IllustrationMY 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS HEADLIGHTS ARE MALFUNCTIONING. MY HEADLIGHTS GO OFF INTERMITTENTLY. MAINLY THE RIGHT HEADLIGHTS BUT BOTH LIGHTS HAVE THIS PROBLEM. IF I TURN OFF AND THEN TURN ON THE LIGHTS THEN THEY WILL WORK OK FOR A LITTLE WHILE. I AM WORRIED THAT BOTH LIGHTS MAY GO OFF AND WILL PUT MY FAMILY AT RISK AT NIGHT.*TR
2006 Toyota Prius
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most Prius years
Owner complaints for the 2006 Toyota Prius are substantially higher than the model-year median of 164.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Prius years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
All reported categories
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
1410–25K
46225–50K
31850–75K
12875–100K
116100–150K
88150K+
1,253 reports with mileage · 186 unknown
NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.
What to inspect
Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.
- Exterior Lighting. Review the 941 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Electrical System. Review the 152 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 94 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
82 crash reports5 fire reports38 injury reports
What owners actually said
1,439 reportsIN 2009 I PURCHASED A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. IMMEDIATELY AFTER PURCHASE THE HEAD LIGHTS RANDOMLY SHUT OFF. SOMETIMES ONE AT TIME AND SOMETIMES BOTH AT THE SAME TIME. RECENTLY I WAS DRIVING OVER A DARK MOUNTAIN PASS IN THE SNOW AND THE HEADLIGHTS BOTH WENT OUT AT THE SAME TIME. IT TOOK ME THREE TIMES, TURNING THEM OFF AND ON FOR…
Read full complaint
IN 2009 I PURCHASED A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. IMMEDIATELY AFTER PURCHASE THE HEAD LIGHTS RANDOMLY SHUT OFF. SOMETIMES ONE AT TIME AND SOMETIMES BOTH AT THE SAME TIME. RECENTLY I WAS DRIVING OVER A DARK MOUNTAIN PASS IN THE SNOW AND THE HEADLIGHTS BOTH WENT OUT AT THE SAME TIME. IT TOOK ME THREE TIMES, TURNING THEM OFF AND ON FOR THEM TO COME BACK ON. WE COULD HAVE BEEN HURT OR KILLED. THIS HAPPENS OFTEN, AT LEAST FIVE TO SIX TIMES WHEN WE ARE DRIVING OUR CAR AT NIGHT AND MY SON HAS BEEN PULLED OVER AND TICKETED TWICE. WE CALLED THE DEALER AND EVEN THOUGH WE BOUGHT THE FULL EXTENDED USED CAR WARRANTY, TOYOTA DOES NOT COVER THE HEADLIGHT ISSUES AND ARE TELLING US IT'S GOING TO COST BETWEEN $500 - $1500 TO HAVE THE HEADLIGHTS REPLACED. IT'S OBVIOUSLY AN ELECTRICAL PROBLEM, BUT TOYOTA SAID THEY ISSUED A STATEMENT SAYING IT WAS NOT. THE LIGHTS EVEN GO OUT WHEN YOU TURN ON YOUR BLINKERS, OFF COURSE RANDOMLY. I EVEN WENT FOR A NIGHT TIME DRIVE WITH MY SALESPERSON RIGHT AFTER I PURCHASED THE VEHICLE AND HE SAW THE LIGHTS GO OFF. HE SAID I WOULD JUST HAVE TO REPLACE THEM AT MY COST EVEN THOUGH IT WAS OBVIOUS THEY WERE GOING ON AND OFF WHEN WE HIT EVEN THE SLIGHTEST BUMP IN ROAD AND EVEN THOUGH IT WAS SUPPOSEDLY A CERTIFIED USED CAR. TOYOTA KNOWS THERE IS A PROBLEM BECAUSE IT'S ISSUED A STATEMENT AND THERE ARE BLOGS ALL OVER THE INTERNET ABOUT IT, YET THEY REFUSE TO HELP THEIR CUSTOMERS MAINTAIN A SAFE OPERATING VEHICLE. I'VE AGAIN CALLED THE DEALER AND HAVE ANOTHER APPOINTMENT ABOUT THIS ISSUE IN A COUPLE OF DAYS. WE ARE HOPING THEY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT WE'VE PURCHASES THREE TOYOTAS FROM THEM IN THE LAST THREE YEARS AND THAT THEY WILL FIX THE HEADLIGHTS FOR US BEFORE SOMEONE GETS HURT OR KILLED. ALL THREE CARS WE PURCHASED FROM TOYOTA ARE ALSO INVOLVED IN THEIR CURRENT RECALLS. WE ARE VERY UNHAPPY WITH OUR TOYOTAS AND FEEL VERY UNSAFE DRIVING THEM WITH FAMILY MEMBERS AND CHILDREN IN OUR VEHICLES. *TR
TOYOTA PRIUS 2006. RT. FRONT (PASSENGER SIDE) HEADLIGHT GOES OUT FOR NO REASON. AFTER THIS IS WILL NOT COME BACK ON, EVEN IF I SWITCH FROM LOW TO HIGH BEAM. I TURN THE LIGHTS OFF AND ON THAT CORRECTS THE PROBLEM FOR ABOUT 3 TO 15 MINUTES, THEN IT GOES OFF AGAIN. TOYOTA SAID IT WAS THE BULB AND REPLACED IT AT ABOUT 34,000 MILE…
Read full complaint
TOYOTA PRIUS 2006. RT. FRONT (PASSENGER SIDE) HEADLIGHT GOES OUT FOR NO REASON. AFTER THIS IS WILL NOT COME BACK ON, EVEN IF I SWITCH FROM LOW TO HIGH BEAM. I TURN THE LIGHTS OFF AND ON THAT CORRECTS THE PROBLEM FOR ABOUT 3 TO 15 MINUTES, THEN IT GOES OFF AGAIN. TOYOTA SAID IT WAS THE BULB AND REPLACED IT AT ABOUT 34,000 MILES UNDER WARRANTY, BUT IT DID NOT CHANGE ANYTHING. THEN THE NEXT CHANCE I HAD TO BRING IT IN IT WAS OUT OF WARRANTY, SO THEY WILL NOT COVER. I THOUGHT IT MAY BE THE IGNITER OR TRANSFORMER SO I REPLACED THAT, BUT IT STILL DOES THE SAME THING. I SEE MANY PRIUS' AROUND TOWN WITH THEIR RIGHT FRONT LIGHT OUT, SO IT SEEMS TO BE QUITE COMMON. I READ ON THE INTERNET THAT LOTS OF PRIUS PEOPLE ARE HAVING THE SAME EXACT PROBLEM, BUT OF COURSE TOYOTA DENIES THAT THERE IS ONE. TOYOTA SIMPLY CHARGES $300. TO REPLACE THE BULB, OR $600 TO REPLACE THE IGNITER, OR $1,100 TO REPLACE THE WHOLE HEADLIGHT ASSEMBLE. REPLACING THE BULB DOES NOT FIX IT, NEITHER DOES THE IGNITER, NOT SURE ABOUT THE WHOLE ASSEMBLY. THE LIGHT GOES OFF WHETHER THE CAR IS PARKED OR DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD, SO VIBRATION IS NOT THE PROBLEM. THIS IS A HUGE SAFETY HAZARD. TOYOTA IS PRODUCING LEMONS, THEN SIMPLY REPLACING THE BULBS AND HOPING YOUR WARRANTY RUNS OUT. TOYOTA IS MAKING A TON OF MONEY OFF OF THIS DEFECT AT $1,100 PER LIGHT ASSEMBLY, AND EVEN THEN I AM NOT SURE THE PROBLEM IS BEING REPAIRED. THIS PROBLEM SEEMS TO BE MORE COMMON ON 2006 AND 2007 MODELS. I JUST DROVE TO THE AIRPORT AND BACK (45 MIN EACH WAY) AND MY LIGHT WENT OUT PROBABLY 30 TIMES. MANY OWNERS DON'T SEEM TO KNOW THAT THEIR LIGHT IS OUT. I NOTICE, BUT I STILL FEEL LIKE I AM A HUGE ROAD HAZARD. I WOULD REPAIR IT IF I KNEW WHAT THE ACTUAL PROBLEM WAS. THE TOYOTA FACTORY SURELY KNOWS WHAT THE PROBLEM IS AND HOW TO CORRECT IT, BUT IF THEY BRING THE PROBLEM TO THE SURFACE THEY KNOW THAT THEY WILL BE FORCED TO PAY FOR ANOTHER RECALL, MEANWHILE THEY MAKE A TON OF PROFIT OFF PARTS AND REPAIRS. *TR
DRIVER SIDE HID HEADLIGHT FAILS INTERMITTEDLY. *TR
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT ON THREE SEPARATE OCCASIONS, SHE HAD EXPERIENCED INSTANCES OF UNINTENDED ACCELERATION. SHE WAS ADVISED TO REMOVE THE FLOOR MATS FROM THE VEHICLE BUT THE FAILURE PERSISTED. SHE CONFIRMED WHEN ATTEMPTING TO PASS ANOTHER VEHICLE, THE VEHICLE WOULD ABNORMALLY ACCELERAT…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT ON THREE SEPARATE OCCASIONS, SHE HAD EXPERIENCED INSTANCES OF UNINTENDED ACCELERATION. SHE WAS ADVISED TO REMOVE THE FLOOR MATS FROM THE VEHICLE BUT THE FAILURE PERSISTED. SHE CONFIRMED WHEN ATTEMPTING TO PASS ANOTHER VEHICLE, THE VEHICLE WOULD ABNORMALLY ACCELERATE WITHOUT HER INTENT. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 25 MPH. THE DEALER COULD NOT DUPLICATE THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 56,000 AND THE CURRENT WAS UNKNOWN.
BRAKES FAILED TEMPORARILY AND MOMENTARILY WHEN BRAKING OVER POTHOLES WHILE APPROACHING AN INTERSTATE ON-RAMP. THIS IS NOT AT ALL THE FIRST TIME THIS HAPPENED. WHEN BRAKING WHILE GOING OVER RAILROAD TRACKS, ESPECIALLY DOUBLE SETS OF TRACKS, IT HAS BEEN COMMON THAT IT WOULD FEEL AS IF I WAS SAILING OVER THE TRACKS -- DEFINITELY …
Read full complaint
BRAKES FAILED TEMPORARILY AND MOMENTARILY WHEN BRAKING OVER POTHOLES WHILE APPROACHING AN INTERSTATE ON-RAMP. THIS IS NOT AT ALL THE FIRST TIME THIS HAPPENED. WHEN BRAKING WHILE GOING OVER RAILROAD TRACKS, ESPECIALLY DOUBLE SETS OF TRACKS, IT HAS BEEN COMMON THAT IT WOULD FEEL AS IF I WAS SAILING OVER THE TRACKS -- DEFINITELY NOT SLOWING DOWN (EVEN THOUGH I HAD MY FOOT ON THE BRAKES) BUT MAYBE EVEN SPEEDING UP. THAT TOO WAS THE FEELING I HAD, ALBEIT MOMENTARILY, LAST WEEK WHEN I WAS BRAKING OVER POTHOLES. *TR
THE HID HEADLIGHTS ON MY 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS INTERMITTENTLY GO OUT ONE AT A TIME. ONCE THEY GO OUT THEY STAY OUT UNLESS I MANUALLY TURN THEM OFF AND THEN ON I CANNOT DETERMINE WHEN ONE OF THE HEADLIGHTS GOES OUT. THE PROBLEM IS WHEN DRIVING WITH ONLY 1 HEADLAMP I HAVE HAD SEVERAL INSTANCES WHEN THE OTHER HEADLAMP HAS GONE OUT AS …
Read full complaint
THE HID HEADLIGHTS ON MY 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS INTERMITTENTLY GO OUT ONE AT A TIME. ONCE THEY GO OUT THEY STAY OUT UNLESS I MANUALLY TURN THEM OFF AND THEN ON I CANNOT DETERMINE WHEN ONE OF THE HEADLIGHTS GOES OUT. THE PROBLEM IS WHEN DRIVING WITH ONLY 1 HEADLAMP I HAVE HAD SEVERAL INSTANCES WHEN THE OTHER HEADLAMP HAS GONE OUT AS WELL LEAVING ME WITH NO HEADLIGHTS AT NIGHT. IF I HADN'T KNOWN TO TURN THEM ON/OFF I WOULD HAVE BEEN DRIVING ON A ROAD AT NIGHT WITH NO HEADLAMPS. *TR
REFERENCE YOUR CASE PE09019, CLOSED IN AUGUST 2009. I ALSO OWN A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS ON WHICH THE HEADLAMPS FAIL DAILY. AS STATED IN THE REPORT IT USUALLY STARTS WITH ONLY ONE LAMP FAILING BUT IT OFTEN ENDS WITH BOTH LAMPS OUT. I WILL NOT DRIVE WITHOUT MY FOG LAMPS ON FOR FEAR I WILL BE IN TOTAL DARKNESS AT A CRUCIAL TIME SUCH …
Read full complaint
REFERENCE YOUR CASE PE09019, CLOSED IN AUGUST 2009. I ALSO OWN A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS ON WHICH THE HEADLAMPS FAIL DAILY. AS STATED IN THE REPORT IT USUALLY STARTS WITH ONLY ONE LAMP FAILING BUT IT OFTEN ENDS WITH BOTH LAMPS OUT. I WILL NOT DRIVE WITHOUT MY FOG LAMPS ON FOR FEAR I WILL BE IN TOTAL DARKNESS AT A CRUCIAL TIME SUCH AS A SHARP CURVE OR TURN IN THE ROAD. I HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR SOMEONE TO TAKE ACTION AND FORCE A RECALL AS IT IS EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE TO REPLACE THESE HEADLAMPS. IN LIGHT OF THE CURRENT FINDINGS AGAINST TOYOTA, YOU SHOULD REOPEN THE INVESTIGATION. I AM NOT CERTAIN BY ANY MEANS BUT I HAD HEARD YOUR ORGANIZATION HAD OVER 500 COMPLAINTS REGARDING THIS ISSUE. WHY DID YOU ONLY INTERVIEW 40 OWNERS? DO WE HAVE TO WAIT FOR SOMEONE'S DEATH, PERHAPS MINE OR ONE OF MY FAMILY MEMBERS, BEFORE WE TAKE THIS SITUATION SERIOUS ENOUGH TO FORCE ACTION ON TOYOTA'S PART? HOW COULD SOMETHING AS SERIOUS AS HEADLAMP FAILURE BE DISMISSED SO CASUALLY? *TR
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING AT VARIOUS UNKNOWN SPEEDS, THE HEADLIGHTS WOULD FAIL TO ILLUMINATE INTERMITTENTLY. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER HOWEVER THEY WERE UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED BUT WOULD TAKE NO LIABILITY CLAIMING A DEFECT DID NOT EXIST IN THE VEHICLE…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING AT VARIOUS UNKNOWN SPEEDS, THE HEADLIGHTS WOULD FAIL TO ILLUMINATE INTERMITTENTLY. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER HOWEVER THEY WERE UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED BUT WOULD TAKE NO LIABILITY CLAIMING A DEFECT DID NOT EXIST IN THE VEHICLE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 53,945.
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHEN THE CONTACT FIRST DROVE THE VEHICLE, HE NOTICED SMOKE EMITTING FROM THE DASHBOARD AREA. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE THEY ADVISED HIM THAT THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE VEHICLE AND NO REPAIRS WERE MADE. ON APPROXIMATELY TWELVE OCCASIONS AFTERWARD, WHILE UTILIZING THE …
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHEN THE CONTACT FIRST DROVE THE VEHICLE, HE NOTICED SMOKE EMITTING FROM THE DASHBOARD AREA. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE THEY ADVISED HIM THAT THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE VEHICLE AND NO REPAIRS WERE MADE. ON APPROXIMATELY TWELVE OCCASIONS AFTERWARD, WHILE UTILIZING THE CRUISE CONTROL MECHANISM, THE VEHICLE WOULD ABNORMALLY ACCELERATE WITHOUT WARNING. THE ACCELERATION WOULD USUALLY OCCUR ON A SMALL DECLINE OR INCLINE. THE VEHICLE WOULD DOWNSHIFT ON ITS OWN AND ACCELERATE UP TO 80 OR 90 MPH. HE HAD TO COMPLETELY DISENGAGE THE CRUISE CONTROL TO PREVENT THE VEHICLE FROM ACCELERATING. HE DID NOT CONTACT THE DEALER OR MANUFACTURER IN REGARDS TO THE VEHICLE ACCELERATING. DURING INCLEMENT WEATHER, HE ATTEMPTED TO PASS ANOTHER VEHICLE AT SPEEDS OF APPROXIMATELY 40 MPH. AS THE VEHICLE GLIDED OVER WET SNOW AND ICE, THE VEHICLE SLID SIDEWAYS AND CRASHED INTO A NEARBY GUARDRAIL. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED. THERE WERE NO INJURIES; HOWEVER, A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 60,000 AND THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 600.
Official recalls
612V536000 · Engine And Engine Cooling; Hybrid Propulsion System: Inverter
Nov 14, 2012
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Hybrid Propulsion System: Inverter
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.
Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Engine And Engine Cooling
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.
Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
12V537000 · Steering; Steering:gear Box:shaft Sector
Nov 14, 2012
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Steering:gear Box:shaft Sector
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.
Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Steering
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.
Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
10V036000 · Equipment:other:labels
Feb 3, 2010
SOUTHEAST TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2005-2011 PASSENGER VEHICLES FOR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 110, "TIRE SELECTION AND RIMS." THESE VEHICLES WERE SOLD WITHOUT THE REQUISITE LOAD CARRYING CAPACITY MODIFICATION LABELS.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A DRIVER MAY OVERLOAD A VEHICLE WHICH MAY INCREASE THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL MAIL TO CONSUMERS THE CORRECTED LABEL OR THE CUSTOMER WILL HAVE THE OPTION FOR DEALERS TO INSTALL THE LABEL FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON MAY 27, 2010. OWNERS MAY CONTACT SOUTHEAST TOYOTA AT 1-800-301-6859.
09V388000 · Vehicle Speed Control:accelerator Pedal
Oct 5, 2009
TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2004-2010 PASSENGER VEHICLES. THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL CAN GET STUCK IN THE WIDE OPEN POSITION DUE TO ITS BEING TRAPPED BY AN UNSECURED OR INCOMPATIBLE DRIVER'S FLOOR MAT.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A STUCK OPEN ACCELERATOR PEDAL MAY RESULT IN VERY HIGH VEHICLE SPEEDS AND MAKE IT DIFFICULT TO STOP THE VEHICLE, WHICH COULD CAUSE A CRASH, SERIOUS INJURY OR DEATH.
Remedy: TOYOTA FILED AN AMENDED DEFECT REPORT ON NOVEMBER 25, 2009, STATING THAT DEALERS WILL MODIFY THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL AND, ON CERTAIN VEHICLES, ALTER THE SHAPE OF THE FLOOR SURFACE UNDER THE PEDAL. THESE CHANGES ADDRESS THE RISK OF PEDAL ENTRAPMENT DUE TO INTERFERENCE WITH THE FLOOR MAT. REDESIGNED ACCELERATOR PEDALS WILL BECOME AVAILABLE BEGINNING IN APRIL 2010 AND DEALERS WILL REPLACE ANY MODIFIED PEDAL WITH THE NEW PEDAL IF DESIRED. ALSO, DEALERS WILL REPLACE ANY GENUINE TOYOTA OR LEXUS ALL-WEATHER FLOOR MATS WITH REDESIGNED ALL-WEATHER MATS, OR REPURCHASE THE PREVIOUS MATS FROM OWNERS WHO DO NOT WANT THE NEW ONES. ADDITIONALLY, SOFTWARE MODIFICATIONS WILL BE INSTALLED ON CAMRY, AVALON AND LEXUS ES 350, IS 350 AND IS 250 MODELS THAT WILL ENSURE THAT THE BRAKE OVERRIDES THE ACCELERATOR IN THE EVENT BOTH BRAKE AND ACCELERATOR PEDALS ARE APPLIED. TOYOTA WILL BEGIN MAILING LETTERS TO OWNERS ON DECEMBER 31, 2009. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331, LEXUS AT 1-800-255-3987.
06V188000 · Steering:electric Power Assist System
May 31, 2006
THE INTERMEDIATE SHAFT AND SLIDING YOKE IN THE ELECTRIC POWER STEERING SYSTEM CAN CRACK WHEN LARGE FORCES ARE APPLIED AND THE CONNECTION MAY SEPARATE OR THE SLEEVE MAY FRACTURE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS COULD RESULT IN A LOSS OF STEERING CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE.
Remedy: TOYOTA WILL REPLACE THE STEERING INTERMEDIATE SHAFT AND INSPECT THE SLIDING YOKE AND REPLACE IT IF NECESSARY. THE RECALL BEGAN ON JUNE 9, 2006. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331.
06V096000 · Air Bags
Apr 3, 2006
ON CERTAIN VEHICLES, DUE TO IMPROPER ASSEMBLY OF THE AIR BAG INFLATOR, WHICH IS USED IN THE SIDE AIR BAG, THE CURTAIN SHIELD AIR BAG, AND THE KNEE AIR BAG ASSEMBLY, SOME INFLATORS WERE PRODUCED WITH AN INSUFFICIENT AMOUNT OF THE HEATING AGENTS NECESSARY FOR PROPER AIR BAG DEPLOYMENT. IN THIS CONDITION, THE EXPANSION FORCE OF THE GAS MAY BE INSUFFICIENT TO PROPERLY INFLATE THE AIR BAG WHEN THE SRS SYSTEM IS ACTIVATED DURING A CRASH.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS MAY INCREASE THE RISK OF INJURY TO THE OCCUPANT IN THE INVOLVED SEATING POSITION IN THE EVENT OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE SPECIFIC SRS AIR BAG. THE RECALL BEGAN ON APRIL 6, 2006. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-888-270-9371, SCION AT 1-866-548-1851, OR LEXUS AT 1-800-255-3987.
Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗
NHTSA investigations
3DP22005 · Pedestrian Alert Sounds
Opened Jan 27, 2023 · Closed Aug 7, 2023
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Electrical System:propulsion System
NHTSA received a petition on or about July 18, 2022, requesting that Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 141 be applied to all electric and hybrid vehicles operating in the United States. The petition can be reviewed at NHTSA.gov under ODI Number 11486072. FMVSS 141 establishes performance requirements for pedestrian alert sounds for motor vehicles. The standard applies to hybrid and electric vehicles that have a gross vehicle weight rating of 4,536 KG or less or are defined as low-speed vehicles. The standard became fully applicable to all such vehicles manufactured on or after March 1, 2021.On January 27, 2023, NHTSA opened Defect Petition (DP) 22-005 to evaluate the subject matter described in the petition. On June 24, 2023 and as supplemented on June 25, 2023, the petitioner notified NHTSA he was withdrawing his petition. The petitioner indicated that, based on his review of data, there is no justification for asserting potential benefits that could be derived from actions sought by my petition. Based on the petitioner's withdrawal, DP22-005 is closed. Closure of this DP does not represent a determination by NHTSA regarding the subject matter of the petition.
DP13001 · Intermediate Steering Shaft Separation
Opened Feb 21, 2013 · Closed Apr 8, 2020
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Steering; Steering:column; Steering:linkages
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606
Additional source detail variants (3)
Steering:column
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606
Steering:linkages
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606
Steering
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606
PE09019 · Headlight Failure
Opened Apr 17, 2009 · Closed Aug 27, 2009
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Exterior Lighting; Exterior Lighting:headlights
ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION AFTER RECEIVING REPORTS THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS WOULD GO OUT, OR EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH HIGH INTENSITY DISCHARGE (HID) HEADLAMPS THAT OPERATE ON INDEPENDENT LAMPS AND ECU'S (ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNITS) FOR EACH HEADLIGHT, MEANING THAT EACH HEADLIGHT RUNS INDEPENDENTLY OF THE OTHER, AND A FAILURE IN ONE LAMP OR ECU DOES NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN A FAILURE OF THE OTHER.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, A RANDOM SAMPLE OF FORTY CONSUMERS WAS CONTACTED BY ODI IN A TELEPHONE SURVEY TO VERIFY THEIR EXPERIENCES.THE CONSUMERS STATED IN COMPLAINTS TO TOYOTA THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS FAILED AT THE SAME TIME.ODI DISCOVERED THROUGH TALKING WITH THESE COMPLAINANTS THAT IN FACT ONE HEADLIGHT WOULD BEGIN TO FLICKER AND THEN CUT OFF.THE OTHER HEADLIGHT WOULD STILL BE OPERATIONAL.IN A FEW CASES WHERE NO ACTION WAS TAKEN, SOME COMPLAINANTS STATED THAT AFTER A FEW MONTHS BOTH HEADLAMPS WOULD BEGIN TO FAIL RESULTING IN NO HEADLIGHTS; HOWEVER NONE REPORTED THAT BOTH LAMPS FAILED SIMULTANEOUSLY.COMPLAINANTS ALSO STATED THAT THEY COULD TOGGLE THE HEADLAMP SWITCH ON AND OFF TO TEMPORARILY RESTORE LIGHTING WHEN THIS CONDITION OCCURRED, EVEN IN CASES WERE BOTH HEADLAMPS WERE EXTINGUISHED.THE RESULTS OF THIS SURVEY ARE LARGELY CONSISTENT WITH ODI'S ASSESSMENT OF THE REPORTS AND WARRANTY DATA.TOYOTA SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER THAT, GENERALLY SPEAKING, ONLY ONE LAMP FAILED AT A TIME, AND THAT TOGGLING THE SWITCH RESTORED THE LAMP.TOYOTA REQUESTED A MEETING WITH ODI AND ON AUGUST 6, 2009, PRESENTED THEIR ASSESSMENT OF HEADLAMP FAILURE.TOYOTA CONFIRMED THAT A HEADLAMP COULD EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING DUE TO A BULB FAILURE, AND THAT IT COULD BE TEMPORARILY RESTORED BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH ON AND OFF, AND THAT SIMULTANEOUS FAILURE OF BOTH HEADLAMPS WAS RARE AND UNLIKELY.TOYOTA ALSO BRIEFLY DISCUSSED THEIR INTENTION TO CONDUCT A CUSTOMER SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO ADDRESS CONSUMER DISSATISFACTION WITH HID BULB FAILURES.SINCE THERE IS STILL ONE HEADLIGHT OPERATING WHEN THE OTHER ONE CUTS OFF, THERE IS STILL LIGHTING AVAILABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR FACILITY.THUS, A SAFETY DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Exterior Lighting:headlights
ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION AFTER RECEIVING REPORTS THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS WOULD GO OUT, OR EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH HIGH INTENSITY DISCHARGE (HID) HEADLAMPS THAT OPERATE ON INDEPENDENT LAMPS AND ECU'S (ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNITS) FOR EACH HEADLIGHT, MEANING THAT EACH HEADLIGHT RUNS INDEPENDENTLY OF THE OTHER, AND A FAILURE IN ONE LAMP OR ECU DOES NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN A FAILURE OF THE OTHER.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, A RANDOM SAMPLE OF FORTY CONSUMERS WAS CONTACTED BY ODI IN A TELEPHONE SURVEY TO VERIFY THEIR EXPERIENCES.THE CONSUMERS STATED IN COMPLAINTS TO TOYOTA THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS FAILED AT THE SAME TIME.ODI DISCOVERED THROUGH TALKING WITH THESE COMPLAINANTS THAT IN FACT ONE HEADLIGHT WOULD BEGIN TO FLICKER AND THEN CUT OFF.THE OTHER HEADLIGHT WOULD STILL BE OPERATIONAL.IN A FEW CASES WHERE NO ACTION WAS TAKEN, SOME COMPLAINANTS STATED THAT AFTER A FEW MONTHS BOTH HEADLAMPS WOULD BEGIN TO FAIL RESULTING IN NO HEADLIGHTS; HOWEVER NONE REPORTED THAT BOTH LAMPS FAILED SIMULTANEOUSLY.COMPLAINANTS ALSO STATED THAT THEY COULD TOGGLE THE HEADLAMP SWITCH ON AND OFF TO TEMPORARILY RESTORE LIGHTING WHEN THIS CONDITION OCCURRED, EVEN IN CASES WERE BOTH HEADLAMPS WERE EXTINGUISHED.THE RESULTS OF THIS SURVEY ARE LARGELY CONSISTENT WITH ODI'S ASSESSMENT OF THE REPORTS AND WARRANTY DATA.TOYOTA SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER THAT, GENERALLY SPEAKING, ONLY ONE LAMP FAILED AT A TIME, AND THAT TOGGLING THE SWITCH RESTORED THE LAMP.TOYOTA REQUESTED A MEETING WITH ODI AND ON AUGUST 6, 2009, PRESENTED THEIR ASSESSMENT OF HEADLAMP FAILURE.TOYOTA CONFIRMED THAT A HEADLAMP COULD EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING DUE TO A BULB FAILURE, AND THAT IT COULD BE TEMPORARILY RESTORED BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH ON AND OFF, AND THAT SIMULTANEOUS FAILURE OF BOTH HEADLAMPS WAS RARE AND UNLIKELY.TOYOTA ALSO BRIEFLY DISCUSSED THEIR INTENTION TO CONDUCT A CUSTOMER SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO ADDRESS CONSUMER DISSATISFACTION WITH HID BULB FAILURES.SINCE THERE IS STILL ONE HEADLIGHT OPERATING WHEN THE OTHER ONE CUTS OFF, THERE IS STILL LIGHTING AVAILABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR FACILITY.THUS, A SAFETY DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Exterior Lighting
ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION AFTER RECEIVING REPORTS THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS WOULD GO OUT, OR EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH HIGH INTENSITY DISCHARGE (HID) HEADLAMPS THAT OPERATE ON INDEPENDENT LAMPS AND ECU'S (ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNITS) FOR EACH HEADLIGHT, MEANING THAT EACH HEADLIGHT RUNS INDEPENDENTLY OF THE OTHER, AND A FAILURE IN ONE LAMP OR ECU DOES NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN A FAILURE OF THE OTHER.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, A RANDOM SAMPLE OF FORTY CONSUMERS WAS CONTACTED BY ODI IN A TELEPHONE SURVEY TO VERIFY THEIR EXPERIENCES.THE CONSUMERS STATED IN COMPLAINTS TO TOYOTA THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS FAILED AT THE SAME TIME.ODI DISCOVERED THROUGH TALKING WITH THESE COMPLAINANTS THAT IN FACT ONE HEADLIGHT WOULD BEGIN TO FLICKER AND THEN CUT OFF.THE OTHER HEADLIGHT WOULD STILL BE OPERATIONAL.IN A FEW CASES WHERE NO ACTION WAS TAKEN, SOME COMPLAINANTS STATED THAT AFTER A FEW MONTHS BOTH HEADLAMPS WOULD BEGIN TO FAIL RESULTING IN NO HEADLIGHTS; HOWEVER NONE REPORTED THAT BOTH LAMPS FAILED SIMULTANEOUSLY.COMPLAINANTS ALSO STATED THAT THEY COULD TOGGLE THE HEADLAMP SWITCH ON AND OFF TO TEMPORARILY RESTORE LIGHTING WHEN THIS CONDITION OCCURRED, EVEN IN CASES WERE BOTH HEADLAMPS WERE EXTINGUISHED.THE RESULTS OF THIS SURVEY ARE LARGELY CONSISTENT WITH ODI'S ASSESSMENT OF THE REPORTS AND WARRANTY DATA.TOYOTA SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER THAT, GENERALLY SPEAKING, ONLY ONE LAMP FAILED AT A TIME, AND THAT TOGGLING THE SWITCH RESTORED THE LAMP.TOYOTA REQUESTED A MEETING WITH ODI AND ON AUGUST 6, 2009, PRESENTED THEIR ASSESSMENT OF HEADLAMP FAILURE.TOYOTA CONFIRMED THAT A HEADLAMP COULD EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING DUE TO A BULB FAILURE, AND THAT IT COULD BE TEMPORARILY RESTORED BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH ON AND OFF, AND THAT SIMULTANEOUS FAILURE OF BOTH HEADLAMPS WAS RARE AND UNLIKELY.TOYOTA ALSO BRIEFLY DISCUSSED THEIR INTENTION TO CONDUCT A CUSTOMER SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO ADDRESS CONSUMER DISSATISFACTION WITH HID BULB FAILURES.SINCE THERE IS STILL ONE HEADLIGHT OPERATING WHEN THE OTHER ONE CUTS OFF, THERE IS STILL LIGHTING AVAILABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR FACILITY.THUS, A SAFETY DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.