NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
1,439 reports34,000 miles · Mar 27, 2010
Exterior Lighting
OUR 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS WITH HID HEADLIGHTS INTERMITTENTLY AND SUDDENLY TURN OFF, MOSTLY ON THE DRIVER SIDE, BUT CAN HAPPEN ON THE PASSENGER SIDE. IT IS SOMETIMES DIFFICULT TO KNOW WHEN A BULB GOES OUT, SO THIS IS CLEARLY A SAFETY ISSUE SINCE ONCOMING TRAFFIC CAN MISJUDGE MY CAR'S POSITION WITH ONLY ONE HEADLIGHT, NOT TO MENTION …
Read full complaint
OUR 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS WITH HID HEADLIGHTS INTERMITTENTLY AND SUDDENLY TURN OFF, MOSTLY ON THE DRIVER SIDE, BUT CAN HAPPEN ON THE PASSENGER SIDE. IT IS SOMETIMES DIFFICULT TO KNOW WHEN A BULB GOES OUT, SO THIS IS CLEARLY A SAFETY ISSUE SINCE ONCOMING TRAFFIC CAN MISJUDGE MY CAR'S POSITION WITH ONLY ONE HEADLIGHT, NOT TO MENTION REDUCED VISIBILITY FOR MY CAR. WHEN I WENT TO THE CITY TOYOTA DEALERSHIP IN DALY CITY, CA NEAR MY HOUSE IN 2008, I WAS SHOCKED TO FIND OUT THE TOYOTA PARTS DEPARTMENT WAS CHARGING $300 FOR ONE BULB. I READ ONLINE THAT TURNING THE HEADLIGHTS OFF AND THEN ON CAN REVIVE THE BULB, AND I FOUND THIS METHOD TO WORK, BUT OFTEN THE BULB WOULD THEN RANDOMLY TURN OFF AGAIN. THIS MAKE-SHIFT TEMPORARY SOLUTION, PLUS THE VERY HIGH PRICE FOR A BULB AS WELL AS UNCLEAR INSTRUCTIONS FROM TOYOTA WHETHER IT WAS THE EXPENSIVE ELECTRONICS UNIT OR THE BULB DISCOURAGED ME FROM DOING ANYTHING. THEN I READ THAT EVEN AFTER BULBS WERE REPLACED WITH OEM BULBS SOME PRIUS OWNERS HAD RECURRING ISSUES. WAS I GOING TO SPEND $300 PER BULB ONLY TO FIND OUT IT DIDN'T WORK? NO WAY. I CONSIDER THIS ISSUE TO BE A RELIABILITY AND SAFETY ISSUE THAT TOYOTA SHOULD RECTIFY AT THEIR COST 100%. ALL I RECEIVED IN THE MAIL FROM TOYOTA WAS A LETTER SAYING THEY WOULD REIMBURSE ME IF I HAD PERFORMED HEADLIGHT ISSUE SERVICE WITH THEM. I AM FRUSTRATED THIS ISSUE IS STILL NOT BEING OFFICIALLY DEALT WITH BY TOYOTA IN A RESPONSIBLE MANNER. MY POST TO THIS SITE IS IN AN ATTEMPT FOR THE PROPER GOVERNMENT AUTHORITIES TO FORCE TOYOTA'S HAND TO DO THE RIGHT THING, AND THAT IS TO FACE UP TO AN OBVIOUS DESIGN/QUALITY ISSUE.
NHTSA ODI #10322433
Mileage unknown · Mar 26, 2010
Unknown Or OtherCrash
THE 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS WAS BEING DRIVEN UP A HILL (PRIVATE ROAD WHICH WE HAVE ACCESS T)., WHEN THE CAR HIT AAN AEA OF LOOSE DIRT & GRAVEL. THIS CAR, A BASE MODEL PRIUS, HAS ANTI-SKID CONTROL, BUT NOT TRACTION CONTROL. THE BASE MODEL IN 2006 WAS THE ONLY ONE DESIGNED LIKE THIS. WHAT HAPPENS, IS WHEN THE ANTI-SKID KICKS IN, I…
Read full complaint
THE 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS WAS BEING DRIVEN UP A HILL (PRIVATE ROAD WHICH WE HAVE ACCESS T)., WHEN THE CAR HIT AAN AEA OF LOOSE DIRT & GRAVEL. THIS CAR, A BASE MODEL PRIUS, HAS ANTI-SKID CONTROL, BUT NOT TRACTION CONTROL. THE BASE MODEL IN 2006 WAS THE ONLY ONE DESIGNED LIKE THIS. WHAT HAPPENS, IS WHEN THE ANTI-SKID KICKS IN, IT CUTS ALL POWER TO THE WHEELS. SINCE THE CAR WS HEADING UP A STEEP INCLINE, WHEN ALL POWER TO THE WHEELS WAS CUT, THE CAR ROLLED BACK DOWN AND OFF THE ROAD ITO THE WOODS AND TREES/ROCKS. I JUST FOUND OUT FROM MY INSURANCE COMPANY THE THE CAR IS A TOTAL LOSS FROM ALL THE DAMAGE TO VARIOUS PARTS. THIS PROBLEM NEVER AFFECTED US EXCEPT WHEN TRYING TO GET OUT OF THE DRIVEWAY ON SNOWY/ICY DAYS. NOW, WHEWN THIS INCIDENT HAPPENED, IT IS APPARENT THE CAR SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN SOLD OR DESIGNED IN THIS WAY
NHTSA ODI #10322324
49,000 miles · Mar 25, 2010
Exterior Lighting
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH WITH THE HEADLIGHTS ACTIVATED. SUDDENLY, THE DRIVER SIDE HEADLIGHT BECAME INOPERABLE WITHOUT ASSISTANCE. THE HEADLIGHT FUNCTIONED AFTER ENGAGING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH. THE FAILURE OCCURRED AT ANY GIVEN SPEED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER …
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH WITH THE HEADLIGHTS ACTIVATED. SUDDENLY, THE DRIVER SIDE HEADLIGHT BECAME INOPERABLE WITHOUT ASSISTANCE. THE HEADLIGHT FUNCTIONED AFTER ENGAGING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH. THE FAILURE OCCURRED AT ANY GIVEN SPEED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER AND REPAIRED FOR THE MALFUNCTION. THE IDENTICAL FAILURE OCCURRED ON A SEPARATE OCCASION. THE VEHICLE HAS NOT BEEN REPAIRED AT THIS TIME. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED AND INFORMED THAT THE SERVICE REPAIR WOULD BE AT THE OWNERS EXPENSE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 49,000. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 74,000.
NHTSA ODI #10322194
63,000 miles · Mar 22, 2010
Exterior Lighting
MY PRIUS HAS 60, 000 MILES AND HAS HI DEFINITION HEADLIGHTS. LAST WEEK ONE OF THE LIGHTS WENT OUT SO I WENT TO A TOYOTA DEALER TO HAVE IT CHANGES. WHEN THEY TURNED ON THE HEADLIGHTS TO CHECK THE PROBLEM THE LIGHT WORKED. THE TECH SAID TOYOTA HAD A PROBLEM WITH HEADLIGHTS GETTING OVERHEATED AND GOING OUT AND COMING BACK ON. THE P…
Read full complaint
MY PRIUS HAS 60, 000 MILES AND HAS HI DEFINITION HEADLIGHTS. LAST WEEK ONE OF THE LIGHTS WENT OUT SO I WENT TO A TOYOTA DEALER TO HAVE IT CHANGES. WHEN THEY TURNED ON THE HEADLIGHTS TO CHECK THE PROBLEM THE LIGHT WORKED. THE TECH SAID TOYOTA HAD A PROBLEM WITH HEADLIGHTS GETTING OVERHEATED AND GOING OUT AND COMING BACK ON. THE PROBLEMS WAS NOT RESOLVED. *DT
NHTSA ODI #10321481
20,000 miles · Mar 22, 2010
EquipmentExterior Lighting
MY HEADLIGHTS ARE INTERMITTENTLY FAILING ON MY 2006 PRIUS. THE DEALERSHIP HAS REPLACED BOTH THE LEFT AND RIGHT (AS A PAIR) HEADLIGHTS AT ~20,000 MILES AND AGAIN AT ~48,000 MILES. AND NOW AT 55,000 MILES, THEY ARE REPLACING ANOTHER FRONT HEADLIGHT HID BULB. THERE WERE TWO ADDITIONAL TIMES THAT I REQUESTED THE TOYOTA SERVIC…
Read full complaint
MY HEADLIGHTS ARE INTERMITTENTLY FAILING ON MY 2006 PRIUS. THE DEALERSHIP HAS REPLACED BOTH THE LEFT AND RIGHT (AS A PAIR) HEADLIGHTS AT ~20,000 MILES AND AGAIN AT ~48,000 MILES. AND NOW AT 55,000 MILES, THEY ARE REPLACING ANOTHER FRONT HEADLIGHT HID BULB. THERE WERE TWO ADDITIONAL TIMES THAT I REQUESTED THE TOYOTA SERVICE DEPARTMENT CHECK THE LIGHTS AS I HAD BEEN TOLD BY A POLICE OFFICER THAT FRONT AND/OR BACK LIGHTS WERE OUT, BUT THE DEALERSHIP SAID ALL OF THE LIGHTS WERE FUNCTIONING. MY LIGHTS APPEAR TO WORK INTERMITTENTLY. I MAY HAVE BOTH HEADLIGHTS WORKING FOR A WEEK OR A MONTH OR MORE, THEN ONE OF BOTH MAY GO OUT, AND THEN ONE OR BOTH MAY START FUNCTIONING AGAIN. IT'S COMPLETELY VARIABLE. I NEVER KNOW IF ONE OF BOTH HEADLIGHTS WILL WORK AT ANY GIVEN TIME. IT'S FRUSTRATING AND SCARY- AS I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO TO FUNDAMENTALLY RESOLVE THE ISSUE AND ENSURE THAT I HAVE FUNCTIONING HEADLIGHTS! APPROXIMATE DATES: JAN 2008 - POLICE OFFICER TOLD ME A LIGHT WAS OUT, DEALER COULD NOT REPRODUCE APRIL 2008 - BOTH HEADLIGHTS REPLACED SEPTEMBER 2009- BOTH HEADLIGHTS REPLACED FEBRUARY 2009- POLICE OFFICER TOLD ME LIGHTS WERE OUT (1 FRONT, 1 BACK) MARCH 2010- HEADLIGHT REPLACED *DT
NHTSA ODI #10321450
74,000 miles · Mar 19, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
I FLOORED MY '06 PRIUS ON THE ON-RAMP TO THE PARKWAY. WHEN I TOOK MY FOOT OFF THE ACCELERATOR, THE CAR CONTINUED TO ACCELERATE AT FULL THROTTLE. I COULD SLOW THE CAR WITH THE BRAKE, BUT FELT I COULD NOT STOP IT WITHOUT SERIOUS DAMAGE TO THE BRAKE OR THE DRIVE TRAIN. INSTEAD, I SLIPPED MY THE SOLE OF MY SHOE UNDER THE EDGE OF …
Read full complaint
I FLOORED MY '06 PRIUS ON THE ON-RAMP TO THE PARKWAY. WHEN I TOOK MY FOOT OFF THE ACCELERATOR, THE CAR CONTINUED TO ACCELERATE AT FULL THROTTLE. I COULD SLOW THE CAR WITH THE BRAKE, BUT FELT I COULD NOT STOP IT WITHOUT SERIOUS DAMAGE TO THE BRAKE OR THE DRIVE TRAIN. INSTEAD, I SLIPPED MY THE SOLE OF MY SHOE UNDER THE EDGE OF THE ACCELERATOR AND LIFTED IT UP. THE ENGINE RESPONDED NORMALLY AND THE PROBLEM HAS NOT RECURRED, ALTHOUGH I HAVE BEEN CAREFUL NOT TO FLOOR THE ACCELERATOR UNTIL I HAVE THE TOYOTA SHOP LOOK AT IT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10321100
Mileage unknown · Mar 18, 2010
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting
MY HID LIGHT ON MY 2006 PRIUS BURNT OUT ON DRIVER'S LEFT SIDE. TOOK IT IN FOR A REPLACEMENT AND THEY TOLD ME THAT I HAVE TO REPLACE BOTH FOR A PRICE OF $500 AND WILL ONLY WARRANTY FOR 1 YEAR. I WAS TOLD THE AVERAGE SPAN FOR A BULB IS 2.5-4 YEARS. THIS IS A RIDICULOUS PRICE FOR A LIGHT BULB. YOU SHOULD PUT PRESSURE ON THE COM…
Read full complaint
MY HID LIGHT ON MY 2006 PRIUS BURNT OUT ON DRIVER'S LEFT SIDE. TOOK IT IN FOR A REPLACEMENT AND THEY TOLD ME THAT I HAVE TO REPLACE BOTH FOR A PRICE OF $500 AND WILL ONLY WARRANTY FOR 1 YEAR. I WAS TOLD THE AVERAGE SPAN FOR A BULB IS 2.5-4 YEARS. THIS IS A RIDICULOUS PRICE FOR A LIGHT BULB. YOU SHOULD PUT PRESSURE ON THE COMPANY TO BRING THE COST FOR THIS SAFETY REPAIR DOWN TO A REASONABLE LEVEL. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10320822
80,000 miles · Mar 18, 2010
Exterior LightingService Brakes, HydraulicVehicle Speed Control
1996 TOYOTA PRIUS - (3) THINGS I HAVE NOTICED WHEN OPERATING CAR. (1) WHEN BRAKING AND GOING OVER ROUGH PAVEMENT, CAR WILL BEHAVE AS THOUGH IT IS HYDROPLANEING - THE BRAKES NOT SLOWING THE CAR FOR A BRIEF PERIOD UNTIL CAR SETTLES DOWN. THIS CAN HAPPEN WHEN GOING AS SLOW AS 5 MPH. THE FASTER ONE IS GOING WHEN HITTING THE ROUGH…
Read full complaint
1996 TOYOTA PRIUS - (3) THINGS I HAVE NOTICED WHEN OPERATING CAR. (1) WHEN BRAKING AND GOING OVER ROUGH PAVEMENT, CAR WILL BEHAVE AS THOUGH IT IS HYDROPLANEING - THE BRAKES NOT SLOWING THE CAR FOR A BRIEF PERIOD UNTIL CAR SETTLES DOWN. THIS CAN HAPPEN WHEN GOING AS SLOW AS 5 MPH. THE FASTER ONE IS GOING WHEN HITTING THE ROUGH PAVEMENT, THE FARTHER THE CAR WILL TRAVEL BEFORE BRAKING SENSATION RE-APPEARS. I BELIEVE THIS OCCURS EVERYTIME I TRAVEL ROUGH PAVEMENT (LA CITY STREETS, NOT BACK COUNTRY OR 4 WHEELING). NOTE THAT WARNING LIGHT ON DASHBOARD DOES LIGHT SUGGESTING LOSS OF CONTROL. I CALLED DEALER SERVICE CENTER AND DESCRIBED PROBLEM, THEY ASSURED ME THAT NO SAFETY WARNINGS OR RECALLS HAD BEEN MADE. 2) WHEN TURNING OFF CRUISE CONTROL, CAR WILL ACCELERATE SLIGHTLY FOR APPROXIMATELY 1-2 SECONDS. THIS IS MOST NOTICEABLE WHEN TRYING TO EXIT CARPOOL LANE IN HEAVY TRAFFIC AND SPACING IS LIMITED. AGAIN CALLED DEALERSHIP AND ASSURED NO SAFETY NOTICES OR RECALLS. I NOW COVER BRAKE WHEN TURNING OFF SPEED CONTROL. 3) CAR JUST EATS UP HID HEADLIGHT (9 IN 80K MILES + 2 ORIGINAL INSTALLED) AND TAILLIGHT BULBS (11 + 2 ORIGINALLY INSTALLED). AGAIN NO SAFETY NOTICES OR RECALLS. I REPLACE THEM AS I NOTICE THEM. I HAVE NEVER HAD BOTH HEADLIGHTS GO OUT AT ONCE AS DESCRIBED ON YOUR WEBSITE. NOTE THAT OTHER THAN THE ABOVE ISSUES/CONCERNS, THIS CAR HAS BEEN A GREAT CAR WITH NO SERVICE EXCEPT FOR GAS, OIL CHANGES, AND REPLACE THE BULBS WHEN THEY GO OUT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10320713
Mileage unknown · Mar 18, 2010
Service Brakes, HydraulicCrashInjury
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHEN THE BRAKE WAS APPLIED, THE ABS LIGHT CAME ON. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 15 MPH ON UNEVEN PAVEMENT OR WET ROADS THERE WAS A DELAY WHEN THE BRAKES WERE APPLIED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHO STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS NOT EXPERIENCING ANY FAILURES. …
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHEN THE BRAKE WAS APPLIED, THE ABS LIGHT CAME ON. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 15 MPH ON UNEVEN PAVEMENT OR WET ROADS THERE WAS A DELAY WHEN THE BRAKES WERE APPLIED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHO STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS NOT EXPERIENCING ANY FAILURES. THE CONTACT ALSO STATED THAT THERE WAS AN ACCIDENT INVOLVING THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACT STATED THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILES WERE NOT AVAILABLE.
NHTSA ODI #10320653
Mileage unknown · Mar 17, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING AT SPEEDS OF 30 MPH AND ATTEMPTING TO MAKE A TURN, THE VEHICLE ABNORMALLY ACCELERATED. SIMULTANEOUSLY, THE POWER STEERING FAILED CAUSING INHIBITED CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE PROCEEDED TO MAKE A 180 DEGREE TURN, AND CRASHED INTO A POLE. THE M…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING AT SPEEDS OF 30 MPH AND ATTEMPTING TO MAKE A TURN, THE VEHICLE ABNORMALLY ACCELERATED. SIMULTANEOUSLY, THE POWER STEERING FAILED CAUSING INHIBITED CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE PROCEEDED TO MAKE A 180 DEGREE TURN, AND CRASHED INTO A POLE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND STATED THAT THE PROCESS WOULD TAKE A MATTER OF TIME BEFORE THEY COULD PROVIDE ANY ASSISTANCE. THE VIN, CURRENT, AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE NOT AVAILABLE WHEN THE COMPLAINT WAS FILED.
NHTSA ODI #10320441
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