← New search

2007 Toyota Prius

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most Prius years

Owner complaints for the 2007 Toyota Prius are substantially higher than the model-year median of 164.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

1,721 reports with mileage · 282 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 1,060 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Electrical System. Review the 248 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Structure. Review the 184 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

124 crash reports9 fire reports53 injury reports

Air Bags complaints

50 reports
Clear category filter
43,000 miles · Aug 18, 2010
Air BagsService Brakes, HydraulicSteeringCrashInjury

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH, THE VEHICLE BEGAN ABNORMALLY SLIDING TOWARD THE LEFT. THE CONTACT ATTEMPTED TO STEER THE VEHICLE TOWARD THE RIGHT BUT THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT CHANGE DIRECTION. THE CONTACT THEN ATTEMPTED TO BRAKE BUT THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT STOP. THE CONTACT WAS UNABLE TO…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH, THE VEHICLE BEGAN ABNORMALLY SLIDING TOWARD THE LEFT. THE CONTACT ATTEMPTED TO STEER THE VEHICLE TOWARD THE RIGHT BUT THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT CHANGE DIRECTION. THE CONTACT THEN ATTEMPTED TO BRAKE BUT THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT STOP. THE CONTACT WAS UNABLE TO MAINTAIN CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE WHICH RESULTED IN A SINGLE VEHICLE ROLLOVER CRASH. THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. THE POLICE APPEARED ON THE SCENE AND SPECULATED THAT THE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE TIRE BLEW PRIOR TO THE CRASH. A POLICE REPORT WAS AVAILABLE. AN AMBULANCE ALSO APPEARED ON THE SCENE AS THE CONTACT SUSTAINED MINOR INJURIES. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED AND TOWED TO AN INSURANCE COMPANY LOT. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT EXAMINED FOR THE CAUSE OF FAILURE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 43,000.

NHTSA ODI #10350326

8,000 miles · Jul 21, 2010
Air BagsCrashInjury

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 65 MPH THE VEHICLE CRASHED INTO A GUARD RAIL AND THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE DRIVER WAS INJURED AND SHE WAS TRANSPORTED BY AMBULANCE TO A HOSPITAL. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A LOCAL MECHANIC WHO CONFIRMED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS DES…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 65 MPH THE VEHICLE CRASHED INTO A GUARD RAIL AND THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE DRIVER WAS INJURED AND SHE WAS TRANSPORTED BY AMBULANCE TO A HOSPITAL. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A LOCAL MECHANIC WHO CONFIRMED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED. AN AUTHORIZED DEALER WAS NOTIFIED AND INFORMED THE CONTACT THAT THE AIR BAGS ONLY DEPLOY WHEN THE WINDSHIELD BREAKS. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 8,000. UPDATED 10/13/10 *BF THE CONSUMER STATED SHE CRASHED HEAD-ON INTO THE GUARD RAIL. THE FROMT OF THE VEHICLE WAS DEMOLISHED AND NONE OF THE AIR BAGS DEPLOYED. UPDATED 10/2110*JB

NHTSA ODI #10344565

29,200 miles · Jan 5, 2010
Air BagsCrashInjury

I WAS IN A 2007 PRIUS ENTERING A CROSS STREET AND WAS HIT BROAD-SIDE ON THE LEFT DRIVERS SIDE FROM THE MIDDLE OF MY CAR TO THE LEFT FRONT END. THE DAMAGE WAS SEVERE AND I WAS TAKEN TO THE HOSPITAL SUFFERING FROM CUTS AND SEVERE BRUISES TO MY RIBS AND BACKSIDE. THE SIDE CURTAINS DID NOT DEPLOY AND I WAS TOLD BY TOYOTA HEADQUARTER…

Read full complaint

I WAS IN A 2007 PRIUS ENTERING A CROSS STREET AND WAS HIT BROAD-SIDE ON THE LEFT DRIVERS SIDE FROM THE MIDDLE OF MY CAR TO THE LEFT FRONT END. THE DAMAGE WAS SEVERE AND I WAS TAKEN TO THE HOSPITAL SUFFERING FROM CUTS AND SEVERE BRUISES TO MY RIBS AND BACKSIDE. THE SIDE CURTAINS DID NOT DEPLOY AND I WAS TOLD BY TOYOTA HEADQUARTERS THAT I WAS NOT HIT HARD ENOUGH. I AM NOT TOTALLY RECOVERED FROM THIS ACCIDENT AS YET AND IT WILL PROBABLY TAKE A FEW MORE WEEKS. I WAS ALSO TOLD BY TOYOTA THERE HAVEN'T BEEN ANY PROBLEMS WITH SIDE-CURTAINS AND THERE WERE NO OTHER COMPLAINTS ABOUT THIS KIND OF FAILURE. I KNOW THAT IS NOT TRUE AND I WOULD LIKE TOYOTA TO ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE FAILURE. *TR UPDATED 04/07/10.*JB

NHTSA ODI #10298275

21,000 miles · Nov 4, 2009
Air BagsVehicle Speed ControlCrash

MY TOYOTA PRIUS ACCELERATED AT EXTREMELY HIGH SPEED AS I PULLED INTO MY DRIVEWAY. I CRASHED THROUGH THE GARAGE DOOR INTO THE BOXES AND FURNITURE STORED IN THE GARAGE. I HAD MY FOOT PRESSED ALL THE WAY DOWN ON THE BRAKE BUT COULD NOT SLOW DOWN OR STOP BUT ACCELERATED TO A VERY HIGH SPEED. THERE WAS SIGNIFICANT PROPERTY DAMAGE AND…

Read full complaint

MY TOYOTA PRIUS ACCELERATED AT EXTREMELY HIGH SPEED AS I PULLED INTO MY DRIVEWAY. I CRASHED THROUGH THE GARAGE DOOR INTO THE BOXES AND FURNITURE STORED IN THE GARAGE. I HAD MY FOOT PRESSED ALL THE WAY DOWN ON THE BRAKE BUT COULD NOT SLOW DOWN OR STOP BUT ACCELERATED TO A VERY HIGH SPEED. THERE WAS SIGNIFICANT PROPERTY DAMAGE AND CAR DAMAGE. IT WAS REPORTED TO ALLSTATE. NO OTHER VEHICLE WAS INVOLVED. THE AIRBAG DID NOT ACTIVATE! I DO NOT KNOW THE EXACT SPEED OTHER THAN TO SAY IT WAS EXTREMELY FAST AND VERY, VERY TERRIFYING! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10290934

37,000 miles · Jun 19, 2009
Air Bags

MULTIPLE TIMES MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS AIRBAG SYSTEM HAS FAILED DUE TO A PASSENGER WEIGHING OVER 250 POUNDS SITTING IN THE PASSENGER SEAT. THE PROBLEM SEEMS TO HAPPEN WHEN THE PASSENGER WIGGLES WHEN GETTING IN OR HAVING A WALLET IN HIS BACK POCKET. AFTER HE GETS IN THE RED AIRBAG WARNING LIGHT COMES ON AND IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING T…

Read full complaint

MULTIPLE TIMES MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS AIRBAG SYSTEM HAS FAILED DUE TO A PASSENGER WEIGHING OVER 250 POUNDS SITTING IN THE PASSENGER SEAT. THE PROBLEM SEEMS TO HAPPEN WHEN THE PASSENGER WIGGLES WHEN GETTING IN OR HAVING A WALLET IN HIS BACK POCKET. AFTER HE GETS IN THE RED AIRBAG WARNING LIGHT COMES ON AND IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE AIRBAG IS THEN DISABLED. THE AIRBAG LIGHT WILL REMAIN ON UNTIL THE DEALER SERVICES THE CAR. THE DEALER?S HAND DIAGNOSTIC TOOL ONCE REPORTED THAT THE CODE WAS ACCIDENT DETECTED, BUT I CHALLENGED THIS AND IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT THE CODE ACTUALLY MEANS OCCUPANT CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM FAIL. UNHOOKING THE 12V BATTERY WILL CLEAR THE SYSTEM AND SUPPOSEDLY MAKE THE AIRBAG WORK PROPERLY AGAIN. THE PROBLEM WILL REOCCUR WHEN THE SAME PASSENGER GETS IN THE PASSENGER SEAT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10274315

19,000 miles · May 15, 2009
Air BagsCrashInjury

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING 55 MPH, THE CONTACT'S VEHICLE WAS STRUCK HEAD-ON BY ANOTHER VEHICLE. THE FRONT AND SIDE CURTAIN AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY. THE CONTACT INJURED HER CHEST AND NECK AREA. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED BY AN INSURANCE ADJUSTER, WHO WAS UNABLE TO DETER…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING 55 MPH, THE CONTACT'S VEHICLE WAS STRUCK HEAD-ON BY ANOTHER VEHICLE. THE FRONT AND SIDE CURTAIN AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY. THE CONTACT INJURED HER CHEST AND NECK AREA. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED BY AN INSURANCE ADJUSTER, WHO WAS UNABLE TO DETERMINE WHY THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED. A REPORT WAS FILED WITH THE MANUFACTURER AND THEY STATED THAT A REPRESENTATIVE WOULD CALL THE CONTACT WITH AN UPDATE ON THEIR INVESTIGATION. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 19,000. UPDATED 6/4/09 *CN THE CONSUMER'S WIFE WAS INJURED. UPDATED 06/09/09.*JB

NHTSA ODI #10268849

Mileage unknown · Dec 1, 2008
Air BagsChild Seat

HELLO THERE. I AM ALMOST 8 MONTHS PREGNANT AND I DRIVE A PRIUS. I CALLED THE DEALER AND THE TOYOTA COMPANY TO GET MY DRIVER SIDE AIRBAG DISABLED UNTIL I HAVE MY CHILD. I BELIEVE THAT IF THE BAG WENT OFF IT WOULD POSE HARM TO MY FETUS, ESPECIALLY AS I CARRY HIGH IN MY TORSO. THEY SAID THAT THEY WERE UNABLE TO DO SO, AS PER REGULA…

Read full complaint

HELLO THERE. I AM ALMOST 8 MONTHS PREGNANT AND I DRIVE A PRIUS. I CALLED THE DEALER AND THE TOYOTA COMPANY TO GET MY DRIVER SIDE AIRBAG DISABLED UNTIL I HAVE MY CHILD. I BELIEVE THAT IF THE BAG WENT OFF IT WOULD POSE HARM TO MY FETUS, ESPECIALLY AS I CARRY HIGH IN MY TORSO. THEY SAID THAT THEY WERE UNABLE TO DO SO, AS PER REGULATION. I FIND THIS HORRID, ESPECIALLY WITH THE HOLIDAY SEASON AND THE USUAL RISE OF IMPAIRED DRIVERS. I CAN BE AS SAFE AS I CAN BUT IF SOMEONE HITS ME AND THE AIRBAG DEPLOYS, IT HAS A GREAT POTENTIAL OF DOING MORE [POSSIBLY UNNECESSARY] DAMAGE TO MY BABY THAN THE CRASH ALONE. I WAS TOLD THAT YOU COULD POSSIBLY PROVIDE SOME RESOLUTION FOR THIS IN ORDER FOR MY DEALER TO DISABLE THE AIRBAG FOR MY REMAINING TWO MONTHS OF PREGNANCY. PLEASE GET BACK TO ME. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10250382

13,000 miles · Jan 3, 2008
Air BagsSeat BeltsCrash

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT SHE COLLIDED INTO ANOTHER VEHICLE WHEN SHE DEPRESSED THE BRAKE. AS A RESULT, THE SEAT BELTS DISENGAGED WHICH ALLOWED THE DRIVER HIT THE STEERING COLUMN. IN ADDITION, THE CRASH DESTROYED THE VEHICLE AND THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. AS OF JANUARY 3, 2008, THE DEA…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT SHE COLLIDED INTO ANOTHER VEHICLE WHEN SHE DEPRESSED THE BRAKE. AS A RESULT, THE SEAT BELTS DISENGAGED WHICH ALLOWED THE DRIVER HIT THE STEERING COLUMN. IN ADDITION, THE CRASH DESTROYED THE VEHICLE AND THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. AS OF JANUARY 3, 2008, THE DEALER OR MANUFACTURER HAD NOT INSPECTED THE VEHICLE TO DETERMINE THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 13,000. A POLICE REPORT IS AVAILABLE.

NHTSA ODI #10213569

3,141 miles · Jul 24, 2007
Air BagsSeat BeltsCrash

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT'S VEHICLE WAS REAR ENDED BY ANOTHER VEHICLE. AS A RESULT, THE CONTACT'S VEHICLE THEN CRASHED INTO THE REAR OF THE PRECEDING VEHICLE. THE AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY AND THE SEAT BELT DID NOT LOCK. THERE WERE NO INJURIES. THE ROAD CONDITIONS WERE DRY. A POLICE REPORT WAS FI…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT'S VEHICLE WAS REAR ENDED BY ANOTHER VEHICLE. AS A RESULT, THE CONTACT'S VEHICLE THEN CRASHED INTO THE REAR OF THE PRECEDING VEHICLE. THE AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY AND THE SEAT BELT DID NOT LOCK. THERE WERE NO INJURIES. THE ROAD CONDITIONS WERE DRY. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED, BUT HAS NOT YET BEEN INSPECTED. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 3,141. UPDATED 02/01/08 *BF

NHTSA ODI #10197388

Mileage unknown · May 1, 2007
Air BagsCrashInjury

2007 PRIUS WAS "T-BONED" ON THE DRIVER SIDE. OTHER CAR (HONDA) WAS GOING ~40 MPH, AND PRIUS WAS GOING ~25 MPH. AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY IN THE PRIUS, BUT DID IN THE HONDA. DRIVER OF PRIUS HAD TO BE CUT OUT OF CAR AND SUFFERED MINOR INJURIES. MEDICS ON THE SCENE WERE SURPRISED THAT THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY IN THE PRIUS. SI…

Read full complaint

2007 PRIUS WAS "T-BONED" ON THE DRIVER SIDE. OTHER CAR (HONDA) WAS GOING ~40 MPH, AND PRIUS WAS GOING ~25 MPH. AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY IN THE PRIUS, BUT DID IN THE HONDA. DRIVER OF PRIUS HAD TO BE CUT OUT OF CAR AND SUFFERED MINOR INJURIES. MEDICS ON THE SCENE WERE SURPRISED THAT THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY IN THE PRIUS. SINCE THE PRIUS WAS TOTALED, THE PARTS HAVE NOT BEEN REPAIRED OR REPLACED. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10189449

Official recalls

4

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.

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.