← 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

What owners actually said

1,439 reports
Mileage unknown · Feb 19, 2010
Service Brakes, HydraulicVehicle Speed Control

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS WHICH WAS PURCHASED IN SEPTEMBER 2006. HE STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING AT SPEEDS OF LESS THAN 40 MPH APPROACHING A STOP SIGN HE REMOVED HIS FOOT FROM THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL, INSTEAD OF SLOWING DOWN THE VEHICLE MAINTAINED THE SPEED IT WAS TRAVELING. HE THEN DEPRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL AND THE BRA…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS WHICH WAS PURCHASED IN SEPTEMBER 2006. HE STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING AT SPEEDS OF LESS THAN 40 MPH APPROACHING A STOP SIGN HE REMOVED HIS FOOT FROM THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL, INSTEAD OF SLOWING DOWN THE VEHICLE MAINTAINED THE SPEED IT WAS TRAVELING. HE THEN DEPRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL AND THE BRAKES WOULD NOT RESPOND. THERE WAS NO RESISTANCE IN THE BRAKE PEDAL AND IT THEN IT EXTENDED TO THE FLOORBOARD. THE SPEED DECREASED SLOWLY AND HE CONTINUED TO PUSH THE BRAKE PEDAL INTO THE FLOORBOARD UNTIL THE VEHICLE EVENTUALLY CAME TO A STOP. THE DEALER ADVISED HIM THAT THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE PEDAL OR THE BRAKES AND THAT HE SHOULD REMOVE THE FLOOR MATS FROM THE VEHICLE. THE FLOOR MATS WERE NOT CLOSE ENOUGH TO THE BRAKE OR ACCELERATOR PEDAL WHEN THE FAILURE OCCURRED. NO REPAIRS HAVE BEEN MADE TO THE VEHICLE. ON TWO ADDITIONAL OCCASIONS, THE CONTACT EXPERIENCED THE SAME FAILURE. HE ALSO RECEIVED A LETTER FROM TOYOTA IN REGARDS TO A RECALL CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER: 09V388000, VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL ACCELERATOR PEDAL, HOWEVER, HE WAS NOT AWARE IF HIS VEHICLE WAS INCLUDED IN THE RECALL OR NOT. THE VIN WAS NOT ACCEPTED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS UNKNOWN AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 70,000.

NHTSA ODI #10312132

12,000 miles · Feb 19, 2010
Exterior Lighting

THERE IS A CLASS ACTION SUIT AGAINST TOYOTA DUE TO INTERMITTENT HEADLIGHT FAILURE. PLEASE CHECK THIS LINK TO SEE IF A RECALL SHOULD BE IMPOSED. THANKS HTTP://WWW.LEMONLAWCLAIMS.COM/TOYOTA_PRIUS_HEADLIGHT_FAILURE.HTM. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10311977

20 miles · Feb 19, 2010
Exterior Lighting

INTERMITTENT FAILURE OF LIGHTS. CAR HAD 20,000 MILES ON IT WHEN HEADLIGHT STARTING FAILING INTERMITTENTLY. AFTER ABOUT ANOTHER YEAR THE OTHER SIDE STARTED FAILING INTERMITTENTLY. I AND OTHERS ON YAHOO PRIUS GROUP HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM WITH THE HEADLIGHT GOING OFF INTERMITTENTLY. COULD CAUSE AN ACCIDENT, AS AT TIMES THEY BOT…

Read full complaint

INTERMITTENT FAILURE OF LIGHTS. CAR HAD 20,000 MILES ON IT WHEN HEADLIGHT STARTING FAILING INTERMITTENTLY. AFTER ABOUT ANOTHER YEAR THE OTHER SIDE STARTED FAILING INTERMITTENTLY. I AND OTHERS ON YAHOO PRIUS GROUP HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM WITH THE HEADLIGHT GOING OFF INTERMITTENTLY. COULD CAUSE AN ACCIDENT, AS AT TIMES THEY BOTH GO OFF. AFTER TURNING THEM OFF AND THEN BACK ON THEY BURN BUT YOU NEVER KNOW IF ONE OR BOTH WILL GO OFF. TOYOTA KNOWS THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH THE HEADLIGHTS ON THE SECOND GENERATION PRIUS BUT HAS MADE NO ATTEMPT TO RECALL OR REPAIR THE PROBLEM. WE ARE ALL LEFT ON OUR OWN TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10311970

8,035 miles · Feb 18, 2010
Service Brakes, HydraulicSteering

1) STEERING WHEEL/SHAFT APPEARS TO BE IMPROPERLY SUPPORTED; FEELS LOOSE WHEN TURNING LOCK TO LOCK SINCE NEW. HAVE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF FOUR (4) TOYOTA DEALERS WHEN SERVICE PERFORMED (HAVE TAKEN TO TOYOTA FOR ALL SERVICE WORK SINCE NEW), ALL HAVE ADVISED THAT THERE IS "NOTHING WRONG" WITH THE VEHICLE. IT IS THE ONLY VEHICL…

Read full complaint

1) STEERING WHEEL/SHAFT APPEARS TO BE IMPROPERLY SUPPORTED; FEELS LOOSE WHEN TURNING LOCK TO LOCK SINCE NEW. HAVE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF FOUR (4) TOYOTA DEALERS WHEN SERVICE PERFORMED (HAVE TAKEN TO TOYOTA FOR ALL SERVICE WORK SINCE NEW), ALL HAVE ADVISED THAT THERE IS "NOTHING WRONG" WITH THE VEHICLE. IT IS THE ONLY VEHICLE WE HAVE EVER OWNED THAT HAS THIS SENSE OF DISCONNECT AND POTENTIAL FOR A MUCH MORE SERIOUS ISSUE WERE THERE EVER A STEERING FAILURE. 2) OVER ROUGH ROADS (WHEN VEHICLE WAS DRIVEN IN SEATTLE AND BELLEVUE, WA) WHEN STOPPING, THE ABS SYSTEM SEEMS TO ACTIVATE PREMATURELY AND INCREASE STOPPING DISTANCES. WE HAVE OTHER VEHICLES WITH ABS BRAKES WHICH DO NOT ACTIVATE SO READILY AND STOP SO SLOWLY. AS IT RELATES TO INCIDENT DATE(S): SINCE NEW, VEHICLE PURCHASED NOVEMBER 2005. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10311820

24,400 miles · Feb 18, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic

I WAS TRAVELING ABOUT 25 MPH ON A SIDE STREET DURING BROAD DAYLIGHT. I APPLIED MY BRAKES TO STOP BUT THE CAR CONTINUED TO ROLL FORWARD. THE BRAKE PEDAL DID NOT DEPRESS TO THE FLOOR - RATHER IT JUST REMAINED IN THE NORMAL DEPRESSED CONDITION AND DID NOT STOP THE CAR AT ALL. I THEN PUMPED THE BRAKE AND IT FINALLY ENGAGED ON THE…

Read full complaint

I WAS TRAVELING ABOUT 25 MPH ON A SIDE STREET DURING BROAD DAYLIGHT. I APPLIED MY BRAKES TO STOP BUT THE CAR CONTINUED TO ROLL FORWARD. THE BRAKE PEDAL DID NOT DEPRESS TO THE FLOOR - RATHER IT JUST REMAINED IN THE NORMAL DEPRESSED CONDITION AND DID NOT STOP THE CAR AT ALL. I THEN PUMPED THE BRAKE AND IT FINALLY ENGAGED ON THE THIRD TRY ALTHOUGH I WAS ALREADY THRU THE STOP SIGN AND INTO THE INTERSECTION. LUCKILY, THERE WERE NO CARS AHEAD OF ME NOR WAS THERE ANY CROSS TRAFFIC AT THE INTERSECTION. THERE WAS NO SNOW OR ICE ON THE GROUND. MY CAR IS A 2006 TOYOTA PRIUS WITH 24,400 MILES TRAVELED AT THE TIME OF THE INCIDENT. IT WAS PURCHASED IN JULY OF 2006. A FOLLOW UP CHECK OF THE BRAKES ON TUESDAY AT A LOCAL TOYOTA DEALER ON THE 16TH RESULTED IN THE FOLLOWING" "CHECKED FOR DIAGNOSTIC CODES - EVERYTHING FINE." HARDLY CALMING. THE PAD WEAR INDICATOR WAS NOT DISPLAYED. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10311800

40,000 miles · Feb 18, 2010
Exterior Lighting

HEADLIGHTS TURN OF INTERMITTENTLY ON BOTH MY DAUGHTERS 2006 & 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. MOSTLY THE RIGHT ONE SOMETIMES BOTH. IF YOU TURN THE HEADLIGHTS OFF THEN BACK ON THE HEADLIGHTS COME BACK ON FOR A WHILE THEN YOU HAVE TO DO THE SAME THING AGAIN. ALSO I NOTICE MANY OTHER PRIUSES THAT HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM. PLEASE LOOK INTO THIS PRO…

Read full complaint

HEADLIGHTS TURN OF INTERMITTENTLY ON BOTH MY DAUGHTERS 2006 & 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. MOSTLY THE RIGHT ONE SOMETIMES BOTH. IF YOU TURN THE HEADLIGHTS OFF THEN BACK ON THE HEADLIGHTS COME BACK ON FOR A WHILE THEN YOU HAVE TO DO THE SAME THING AGAIN. ALSO I NOTICE MANY OTHER PRIUSES THAT HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM. PLEASE LOOK INTO THIS PROBLEM. THANK YOU. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10311706

62,000 miles · Feb 17, 2010
Exterior Lighting

2006 PRIUS. 62K MILES. ONE HEADLIGHT STARTED GOING OUT INTERMITTENTLY ABOUT 3 WEEKS AGO (JAN.2010) NOW A MINUTE OR SO AFTER THE FIRST ONE GOES OUT THE SECOND ONE GOES TOO LEAVING ME IN TOTAL DARKNESS. THE FIX IS TO TURN THE SWITCH ON AND OFF. A BULLETIN I RECEIVED LAST YEAR SAYS YOU CAN KILL THE HID BY TURNING OFF AND ON WHILE S…

Read full complaint

2006 PRIUS. 62K MILES. ONE HEADLIGHT STARTED GOING OUT INTERMITTENTLY ABOUT 3 WEEKS AGO (JAN.2010) NOW A MINUTE OR SO AFTER THE FIRST ONE GOES OUT THE SECOND ONE GOES TOO LEAVING ME IN TOTAL DARKNESS. THE FIX IS TO TURN THE SWITCH ON AND OFF. A BULLETIN I RECEIVED LAST YEAR SAYS YOU CAN KILL THE HID BY TURNING OFF AND ON WHILE STILL HOT. THIS THE ONLY WAY TO KEEP THE LIGHTS GOING! I GOT A TICKET LAST WEEK FOR A LIGHT OUT AND OF COURSE I MADE IT COME BACK ON FOR THE OFFICER BUT HE WASN'T IMPRESSED. NOW I HAVE TO GET IT FIXED AND I HAVE READ ALL THE BLOGS AND CLEARLY REPLACING THE BULB IS NOT WAY TO CORRECT THIS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10311589

55,000 miles · Feb 17, 2010
SteeringSuspension

I WAS DRIVING AT ABOUT 65 M/HR ON I-95 AND NOTICED MY CAR VEERING FIRST TO THE LEFT THEN TO THE RIGHT. I WAS PUZZLED BY THIS AND LOOKED OVER TO NOTICE THAT TREES WERE NOT MOVING, I.E., IT DID NOT FEEL WINDY OUTSIDE. THIS WAS A VERY PECULIAR INCIDENT THAT HAS HAPPENED TO MY CAR ABOUT 3-4 TIMES IN THE PAST 3 YEARS. I LATER HEARD O…

Read full complaint

I WAS DRIVING AT ABOUT 65 M/HR ON I-95 AND NOTICED MY CAR VEERING FIRST TO THE LEFT THEN TO THE RIGHT. I WAS PUZZLED BY THIS AND LOOKED OVER TO NOTICE THAT TREES WERE NOT MOVING, I.E., IT DID NOT FEEL WINDY OUTSIDE. THIS WAS A VERY PECULIAR INCIDENT THAT HAS HAPPENED TO MY CAR ABOUT 3-4 TIMES IN THE PAST 3 YEARS. I LATER HEARD ON THE NEWS THE RECALL OF COROLLAS FOR THE SAME TYPE OF ISSUE. THEY ACTUALLY SHOWED A TEST MODEL SIMULATION AND IT LOOKED EXACTLY LIKE WHAT I HAVE BEEN EXPERIENCING. I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS MY IMAGINATION BUT IT CERTAINLY DID NOT FEEL THAT WAY WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10311584

30,000 miles · Feb 17, 2010
Exterior Lighting

I HAVE A 2006 PRIUS WITH HID HEADLIGHTS. A LITTLE OVER A YEAR AGO I NOTICED THAT ONE OR SOMETIMES BOTH HEADLIGHTS WOULD GO OUT INTERMITTENTLY. WE LIVE ON A STREET WITHOUT STREETLAMPS AND I HAD SOME SCARY MOMENTS SEVERAL TIMES WHEN BOTH LIGHTS WENT OUT. WHEN I TOLD MY DEALER ABOUT IT, THEY SAID THEY COULD DO NOTHING AS THE LIG…

Read full complaint

I HAVE A 2006 PRIUS WITH HID HEADLIGHTS. A LITTLE OVER A YEAR AGO I NOTICED THAT ONE OR SOMETIMES BOTH HEADLIGHTS WOULD GO OUT INTERMITTENTLY. WE LIVE ON A STREET WITHOUT STREETLAMPS AND I HAD SOME SCARY MOMENTS SEVERAL TIMES WHEN BOTH LIGHTS WENT OUT. WHEN I TOLD MY DEALER ABOUT IT, THEY SAID THEY COULD DO NOTHING AS THE LIGHTS WERE WORKING WHEN THEY EXAMINED THEM. FINALLY, I GOT A LETTER FROM TOYOTA (ATTACHED), WHICH SAID THEY WOULD LOWER THE REPLACEMENT PRICE OF THE HEADLIGHTS (BUT NOT WARNING OF THE PROBLEMS I HAD BEEN HAVING). I HAD MY DEALER REPAIR THE LIGHTS AT A COST OF $559.25. THE DEALER TOLD ME THAT IF I COMPLAINED TO TOYOTA, THEY WOULD REIMBURSE ME. A CASE MANAGER AT TOYOTA SAID THEY WOULD PAY FOR THE PARTS (ABOUT $300). I HAVE NOW READ OF HUNDREDS OF OTHER PEOPLE WITH MY MODEL CAR WHO HAVE HAD IDENTICAL PROBLEMS. I FEEL THAT TOYOTA SHOULD ISSUE A RECALL FOR A DANGEROUS PROBLEM LIKE THIS, OR AT LEAST NOTIFY THE DEALERS SO WHEN OWNERS COMPLAIN OF THE PROBLEM IT IS REPAIRED UNDER WARRANTY. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10311514

3,000 miles · Feb 17, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic

NHTSA ID: 193333 I UNDERSTAND THAT THE JAPANESE GOVERNMENT IS INVESTIGATING A BRAKING ISSUE ON 2010 PRIUSES -- INVOLVING SLIPPING OR SURGING FORWARD WHEN THE BRAKES ARE APPLIED. THIS IS NOT UNIQUE TO THE 2010 MODEL; OUR 2006 PRIUS SLIPS IN THE SAME WAY, UNDER THE SAME CIRCUMSTANCES: WHEN THE DRIVER BRAKES AT SLOW SPEE…

Read full complaint

NHTSA ID: 193333 I UNDERSTAND THAT THE JAPANESE GOVERNMENT IS INVESTIGATING A BRAKING ISSUE ON 2010 PRIUSES -- INVOLVING SLIPPING OR SURGING FORWARD WHEN THE BRAKES ARE APPLIED. THIS IS NOT UNIQUE TO THE 2010 MODEL; OUR 2006 PRIUS SLIPS IN THE SAME WAY, UNDER THE SAME CIRCUMSTANCES: WHEN THE DRIVER BRAKES AT SLOW SPEEDS ON A WET SURFACE LIKE A LIGHT RAIL TRACK, OR GOES OVER BUMPS OR INTO POTHOLES WHILE BRAKING. IT FEELS AS IF THERE ARE NO BRAKES, AND THE CAR LURCHES FORWARD. THIS HAS HAPPENED ONLY ON FLAT STREETS -- NEVER ON HILLS. THE PROBLEM OCCURS ABOUT TWICE A MONTH. IN CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THIS PROBLEM, THE TOYOTA DEALER TELLS ME ANY VEHICLE WILL DO THIS, BUT THE ANOMALY IS ONE I HAVE NEVER EXPERIENCED IN ANY OTHER CAR I'VE OWNED, INCLUDING 2 TOYOTAS. IN OTHER WORDS, NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE TO ADDRESS THIS SITUATION, BECAUSE THE DEALERS SAY THERE IS NO DEFECT. "APPROXIMATE INCIDENT DATE" QUESTION BELOW MAKES NO SENSE, BECAUSE THIS IS A RECURRING PROBLEM. ALSO, "MILEAGE" INFORMATION IS USELESS, SINCE THIS HAS HAPPENED DOZENS OF TIMES. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10311449

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.