHICLE. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10364642

45,000 miles · Sep 9, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control

AS A FOLLOW UP TO ODI 10354506 - TOYOTA PULLED THE INFORMATION OFF THE EVENT DATA RECORDER AND IT INDICATED THAT THE THROTTLE AND THE BRAKE WERE BOTH ENGAGED AT THE SAME TIME. THAT IS TRUE, BUT MY FOOT WAS ONLY ON THE BRAKE. I ONLY USE MY RIGHT FOOT TO ACCELERATE AND TO BRAKE. AS SOON AS THE CAR STARTED ACCELERATING, I MOVED …

Read full complaint

AS A FOLLOW UP TO ODI 10354506 - TOYOTA PULLED THE INFORMATION OFF THE EVENT DATA RECORDER AND IT INDICATED THAT THE THROTTLE AND THE BRAKE WERE BOTH ENGAGED AT THE SAME TIME. THAT IS TRUE, BUT MY FOOT WAS ONLY ON THE BRAKE. I ONLY USE MY RIGHT FOOT TO ACCELERATE AND TO BRAKE. AS SOON AS THE CAR STARTED ACCELERATING, I MOVED MY FOOT OVER TO SLAM ON THE BRAKES. IT MAKES SENSE THAT THE EVENT DATA RECORDER WOULD SHOW THE THROTTLE AND BRAKE ENGAGED AT THE SAME TIME, BUT MY FOOT WAS ONLY ON THE BRAKE. SOMETHING ELSE WAS ENGAGING THE THROTTLE, AND APPARENTLY TOYOTA HAS NO WAY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THAT COULD BE. THE DEALER, WHILE SYMPATHETIC, HAD NO FIX THAT HE COULD APPLY. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10354711

45,000 miles · Sep 8, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control

I WAS PULLING INTO A PARKING SPACE AT A VERY LOW RATE OF SPEED (LESS THAN 5 MPH) AND THE CAR SUDDENLY SHOT FORWARD. I STOOD ON THE BRAKES AND THE CAR RESPONDED AS EXPECTED - IT STOPPED. I TURNED OFF THE POWER. ABOUT 10 MINUTES LATER, I TURNED THE CAR ON AND IT DROVE NORMALLY. THERE WAS NO FLOOR MAT - I HAD REMOVED IT MONTHS …

Read full complaint

I WAS PULLING INTO A PARKING SPACE AT A VERY LOW RATE OF SPEED (LESS THAN 5 MPH) AND THE CAR SUDDENLY SHOT FORWARD. I STOOD ON THE BRAKES AND THE CAR RESPONDED AS EXPECTED - IT STOPPED. I TURNED OFF THE POWER. ABOUT 10 MINUTES LATER, I TURNED THE CAR ON AND IT DROVE NORMALLY. THERE WAS NO FLOOR MAT - I HAD REMOVED IT MONTHS AGO. MY FOOT WAS ON THE ACCELERATOR, EASING INTO THE PARKING SPACE AND I DIDN'T FEEL THE ACCELERATOR MOVE AT ALL. IT WAS LIKE THE CAR ACCELERATED WITHOUT ANY INPUT FROM THE ACCELERATOR AT ALL. I'VE TAKEN THE CAR TO THE DEALER, BUT I'M AFRAID TO DRIVE IT NOW, AND I'M AFRAID TO TAKE MY CHILDREN ANYWHERE IN IT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10354506

108,577 miles · Sep 8, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control

AFTER EXITING AN INTERSTATE, I WAS STOPPED AT A TRAFFIC LIGHT. I ACCELERATED WHEN THE LIGHT TURNED GREEN, TO APPROXIMATELY 40 MPH. AFTER ABOUT 200 FEET, AS I APPROACHED A MERGE POINT, I TOOK MY FOOT OFF THE GAS, BUT THE CAR KEPT ACCELERATING. I IMMEDIATELY STEPPED ON THE BRAKE, AND THE CAR SLOWED. I REMOVED MY FOOT FROM THE …

Read full complaint

AFTER EXITING AN INTERSTATE, I WAS STOPPED AT A TRAFFIC LIGHT. I ACCELERATED WHEN THE LIGHT TURNED GREEN, TO APPROXIMATELY 40 MPH. AFTER ABOUT 200 FEET, AS I APPROACHED A MERGE POINT, I TOOK MY FOOT OFF THE GAS, BUT THE CAR KEPT ACCELERATING. I IMMEDIATELY STEPPED ON THE BRAKE, AND THE CAR SLOWED. I REMOVED MY FOOT FROM THE BRAKE, AND FELT THE CAR CONTINUE TO ACCELERATE ON ITS OWN. I DIDN'T HAVE ANOTHER CAR IN FRONT OF ME, SO I STEPPED ON THE GAS PEDAL BRIEFLY, AND THEN ON THE BRAKE AGAIN, AND THEN IT SEEMED TO OPERATE NORMALLY AGAIN. REMEMBERING ABOUT THE FLOOR MAT RECALL, I IMMEDIATELY LOOKED DOWN TO CHECK TO SEE IF THE GAS PEDAL WAS CLEAR OF THE MAT. IT WAS. AFTER I HAD PARKED THE CAR, I NOTICED THAT THE MAT WAS STILL SECURED IN ITS PROPER PLACE. THERE WASN'T ANYTHING ELSE THAT COULD HAVE INTERFERED WITH THE PEDAL. LATER THAT SAME DAY, I WAS DRIVING MY 13YR OLD DAUGHTER HOME FROM SCHOOL. I WAS STOPPED AT A STOP SIGN. I MADE A LEFT TURN ONTO A BUSY STREET DURING RUSH HOUR. AFTER ACCELERATING THROUGH THE TURN, I TOOK MY FOOT OFF THE GAS BECAUSE THERE WERE CARS AHEAD OF ME STOPPED FOR ANOTHER LIGHT. THE CAR CONTINUED TO ACCELERATE. I STEPPED ON THE BRAKE, WHICH WAS STIFFER THAN USUAL, AND I COULD HEAR THE ENGINE CONTINUING TO REV IN THE BACKGROUND. THE CAR SLOWED. I HAD A LITTLE SPACE IN FRONT OF ME, SO I EASED UP OFF THE BRAKE, BUT THE CAR CONTINUED TO ACCELERATE ON ITS OWN. I PRESSED DOWN ON THE BRAKE AGAIN, ALL THE WHILE FEELING THE CONTINUED ACCELERATION, AND MOVED OFF TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD, WHERE I BRAKED UNTIL I CAME TO A STOP. THIS WAS A TWO LANE ROAD WITH NO SHOULDER, SO I JUST MOVED OVER AS FAR AS I COULD AND PUT MY HAZARDS ON. I WAS STILL PART WAY ON THE ROAD. I PUT THE CAR IN PARK, PUSHED THE ON/OFF IGNITION SWITCH, AND SHUT DOWN THE CAR. I SAT THERE FOR A FEW MINUTES, RE-STARTED THE CAR AND DROVE HOME WITHOUT FURTHER EVENT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10354389

28,000 miles · Jun 6, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control

I OWN A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHEN I APPLY THE BRAKE WHEN GOING OVER ROUGH TERRAIN OR POTHOLES, IT FEELS LIKE THE CAR SPEEDS UP MOMENTARILY BEFORE THE BRAKING KICKS IN. I HAVE TALKED TO MY DEALER ABOUT THIS, BUT HE THE MECHANIC SAYS IT IS NORMAL FOR HYBRIDS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10334776

Mileage unknown · May 3, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control

INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6) SINCE THE TOYOTA RECALL OF THEIR PRIUS CARS MY FAMILY AND I HAVE BEEN WORRIED ABOUT OUR SAFETY IN OUR PRIUS 2006. WE DID NOT WANT TO WAIT UNTIL SOMETHING HAPPENS. WE WOULD RATHER TAKE CARE OF THE PROBLEM BEFORE ANYTHING HAPPENS BUT WE C…

Read full complaint

INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6) SINCE THE TOYOTA RECALL OF THEIR PRIUS CARS MY FAMILY AND I HAVE BEEN WORRIED ABOUT OUR SAFETY IN OUR PRIUS 2006. WE DID NOT WANT TO WAIT UNTIL SOMETHING HAPPENS. WE WOULD RATHER TAKE CARE OF THE PROBLEM BEFORE ANYTHING HAPPENS BUT WE CANNOT DO THAT BECAUSE TOYOTA DEALERS ARE NOT DOING ANY REPAIRS TO MY 2006 PRIUS AND THEIR EMPLOYEES LIED TO ME AND MAYBE TO ALL OTHER CUSTOMERS. ON 03/29/2010 I TOOK MY 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS TO MIKE CALVERT TOYOTA LOCATED AT 2333 S. LOOP WEST HOUSTON TX 77054 FOR REGULAR SERVICE. THEY FINISHED SERVICING MY PRIUS ABOUT 12:24:20 PM. I ASKED THE CASHIER HOW WAS TOYOTA TAKEING CARE OF THE PRIUS RECALLS. SHE ANSWERED THAT SHE DID NOT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT AND IF I HAD ANY QUESTIONS TO ASK MY SERVICE MEN. MY SERVICE MEN, NOEL BUTLER WAS PRESENT AND HE SAID THAT THE RECALL WAS ONLY ON PRIUS 2010. MY SERVICE MEN KEPT ON TALKING TO THE CASHIER WHILE HE WAS EXITING THE DOOR AND SAYING "HE JUST WANT TO CAPITALIZE ON THE RECALL BECAUSE HIS CAR HAS OVER 82000 MILES AND IS A PRIUS 2006. THE CASHIER AND NOEL BUTLER LIED TO ME BECAUSE EVERYBODY KNOWS ABOUT TOYOTA RECALLS. THE RECALL HAS BEEN ON THE NEWS ALL OVER THE WORLD. ON MONDAY, MAY 03 2010 I RECEIVED A LETTER FROM TOYOTA STATING THAT "TOYOTA HAS DECIDED THAT A DEFECT WHICH RELATES TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY EXISTS IN 2004 THROUGH 2009 MODEL YEAR PRIUS VEHICLES." THEREFORE, NEITHER TOYOTA DEALERS NOR EMPLOYEES ARE BEING HONEST WITH THE CONSUMERS BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT HONORING ANY PROMISED REPAIRS. I WILL NEVER BUY A TOYOTA BECAUSE THEY ARE A BUNCH OF LIARS. [XXX] *TR

NHTSA ODI #10328673

130,000 miles · Apr 28, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE TRAVELING AT APPROXIMATELY 20 MPH, THE CONTACT DEPRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL BUT THE VEHICLE DID NOT SLOW DOWN. THE VEHICLE THEN CRASHED INTO THE REAR OF ANOTHER VEHICLE AND CONTINUED TO LUNGE INTO THE OTHER VEHICLE UNTIL THE ENGINE STALLED. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS AT…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE TRAVELING AT APPROXIMATELY 20 MPH, THE CONTACT DEPRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL BUT THE VEHICLE DID NOT SLOW DOWN. THE VEHICLE THEN CRASHED INTO THE REAR OF ANOTHER VEHICLE AND CONTINUED TO LUNGE INTO THE OTHER VEHICLE UNTIL THE ENGINE STALLED. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS AT THE DEALERSHIP BUT REPAIRS HAD NOT BEEN PERFORMED AT THE TIME OF THE COMPLAINT. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE APPROXIMATELY 130,000.

NHTSA ODI #10327941

Mileage unknown · Apr 2, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING AT APPROXIMATELY 70 MPH, THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WENT DOWN TO THE FLOORBOARD WHEN DEPRESSED. HE ENGAGED THE BRAKE PEDAL, TURNED THE VEHICLE OFF AND THEN RESTARTED IT WHICH SEEMED TO CORRECT THE PROBLEM. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THIS FAILURE WAS THE SECON…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING AT APPROXIMATELY 70 MPH, THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WENT DOWN TO THE FLOORBOARD WHEN DEPRESSED. HE ENGAGED THE BRAKE PEDAL, TURNED THE VEHICLE OFF AND THEN RESTARTED IT WHICH SEEMED TO CORRECT THE PROBLEM. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THIS FAILURE WAS THE SECOND OCCURRENCE OF THE PROBLEM. HE CALLED THE MANUFACTURER AND WAS TOLD THAT THEY WOULD GET BACK WITH HIM WHEN THEY WERE READY TO REPAIR THE PROBLEM. THE VIN WAS UNAVAILABLE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS UNKNOWN. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 104,000.

NHTSA ODI #10323527

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.