← 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
25,000 miles · Nov 19, 2009
Equipment Adaptive/mobilityVehicle Speed Control

WHILE DRIVING MY PRIUS I HAVE EXPERIENCED BRIEF MOMENTS OF UNEXPLAINED ACCELERATION. IT WAS STARTLING WHEN IT HAPPENED BUT WAS ALSO OVER QUICKLY. I BELIEVE IT HAS HAPPENED TWICE. ONCE WAS ABOUT ONE WEEK AFTER I HAD TAKEN THE CAR IN FOR MAINTENANCE. I CAN REMEMBER THINKING I MIGHT HAVE TO TAKE THE CAR IN AGAIN. IT FELT LIKE …

Read full complaint

WHILE DRIVING MY PRIUS I HAVE EXPERIENCED BRIEF MOMENTS OF UNEXPLAINED ACCELERATION. IT WAS STARTLING WHEN IT HAPPENED BUT WAS ALSO OVER QUICKLY. I BELIEVE IT HAS HAPPENED TWICE. ONCE WAS ABOUT ONE WEEK AFTER I HAD TAKEN THE CAR IN FOR MAINTENANCE. I CAN REMEMBER THINKING I MIGHT HAVE TO TAKE THE CAR IN AGAIN. IT FELT LIKE THE ACCELERATION WHEN USING CRUISE CONTROL, HOWEVER, I DON'T AND WASN'T USING CRUISE CONTROL. I HAVE ONLY THE FLOOR MATS THAT CAME WITH THE VEHICLE AND DO NOT BELIEVE THIS WAS CAUSED BY THE FLOOR MAT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10292910

44,700 miles · Nov 8, 2009
EquipmentVehicle Speed Control

TOYOTA PRIUS 2006. I PRESSED ACCELERATOR ALL THE WAY DOWN TO ACCELERATE AND GOT STUCK THERE. I WAS ABLE TO STOP THE CAR WITH THE BRAKE. IT HAPPENS TWICE IN JULY 2009. ONCE I STOPPED THE CAR I CHECKED IF THE FLOOR MATS HAVE DONE SO. THE FLOOR MATS WERE NOT THE CAUSE. THE ACCELERATOR WAS STUCK ALL THE WAY DOWN EVEN WITH THE ENGINE…

Read full complaint

TOYOTA PRIUS 2006. I PRESSED ACCELERATOR ALL THE WAY DOWN TO ACCELERATE AND GOT STUCK THERE. I WAS ABLE TO STOP THE CAR WITH THE BRAKE. IT HAPPENS TWICE IN JULY 2009. ONCE I STOPPED THE CAR I CHECKED IF THE FLOOR MATS HAVE DONE SO. THE FLOOR MATS WERE NOT THE CAUSE. THE ACCELERATOR WAS STUCK ALL THE WAY DOWN EVEN WITH THE ENGINE OFF.... AND ONLY AFTER A MINUTE OR TWO OF THE CAR STOPPED AND ENGINE OFF DID CAME THE ACCELERATOR BACK. I BROUGHT THE CAR TO THE DEALERS AND THEY TOLD ME THAT IT WAS THE MAT. I TOLD THEM THAT WAS NOT THE CASE. THE DEALER PUT SOME GREASE IN THE ACCELERATOR AND DID A FEW MORE THINGS (CLEANING AROUND AND THE FUEL INJECTION I THINK). SINCE THEN I HAVE AVOIDED PRESSING THE ACCELERATOR ALL THE WAY DOWN EVEN WHEN I NEED THE POWER TO ACCELERATE AT THE ENTRANCE OF HIGHWAYS AND HAS NOT HAPPENED AGAIN. BUT THERE IS DEFINITELY SOMETHING WRONG WITH EITHER THE MECHANICS OF THE ACCELERATOR OR THE ELECTRONICS THAT SOMEHOW GETS THE ACCELERATOR STUCK WHEN YOU PRESS ALL THE WAY DOWN. THIS SHOULD NOT HAPPEN AND NEEDS TO BE REPAIRED. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10291380

Mileage unknown · Nov 4, 2009
Vehicle Speed Control

REGARDING THE PROBLEM WITH TOYOTAS. I BOUGHT A 2006 PRIUS EARLIER THIS YEAR. WHAT I HAVE NOTICED PERIODICALLY IS THAT WHEN I STEP ON THE BRAKE IF I HAVE HAD CRUISE CONTROL ON, THE CAR SURGES FORWARD FOR A SECOND. MY HEART ALWAYS SKIPS A BEAT, BUT THEN THE CAR RETURNS TO NORMAL. I'M WONDERING IF THE CRUISE CONTROL MIGHT BE PA…

Read full complaint

REGARDING THE PROBLEM WITH TOYOTAS. I BOUGHT A 2006 PRIUS EARLIER THIS YEAR. WHAT I HAVE NOTICED PERIODICALLY IS THAT WHEN I STEP ON THE BRAKE IF I HAVE HAD CRUISE CONTROL ON, THE CAR SURGES FORWARD FOR A SECOND. MY HEART ALWAYS SKIPS A BEAT, BUT THEN THE CAR RETURNS TO NORMAL. I'M WONDERING IF THE CRUISE CONTROL MIGHT BE PART OF THE PROBLEM THAT TOYOTA IS SUPPOSEDLY LOOKING IN TO. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10291035

15,000 miles · Nov 4, 2009
Vehicle Speed Control

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS PURCHASED FEBRUARY 2006. WHEN UTILIZING THE CRUISE CONTROL SWITCH, THE ENGINE WOULD BEGIN TO ACCELERATE RAPIDLY AND RACE. ONCE THE CRUISE CONTROL WAS CANCELED, THE ACCELERATION WOULD CEASE. HE STATED THE FLOOR MATS DID NOT CAUSE RAPID ACCELERATION. THE FAILURE WOULD ONLY OCCUR WHEN CRUIS…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS PURCHASED FEBRUARY 2006. WHEN UTILIZING THE CRUISE CONTROL SWITCH, THE ENGINE WOULD BEGIN TO ACCELERATE RAPIDLY AND RACE. ONCE THE CRUISE CONTROL WAS CANCELED, THE ACCELERATION WOULD CEASE. HE STATED THE FLOOR MATS DID NOT CAUSE RAPID ACCELERATION. THE FAILURE WOULD ONLY OCCUR WHEN CRUISE CONTROL WAS UTILIZED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED, AND HE WAS ADVISED TO DISCONTINUE USAGE OF THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL. NO REPAIRS HAD BEEN MADE TO CORRECT THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE UNDER 15,000. UPDATED 11/23/09. *LJ UPDATED 11/24/09

NHTSA ODI #10290951

171,000 miles · Oct 28, 2009
Vehicle Speed Control

I HAVE A 2007 PRIUS AND I HAVE HAD A PROBLEM WITH ACCELERATION 3 TIMES. I READ THAT IT WAS THOUGHT TO BE A CASE OF THE GAS PEDAL BEING CAUGHT ON THE FLOOR MATS. I TOOK OUT THE CARPET MAT AND I CURRENTLY HAVE ONLY THE PLASTIC ALL WEATHER MAT (I TOOK OUT THE CARPET MAT) WHICH IS SECURED WITH THE TWO PLASTIC HOOKS. MY DAUGHTER GETS…

Read full complaint

I HAVE A 2007 PRIUS AND I HAVE HAD A PROBLEM WITH ACCELERATION 3 TIMES. I READ THAT IT WAS THOUGHT TO BE A CASE OF THE GAS PEDAL BEING CAUGHT ON THE FLOOR MATS. I TOOK OUT THE CARPET MAT AND I CURRENTLY HAVE ONLY THE PLASTIC ALL WEATHER MAT (I TOOK OUT THE CARPET MAT) WHICH IS SECURED WITH THE TWO PLASTIC HOOKS. MY DAUGHTER GETS HER DRIVERS LICENSE NEXT MONDAY AND I WAS GOING TO HAVE HER DRIVE THE PRIUS. I'M AFRAID TO HAVE HER DRIVE IT NOW. ARE YOU ABSOLUTELY SURE THAT THE ACCELERATION PROBLEM IS JUST THE FLOOR MATS AND THAT THERE IS NO POSSIBILITY THAT THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH THE ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS? BECAUSE IF IT IS JUST THE MAT ISSUE THEN I HAVE TAKEN CARE OF THAT. IF IT COULD BE ELECTRIC THAN I WON'T LET HER DRIVE IT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10290172

44,000 miles · Jul 9, 2009
Vehicle Speed Control

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 50 MPH, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED WHEN THE BRAKE PEDAL WAS DEPRESSED. THE BRAKE PEDAL REQUIRED GREATER FORCE TO SLOW DOWN THE VEHICLE. IN ADDITION, THE STOPPING DISTANCE WAS INCREASED. THERE WERE NO WARNINGS AND THE FAILURES OCCURRED INTERMITTENTLY. THE VEHI…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 50 MPH, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED WHEN THE BRAKE PEDAL WAS DEPRESSED. THE BRAKE PEDAL REQUIRED GREATER FORCE TO SLOW DOWN THE VEHICLE. IN ADDITION, THE STOPPING DISTANCE WAS INCREASED. THERE WERE NO WARNINGS AND THE FAILURES OCCURRED INTERMITTENTLY. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER FOR DIAGNOSTIC TESTING, BUT THEY COULD NOT DUPLICATE THE FAILURES. ON THREE SEPARATE OCCASIONS, THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN BACK TO THE AUTHORIZED DEALER FOR IDENTICAL FAILURES, BUT THERE WERE NO RESOLUTIONS. THE MANUFACTURER INSPECTED THE VEHICLE, BUT WAS UNABLE TO DETECT THE FAILURES. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 44,000 AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 49,000. UPDATED 08/21/09. *LJ UPDATED 08/26/09.*JB

NHTSA ODI #10276270

45,000 miles · May 11, 2009
Vehicle Speed Control

I OWN A 2006 TOYOTA PRUIS. I EXPERIENCED TWO DIFFERENT TIMES UNINTENDED ACCELERATION. I CAN'T TELL EXACTLY WHAT WAS GOING ON AT THE TIME. I HIT THE BRAKE & SHUT OFF THE CRUISE CONTROL. ENGINE RETURNED BACK TO NORMAL. I WOULD GUESS IT WOULD PERTAIN TO SOME MALFUNCTION IN THE CRUISE. ANY OTHER SAME COMPLAINTS? *TR

NHTSA ODI #10268360

33,700 miles · May 6, 2009
Vehicle Speed Control

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE STOPPED AT A TRAFFIC LIGHT, THE CONTACT PROCEEDED TO ACCELERATE AND NOTICED THAT THE ENGINE ENGAGED BEFORE THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WAS DEPRESSED. THE CONTACT WAS STILL DEPRESSING THE BRAKE PEDAL WHEN THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO TAKE OFF. HE HAD TO APPLY MORE PRESSURE TO THE BRAKES IN ORDE…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE STOPPED AT A TRAFFIC LIGHT, THE CONTACT PROCEEDED TO ACCELERATE AND NOTICED THAT THE ENGINE ENGAGED BEFORE THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WAS DEPRESSED. THE CONTACT WAS STILL DEPRESSING THE BRAKE PEDAL WHEN THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO TAKE OFF. HE HAD TO APPLY MORE PRESSURE TO THE BRAKES IN ORDER TO STOP THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER, BUT THEY WERE UNABLE TO DETERMINE THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE COULD NOT BE DUPLICATED AND NO REPAIRS WERE MADE. THE CONTACT IS IN THE PROCESS OF NOTIFYING THE MANUFACTURER. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 33,700 AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 33,720.

NHTSA ODI #10267843

73,000 miles · Feb 2, 2009
EquipmentVehicle Speed Control

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING 60 MPH, THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO ACCELERATE ON ITS OWNS AND THE SPEED INCREASED TO 90 MPH. THE CONTACT DEPRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL AND THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO SLOW DOWN, BUT FAILED TO COME TO A COMPLETE STOP. THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO SAFELY MANEUVER THE VEHICLE TO THE SHOULDER AND …

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING 60 MPH, THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO ACCELERATE ON ITS OWNS AND THE SPEED INCREASED TO 90 MPH. THE CONTACT DEPRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL AND THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO SLOW DOWN, BUT FAILED TO COME TO A COMPLETE STOP. THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO SAFELY MANEUVER THE VEHICLE TO THE SHOULDER AND TURNED OFF THE IGNITION. UPON EXITING THE VEHICLE, THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE BRAKES WHERE SMOKING. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER AND THEY DETERMINED THAT THE FLOORMAT WAS PINNED DOWN TO THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WHEN HE APPLIED THE BRAKES. THE BRAKES WERE COMPLETELY DESTROYED AND THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED AT THE COST OF $1,600. THE CONTACT IS IN THE PROCESS OF NOTIFYING THE MANUFACTURER. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 73,000 AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 76,000. UPDATED 04-14-09 *BF UPDATED 04/15/09.*JB

NHTSA ODI #10257140

28,000 miles · Mar 27, 2008
Vehicle Speed Control

CAR ACCELERATED WITHOUT PRESSING ON THE GAS PEDAL. HAD TO APPLY THE BRAKES SO HARD THAT THEY WERE LEFT SMOKING TO STOP THE CAR. TOWED IT TO MARK MILLER TOYOTA. THEY RAN TESTS, AND CLAIM THE GAS PEDAL AND BRAKE WERE APPLIED AT THE SAME TIME, IMPLYING THAT THE PROBLEM WAS HUMAN CAUSED. WE DISAGREE. HAVE BEEN DRIVING FOR 30 YEA…

Read full complaint

CAR ACCELERATED WITHOUT PRESSING ON THE GAS PEDAL. HAD TO APPLY THE BRAKES SO HARD THAT THEY WERE LEFT SMOKING TO STOP THE CAR. TOWED IT TO MARK MILLER TOYOTA. THEY RAN TESTS, AND CLAIM THE GAS PEDAL AND BRAKE WERE APPLIED AT THE SAME TIME, IMPLYING THAT THE PROBLEM WAS HUMAN CAUSED. WE DISAGREE. HAVE BEEN DRIVING FOR 30 YEARS PLUS. NO TICKETS IN DECADES. THE IDEA THAT WE WERE APPLYING THE ACCELERATOR WHILE BRAKING HARD IS LUDICROUS. THE COMPUTER REGISTERED THAT THE PRESSURE WAS APPLIED TO THE PEDAL, BUT THE COMPUTER APPLIED THE PRESSURE. WE ALSO EXPERIENCED THIS OCCURRING ON AT LEAST TWO OTHER OCCASIONS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10222461

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.