NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Vehicle Speed Control complaints
84 reportsClear category filter99 miles · Feb 4, 2010
Service Brakes, HydraulicVehicle Speed Control
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING AT SLOW SPEEDS INCLUDING 10 MPH OVER POTHOLES AND MAKING A LEFT OR RIGHT TURN, THE BRAKES LOST TRACTION. THE DEALER WAS UNABLE TO DIAGNOSE THE FAILURE. THE DEALER ALSO STATED THAT THE FAILURE WAS NOT RELATED TO THE FLOOR MATS. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 99 AND THE CURRENT MILEA…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING AT SLOW SPEEDS INCLUDING 10 MPH OVER POTHOLES AND MAKING A LEFT OR RIGHT TURN, THE BRAKES LOST TRACTION. THE DEALER WAS UNABLE TO DIAGNOSE THE FAILURE. THE DEALER ALSO STATED THAT THE FAILURE WAS NOT RELATED TO THE FLOOR MATS. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 99 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 50,000. UPDATED 04/01/10 *BF THE CONSUMER STATED IT FELT AS THOUGH THE VEHICLE WAS ACCELERATING WHEN MAKING A TURN AT A SLOW SPEED OR DRIVING OVER ROUGH PAVEMENT. UPDATED 06/28/10*JB
NHTSA ODI #10305324
57,500 miles · Feb 3, 2010
Engine And Engine CoolingVehicle Speed Control
STARTING UP MY TOYOTA PRIUS COMING OUT OF A CAR WASH THE ENGINE STUCK WITH HIGH REVS. I CONFIRMED IT WAS NOT THE CAR MAT BECAUSE I HAD BEEN IN THE CAR WASH AND THAT WAS MY THOUGHT. COULD NOT GET THE ENGINE TO STOP OVER REVVING (WAS CONSISTENTLY HIGH). NEVER WENT INTO HIGH SPEED. WAS ABLE TO CONTROL IT BY PUTTING IT IN LOW GE…
Read full complaint
STARTING UP MY TOYOTA PRIUS COMING OUT OF A CAR WASH THE ENGINE STUCK WITH HIGH REVS. I CONFIRMED IT WAS NOT THE CAR MAT BECAUSE I HAD BEEN IN THE CAR WASH AND THAT WAS MY THOUGHT. COULD NOT GET THE ENGINE TO STOP OVER REVVING (WAS CONSISTENTLY HIGH). NEVER WENT INTO HIGH SPEED. WAS ABLE TO CONTROL IT BY PUTTING IT IN LOW GEAR AND NEUTRAL AT THE INTERSECTIONS. IN LESS THAN 1 MILE I TURNED OFF THE CAR AND DID NOT HAVE ANY FOLLOW-ON PROBLEMS. NOT THE CAR MATS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10304720
13,153 miles · Feb 3, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING 40 MPH THE VEHICLE HAD SUDDENLY BEGAN TO ACCELERATE ON ITS OWN. THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO APPLY ENOUGH BRAKING PRESSURE TO SLOW THE VEHICLE, WHICH ALLOWED THE CONTACT TO PARK THE VEHICLE AND SHUT IT OFF. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALERSHIP WHERE THE CONTA…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING 40 MPH THE VEHICLE HAD SUDDENLY BEGAN TO ACCELERATE ON ITS OWN. THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO APPLY ENOUGH BRAKING PRESSURE TO SLOW THE VEHICLE, WHICH ALLOWED THE CONTACT TO PARK THE VEHICLE AND SHUT IT OFF. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALERSHIP WHERE THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED TO REMOVE THE DRIVER SIDE FLOOR MAT. THERE WERE NO PRIOR WARNINGS AND THE CURRENT MILEAGES IS 23000 AND THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 13153. UPDATED 4/7/2010 *CN UPDATED 05/06/10.*JB
NHTSA ODI #10304718
41,404 miles · Feb 3, 2010
Power TrainService Brakes, HydraulicVehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 30 MPH ON NORMAL ROAD CONDITIONS. THERE WAS PRESSURE APPLIED TO THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL, FOLLOWED BY AN UNINTENDED INCREASE IN ACCELERATION. THE DRIVER APPLIED PRESSURE TO THE BRAKE PEDAL AND THE VEHICLE FAILED TO SLOW DOWN. THE GEAR SHIFT FAILED T…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 30 MPH ON NORMAL ROAD CONDITIONS. THERE WAS PRESSURE APPLIED TO THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL, FOLLOWED BY AN UNINTENDED INCREASE IN ACCELERATION. THE DRIVER APPLIED PRESSURE TO THE BRAKE PEDAL AND THE VEHICLE FAILED TO SLOW DOWN. THE GEAR SHIFT FAILED TO OPERATE IN THE "NEUTRAL" POSITION. IN ADDITION, THE ENTIRE GEAR INDICATORS ILLUMINATED AT THE SAME TIME. THE VEHICLE WAS DRIVEN INTO A BARRIER OF DIRT AS A RESULT OF THE VEHICLE COMING TO A COMPLETE STOP. THE FAILURES OCCURRED ON FOUR SEPARATE OCCASIONS. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER. THE TECHNICIAN WAS UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE HAS NOT BEEN REPAIRED FOR THE MALFUNCTIONS. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 41,404.
NHTSA ODI #10304704
35,000 miles · Feb 3, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
I HAVE A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. SEVERAL TIMES--POSSIBLY AS MANY AS 20--OVER THE COURSE OF OWNING THE CAR IN THE LAST FOUR YEARS, I HAVE HAD THE FOLLOWING EXPERIENCE. WHEN APPLYING THE BRAKE AFTER LETTING MY FOOT OFF THE ACCELERATOR, THE CAR WILL HAVE A SUDDEN SURGE FORWARD--EITHER AS IF THE BREAK ISN'T WORKING OR THE ACCELERATION WA…
Read full complaint
I HAVE A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. SEVERAL TIMES--POSSIBLY AS MANY AS 20--OVER THE COURSE OF OWNING THE CAR IN THE LAST FOUR YEARS, I HAVE HAD THE FOLLOWING EXPERIENCE. WHEN APPLYING THE BRAKE AFTER LETTING MY FOOT OFF THE ACCELERATOR, THE CAR WILL HAVE A SUDDEN SURGE FORWARD--EITHER AS IF THE BREAK ISN'T WORKING OR THE ACCELERATION WAS ACTUALLY INCREASING RATHER THAN STAYING THE SAME OR DECREASING. EACH TIME IT HAS HAPPENED, THE CAR MONITOR LIGHT FOR "SLIPPERY ROAD" FLASHES ON THE DASHBOARD. I HAVE TWICE ASKED A TOYOTA DEALER ABOUT THIS. THEY SAY IT IS A COMMON FEATURE OF THE PRIUS WHEN IT SWITCHES BETWEEN THE GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPONENTS OF THE ENGINE. THIS DOESN'T SEEM LIKE A SATISFACTORY EXPLANATION. IT COULD EASILY RESULT IN AN ACCIDENT IF SOMEONE HAPPENS TO BE IN FRONT OF ME THE NEXT TIME IT OCCURS. THIS HAS OCCURRED EVEN AFTER I REMOVED THE DRIVER FLOOR MAT, AS RECOMMENDED BY TOYOTA. I DO NOT BELIEVE IT HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH EITHER THE GAS PEDAL OR THE FLOOR MAT. I THINK IT'S ELECTRICAL. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10304667
23,000 miles · Feb 3, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
BACK IN 2009, I EXPERIENCED RUNAWAY ACCELERATION IN MY 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CRUISE CONTROL HAD BEEN ENGAGED FOR BETWEEN 5 AND 15 MINUTES. ALL OF A SUDDEN, THE VEHICLE STARTED TO RACE. I WAS TRAVELING IN THE 70'S (MPH), AND IT SHOT UP TO NEARLY 100 BEFORE I GOT IT UNDER CONTROL. THE DEALER CLAIMED HE HAD NO SUCH OTHER COMPL…
Read full complaint
BACK IN 2009, I EXPERIENCED RUNAWAY ACCELERATION IN MY 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CRUISE CONTROL HAD BEEN ENGAGED FOR BETWEEN 5 AND 15 MINUTES. ALL OF A SUDDEN, THE VEHICLE STARTED TO RACE. I WAS TRAVELING IN THE 70'S (MPH), AND IT SHOT UP TO NEARLY 100 BEFORE I GOT IT UNDER CONTROL. THE DEALER CLAIMED HE HAD NO SUCH OTHER COMPLAINTS AND COULD NOT REPLICATE MY PROBLEM. I BROUGHT IT BACK AGAIN A FEW MONTHS. LATER BECAUSE THE CRUISE CONTROL INTERMITTENTLY FAILED TO SET. I BROUGHT IT BACK A THIRD TIME, AGAIN, A FEW MOS. LATER. THIS TIME, THEY HAD A FIX, WHICH WAS A NEW CRUISE CONTROL MODULE. THE FIRST 2 TRIPS WERE UNDER WARRANTY. THEY WANTED TO CHARGE ME THE 3RD TIME BECAUSE IT WAS THEN BEYOND THE 3 YEARS OF WARRANTY. I FOUGHT THIS BECAUSE THE CONDITION WAS OBVIOUSLY PRE-EXISTING. YESTERDAY, STEVE WOZNIAK RECEIVED TELEVISION AND PRESS ATTENTION WHEN HE REPORTED THE SAME PROBLEM, A PROBLEM THAT TOYOTA TOLD ME THEY HAD NEVER EXPERIENCED BEFORE. AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED, THIS COMPANY IS SCAMMING THE PUBLIC. THEY ARE PLAYING WITH PEOPLE'S LIVES. IT'S GOT TO STOP. IT'S MORE THAN JUST BRAKE PEDALS AND CARPET; IT'S APPARENTLY A WAY OF LIFE FOR THIS COMPANY. (I NO LONGER HAVE THE VEHICLE. DATES AND MILEAGE ARE APPROX.) *TR
NHTSA ODI #10304612
50,000 miles · Feb 3, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
I HAVE A 2006 PRIUS. TWICE IN 60,000 MILES, WHEN IN CRUISE CONTROL, DRIVING AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS, AND HAVING TO BRAKE SUDDENLY, THE CRUISE CONTROL DISENGAGED, AS IT SHOULD,. I BRAKE, THE CAR SLOWS, AS IT SHOULD. THEN THE CAR STARTS TO SURGE UP TO THE ORIGINAL CRUISE CONTROL SET SPEED. I AM ABLE TO BRAKE AND STOP IT, BUT AT HIGHWAY…
Read full complaint
I HAVE A 2006 PRIUS. TWICE IN 60,000 MILES, WHEN IN CRUISE CONTROL, DRIVING AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS, AND HAVING TO BRAKE SUDDENLY, THE CRUISE CONTROL DISENGAGED, AS IT SHOULD,. I BRAKE, THE CAR SLOWS, AS IT SHOULD. THEN THE CAR STARTS TO SURGE UP TO THE ORIGINAL CRUISE CONTROL SET SPEED. I AM ABLE TO BRAKE AND STOP IT, BUT AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS, AND APPROACHING A NEAR EMERGENCY STOP SITUATION- THIS HAS SCARED ME. IT HAS ONLY HAPPENED TWICE...BUT MEMORABLE IN THE SURPRISE IT EVEN HAPPENED. I REPORTED IT TO A LOCAL TOYOTA DEALER, WHO COULDN'T RECREATE THE PROBLEM, THEN ALSO CALLED THE TOYOTA CORPORATION CUSTOMER SERVICE, WHICH SAID THEY HAD NO REPORTS OF THAT HAPPENING. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10304258
10,000 miles · Feb 1, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. HE STATED THAT HE WAS DRIVING 45 MPH WHEN HE HIT THE BRAKE PEDAL AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THE VEHICLE SURGED FORWARD WITHOUT A WARNING WHILE STILL HAVING HIS FOOT ON THE BRAKE PEDAL. THE FAILURE OCCURRED APPROXIMATELY 15 TIMES OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS. THE DEALER HAS NOT BEEN CONTACTED …
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. HE STATED THAT HE WAS DRIVING 45 MPH WHEN HE HIT THE BRAKE PEDAL AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THE VEHICLE SURGED FORWARD WITHOUT A WARNING WHILE STILL HAVING HIS FOOT ON THE BRAKE PEDAL. THE FAILURE OCCURRED APPROXIMATELY 15 TIMES OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS. THE DEALER HAS NOT BEEN CONTACTED YET SINCE THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM. NO REPAIRS WERE MADE TO THE VEHICLE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 10000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 60000. UPDATED 03/09/10. *LJ UPDATED 05/13/10.*JB
NHTSA ODI #10303712
44,000 miles · Jan 30, 2010
Power TrainVehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
WE OWN A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CAR WAS PURCHASED NEW,HAS BEEN DEALER MAINTAINED AND IS OUR PRIMARY VEHICLE. ON JANUARY 26, 2010 AT 2:05 PM MY WIFE EXPERIENCE UNCONTROLLABLE ACCELERATION AND DESPITE ATTEMPTING THE STRATEGIES RECOMMENDED BY TOYOTA WAS INVOLVED IN A CRASH CAUSING HER AND OTHERS INJURY. THE WEATHER WAS CLEAR, THE…
Read full complaint
WE OWN A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CAR WAS PURCHASED NEW,HAS BEEN DEALER MAINTAINED AND IS OUR PRIMARY VEHICLE. ON JANUARY 26, 2010 AT 2:05 PM MY WIFE EXPERIENCE UNCONTROLLABLE ACCELERATION AND DESPITE ATTEMPTING THE STRATEGIES RECOMMENDED BY TOYOTA WAS INVOLVED IN A CRASH CAUSING HER AND OTHERS INJURY. THE WEATHER WAS CLEAR, THE ROAD WAS DRY AND STRAIGHT AND MY WIFE WAS APPROACHING AN INTERSECTION WITH PLENTY OF UNOBSTUCTED VISIBILITY. WE HAD FOLLOWED THE INITIAL RECALL INSTRUCTIONS AND HAD BEEN IN CONTACT WITH THE LOCAL DEALER ABOUT ANY FOLLOW-UP INSTRUCTIONS PERTAINING TO OUR VEHICLE. AFTER THE ACCIDENT I CONTACT, IN PERSON, THE SERVICE MANAGER AT PERFORMANCE TOYOTA IN LINCOLN, NE. HE STATED OUR VEHICLE WAS NOT PART OF THE MOST RECENT RECALL INVOLVING FAULTY GAS PEDALS. I ADVISED HIM I UNDERSTOOD THAT HOWEVER MY WIFE EXPERIENCED UNCONTROLLED ACCELERATION AND DESPITE ATTEMPTING TO EMPLOY THE RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES WAS INVOLVED IN A CRASH RESULTING TO INJURIES TO HER AND OTHERS. I ASKED THE SERVICE MANAGER HOW TO PROCEED AND HE ADVISED ME TO CALL THE "TOYOTA CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE LINE" AND SPEAK TO THEM. WHEN I STATED I HAD TRIED MANY TIMES AND WAS UNABLE TO REACH A PERSON HE INSISTED THAT WAS THE APPROPRIATE MANNER TO DEAL WITH THE SITUATION. I LEFT THE DEALERSHIP FEELING EXTREMELY FRUSTRATED DUE TO THE FACT THE RECORDED MESSAGE ON THE "TOYOTA CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE LINE" ADVISED IF YOU HAD EXPERIENCED AND ACCELERATOR/ACCELERATION PROBLEM CONTACT YOUR DEALER IMMEDIATELY. WE ARE AWARE THAT MANY TOYOTA OWNERS HAVE EXPERIENCE THIS ISSUE WITH THEIR VEHICLES AND IN MORE MODELS AND YEARS THAN ARE INVOLVED IN THE LATEST RECALL. IT IS NOT POSSIBLE FOR AN INDIVIDUAL MIDDLE CLASS CITIZEN TO CHALLENGE A MAJOR AUTOMAKER TO FIRST ADMIT AND THEN CORRECT A DEFECT IN AN AUTOMOBILE THEY PRODUCED AND SOLD . WE REQUEST YOU INVESTIGATE THIS INCIDENT IN ADDITION TO THE MANY MORE THAT HAVE BEEN REPORTED. WE WILL BE AVAILABLE AND COOPERATIVE IN ANY FACT FINDING YOU MAY WISH TO DO. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10303303
43,000 miles · Nov 27, 2009
Vehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. AT LOW SPEED BRAKE APPLICATION, THE VEHICLE HAD SUDDENLY SURGED FORWARD WITHOUT WARNING. CONSEQUENTLY SHE STRUCK A DITCH AT 70 MPH. SHE SUFFERED A BROKEN HAND AND A CONCUSSION. THE VEHICLE HAS NOT BEEN DIAGNOSED BY THE DEALERSHIP. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 43000.
NHTSA ODI #10293702
Official recalls
6Nov 14, 2012
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Hybrid Propulsion System: Inverter
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.
Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Engine And Engine Cooling
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.
Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Nov 14, 2012
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Steering:gear Box:shaft Sector
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.
Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Steering
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.
Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Feb 3, 2010
SOUTHEAST TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2005-2011 PASSENGER VEHICLES FOR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 110, "TIRE SELECTION AND RIMS." THESE VEHICLES WERE SOLD WITHOUT THE REQUISITE LOAD CARRYING CAPACITY MODIFICATION LABELS.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A DRIVER MAY OVERLOAD A VEHICLE WHICH MAY INCREASE THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL MAIL TO CONSUMERS THE CORRECTED LABEL OR THE CUSTOMER WILL HAVE THE OPTION FOR DEALERS TO INSTALL THE LABEL FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON MAY 27, 2010. OWNERS MAY CONTACT SOUTHEAST TOYOTA AT 1-800-301-6859.
Oct 5, 2009
TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2004-2010 PASSENGER VEHICLES. THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL CAN GET STUCK IN THE WIDE OPEN POSITION DUE TO ITS BEING TRAPPED BY AN UNSECURED OR INCOMPATIBLE DRIVER'S FLOOR MAT.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A STUCK OPEN ACCELERATOR PEDAL MAY RESULT IN VERY HIGH VEHICLE SPEEDS AND MAKE IT DIFFICULT TO STOP THE VEHICLE, WHICH COULD CAUSE A CRASH, SERIOUS INJURY OR DEATH.
Remedy: TOYOTA FILED AN AMENDED DEFECT REPORT ON NOVEMBER 25, 2009, STATING THAT DEALERS WILL MODIFY THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL AND, ON CERTAIN VEHICLES, ALTER THE SHAPE OF THE FLOOR SURFACE UNDER THE PEDAL. THESE CHANGES ADDRESS THE RISK OF PEDAL ENTRAPMENT DUE TO INTERFERENCE WITH THE FLOOR MAT. REDESIGNED ACCELERATOR PEDALS WILL BECOME AVAILABLE BEGINNING IN APRIL 2010 AND DEALERS WILL REPLACE ANY MODIFIED PEDAL WITH THE NEW PEDAL IF DESIRED. ALSO, DEALERS WILL REPLACE ANY GENUINE TOYOTA OR LEXUS ALL-WEATHER FLOOR MATS WITH REDESIGNED ALL-WEATHER MATS, OR REPURCHASE THE PREVIOUS MATS FROM OWNERS WHO DO NOT WANT THE NEW ONES. ADDITIONALLY, SOFTWARE MODIFICATIONS WILL BE INSTALLED ON CAMRY, AVALON AND LEXUS ES 350, IS 350 AND IS 250 MODELS THAT WILL ENSURE THAT THE BRAKE OVERRIDES THE ACCELERATOR IN THE EVENT BOTH BRAKE AND ACCELERATOR PEDALS ARE APPLIED. TOYOTA WILL BEGIN MAILING LETTERS TO OWNERS ON DECEMBER 31, 2009. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331, LEXUS AT 1-800-255-3987.
May 31, 2006
THE INTERMEDIATE SHAFT AND SLIDING YOKE IN THE ELECTRIC POWER STEERING SYSTEM CAN CRACK WHEN LARGE FORCES ARE APPLIED AND THE CONNECTION MAY SEPARATE OR THE SLEEVE MAY FRACTURE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS COULD RESULT IN A LOSS OF STEERING CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE.
Remedy: TOYOTA WILL REPLACE THE STEERING INTERMEDIATE SHAFT AND INSPECT THE SLIDING YOKE AND REPLACE IT IF NECESSARY. THE RECALL BEGAN ON JUNE 9, 2006. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331.
Apr 3, 2006
ON CERTAIN VEHICLES, DUE TO IMPROPER ASSEMBLY OF THE AIR BAG INFLATOR, WHICH IS USED IN THE SIDE AIR BAG, THE CURTAIN SHIELD AIR BAG, AND THE KNEE AIR BAG ASSEMBLY, SOME INFLATORS WERE PRODUCED WITH AN INSUFFICIENT AMOUNT OF THE HEATING AGENTS NECESSARY FOR PROPER AIR BAG DEPLOYMENT. IN THIS CONDITION, THE EXPANSION FORCE OF THE GAS MAY BE INSUFFICIENT TO PROPERLY INFLATE THE AIR BAG WHEN THE SRS SYSTEM IS ACTIVATED DURING A CRASH.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS MAY INCREASE THE RISK OF INJURY TO THE OCCUPANT IN THE INVOLVED SEATING POSITION IN THE EVENT OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE SPECIFIC SRS AIR BAG. THE RECALL BEGAN ON APRIL 6, 2006. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-888-270-9371, SCION AT 1-866-548-1851, OR LEXUS AT 1-800-255-3987.
Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗
NHTSA investigations
3DP22005 · Pedestrian Alert Sounds
Opened Jan 27, 2023 · Closed Aug 7, 2023
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Electrical System:propulsion System
NHTSA received a petition on or about July 18, 2022, requesting that Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 141 be applied to all electric and hybrid vehicles operating in the United States. The petition can be reviewed at NHTSA.gov under ODI Number 11486072. FMVSS 141 establishes performance requirements for pedestrian alert sounds for motor vehicles. The standard applies to hybrid and electric vehicles that have a gross vehicle weight rating of 4,536 KG or less or are defined as low-speed vehicles. The standard became fully applicable to all such vehicles manufactured on or after March 1, 2021.On January 27, 2023, NHTSA opened Defect Petition (DP) 22-005 to evaluate the subject matter described in the petition. On June 24, 2023 and as supplemented on June 25, 2023, the petitioner notified NHTSA he was withdrawing his petition. The petitioner indicated that, based on his review of data, there is no justification for asserting potential benefits that could be derived from actions sought by my petition. Based on the petitioner's withdrawal, DP22-005 is closed. Closure of this DP does not represent a determination by NHTSA regarding the subject matter of the petition.
DP13001 · Intermediate Steering Shaft Separation
Opened Feb 21, 2013 · Closed Apr 8, 2020
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Steering; Steering:column; Steering:linkages
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606
Additional source detail variants (3)
Steering:column
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606
Steering:linkages
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606
Steering
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606
PE09019 · Headlight Failure
Opened Apr 17, 2009 · Closed Aug 27, 2009
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Exterior Lighting; Exterior Lighting:headlights
ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION AFTER RECEIVING REPORTS THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS WOULD GO OUT, OR EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH HIGH INTENSITY DISCHARGE (HID) HEADLAMPS THAT OPERATE ON INDEPENDENT LAMPS AND ECU'S (ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNITS) FOR EACH HEADLIGHT, MEANING THAT EACH HEADLIGHT RUNS INDEPENDENTLY OF THE OTHER, AND A FAILURE IN ONE LAMP OR ECU DOES NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN A FAILURE OF THE OTHER.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, A RANDOM SAMPLE OF FORTY CONSUMERS WAS CONTACTED BY ODI IN A TELEPHONE SURVEY TO VERIFY THEIR EXPERIENCES.THE CONSUMERS STATED IN COMPLAINTS TO TOYOTA THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS FAILED AT THE SAME TIME.ODI DISCOVERED THROUGH TALKING WITH THESE COMPLAINANTS THAT IN FACT ONE HEADLIGHT WOULD BEGIN TO FLICKER AND THEN CUT OFF.THE OTHER HEADLIGHT WOULD STILL BE OPERATIONAL.IN A FEW CASES WHERE NO ACTION WAS TAKEN, SOME COMPLAINANTS STATED THAT AFTER A FEW MONTHS BOTH HEADLAMPS WOULD BEGIN TO FAIL RESULTING IN NO HEADLIGHTS; HOWEVER NONE REPORTED THAT BOTH LAMPS FAILED SIMULTANEOUSLY.COMPLAINANTS ALSO STATED THAT THEY COULD TOGGLE THE HEADLAMP SWITCH ON AND OFF TO TEMPORARILY RESTORE LIGHTING WHEN THIS CONDITION OCCURRED, EVEN IN CASES WERE BOTH HEADLAMPS WERE EXTINGUISHED.THE RESULTS OF THIS SURVEY ARE LARGELY CONSISTENT WITH ODI'S ASSESSMENT OF THE REPORTS AND WARRANTY DATA.TOYOTA SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER THAT, GENERALLY SPEAKING, ONLY ONE LAMP FAILED AT A TIME, AND THAT TOGGLING THE SWITCH RESTORED THE LAMP.TOYOTA REQUESTED A MEETING WITH ODI AND ON AUGUST 6, 2009, PRESENTED THEIR ASSESSMENT OF HEADLAMP FAILURE.TOYOTA CONFIRMED THAT A HEADLAMP COULD EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING DUE TO A BULB FAILURE, AND THAT IT COULD BE TEMPORARILY RESTORED BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH ON AND OFF, AND THAT SIMULTANEOUS FAILURE OF BOTH HEADLAMPS WAS RARE AND UNLIKELY.TOYOTA ALSO BRIEFLY DISCUSSED THEIR INTENTION TO CONDUCT A CUSTOMER SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO ADDRESS CONSUMER DISSATISFACTION WITH HID BULB FAILURES.SINCE THERE IS STILL ONE HEADLIGHT OPERATING WHEN THE OTHER ONE CUTS OFF, THERE IS STILL LIGHTING AVAILABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR FACILITY.THUS, A SAFETY DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Exterior Lighting:headlights
ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION AFTER RECEIVING REPORTS THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS WOULD GO OUT, OR EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH HIGH INTENSITY DISCHARGE (HID) HEADLAMPS THAT OPERATE ON INDEPENDENT LAMPS AND ECU'S (ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNITS) FOR EACH HEADLIGHT, MEANING THAT EACH HEADLIGHT RUNS INDEPENDENTLY OF THE OTHER, AND A FAILURE IN ONE LAMP OR ECU DOES NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN A FAILURE OF THE OTHER.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, A RANDOM SAMPLE OF FORTY CONSUMERS WAS CONTACTED BY ODI IN A TELEPHONE SURVEY TO VERIFY THEIR EXPERIENCES.THE CONSUMERS STATED IN COMPLAINTS TO TOYOTA THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS FAILED AT THE SAME TIME.ODI DISCOVERED THROUGH TALKING WITH THESE COMPLAINANTS THAT IN FACT ONE HEADLIGHT WOULD BEGIN TO FLICKER AND THEN CUT OFF.THE OTHER HEADLIGHT WOULD STILL BE OPERATIONAL.IN A FEW CASES WHERE NO ACTION WAS TAKEN, SOME COMPLAINANTS STATED THAT AFTER A FEW MONTHS BOTH HEADLAMPS WOULD BEGIN TO FAIL RESULTING IN NO HEADLIGHTS; HOWEVER NONE REPORTED THAT BOTH LAMPS FAILED SIMULTANEOUSLY.COMPLAINANTS ALSO STATED THAT THEY COULD TOGGLE THE HEADLAMP SWITCH ON AND OFF TO TEMPORARILY RESTORE LIGHTING WHEN THIS CONDITION OCCURRED, EVEN IN CASES WERE BOTH HEADLAMPS WERE EXTINGUISHED.THE RESULTS OF THIS SURVEY ARE LARGELY CONSISTENT WITH ODI'S ASSESSMENT OF THE REPORTS AND WARRANTY DATA.TOYOTA SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER THAT, GENERALLY SPEAKING, ONLY ONE LAMP FAILED AT A TIME, AND THAT TOGGLING THE SWITCH RESTORED THE LAMP.TOYOTA REQUESTED A MEETING WITH ODI AND ON AUGUST 6, 2009, PRESENTED THEIR ASSESSMENT OF HEADLAMP FAILURE.TOYOTA CONFIRMED THAT A HEADLAMP COULD EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING DUE TO A BULB FAILURE, AND THAT IT COULD BE TEMPORARILY RESTORED BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH ON AND OFF, AND THAT SIMULTANEOUS FAILURE OF BOTH HEADLAMPS WAS RARE AND UNLIKELY.TOYOTA ALSO BRIEFLY DISCUSSED THEIR INTENTION TO CONDUCT A CUSTOMER SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO ADDRESS CONSUMER DISSATISFACTION WITH HID BULB FAILURES.SINCE THERE IS STILL ONE HEADLIGHT OPERATING WHEN THE OTHER ONE CUTS OFF, THERE IS STILL LIGHTING AVAILABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR FACILITY.THUS, A SAFETY DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Exterior Lighting
ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION AFTER RECEIVING REPORTS THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS WOULD GO OUT, OR EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH HIGH INTENSITY DISCHARGE (HID) HEADLAMPS THAT OPERATE ON INDEPENDENT LAMPS AND ECU'S (ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNITS) FOR EACH HEADLIGHT, MEANING THAT EACH HEADLIGHT RUNS INDEPENDENTLY OF THE OTHER, AND A FAILURE IN ONE LAMP OR ECU DOES NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN A FAILURE OF THE OTHER.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, A RANDOM SAMPLE OF FORTY CONSUMERS WAS CONTACTED BY ODI IN A TELEPHONE SURVEY TO VERIFY THEIR EXPERIENCES.THE CONSUMERS STATED IN COMPLAINTS TO TOYOTA THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS FAILED AT THE SAME TIME.ODI DISCOVERED THROUGH TALKING WITH THESE COMPLAINANTS THAT IN FACT ONE HEADLIGHT WOULD BEGIN TO FLICKER AND THEN CUT OFF.THE OTHER HEADLIGHT WOULD STILL BE OPERATIONAL.IN A FEW CASES WHERE NO ACTION WAS TAKEN, SOME COMPLAINANTS STATED THAT AFTER A FEW MONTHS BOTH HEADLAMPS WOULD BEGIN TO FAIL RESULTING IN NO HEADLIGHTS; HOWEVER NONE REPORTED THAT BOTH LAMPS FAILED SIMULTANEOUSLY.COMPLAINANTS ALSO STATED THAT THEY COULD TOGGLE THE HEADLAMP SWITCH ON AND OFF TO TEMPORARILY RESTORE LIGHTING WHEN THIS CONDITION OCCURRED, EVEN IN CASES WERE BOTH HEADLAMPS WERE EXTINGUISHED.THE RESULTS OF THIS SURVEY ARE LARGELY CONSISTENT WITH ODI'S ASSESSMENT OF THE REPORTS AND WARRANTY DATA.TOYOTA SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER THAT, GENERALLY SPEAKING, ONLY ONE LAMP FAILED AT A TIME, AND THAT TOGGLING THE SWITCH RESTORED THE LAMP.TOYOTA REQUESTED A MEETING WITH ODI AND ON AUGUST 6, 2009, PRESENTED THEIR ASSESSMENT OF HEADLAMP FAILURE.TOYOTA CONFIRMED THAT A HEADLAMP COULD EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING DUE TO A BULB FAILURE, AND THAT IT COULD BE TEMPORARILY RESTORED BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH ON AND OFF, AND THAT SIMULTANEOUS FAILURE OF BOTH HEADLAMPS WAS RARE AND UNLIKELY.TOYOTA ALSO BRIEFLY DISCUSSED THEIR INTENTION TO CONDUCT A CUSTOMER SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO ADDRESS CONSUMER DISSATISFACTION WITH HID BULB FAILURES.SINCE THERE IS STILL ONE HEADLIGHT OPERATING WHEN THE OTHER ONE CUTS OFF, THERE IS STILL LIGHTING AVAILABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR FACILITY.THUS, A SAFETY DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Illustration