← 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

Electrical System complaints

248 reports
Clear category filter
65,000 miles · May 20, 2010
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

THE HEADLIGHTS ON MY 2007 PRIUS COME AND GO. THE PROBLEM IS A DEFECT IN THE HEADLIGHTS AND THE FIX IS MORE THAN $500. FOR THE HEADLIGHTS. THIS IS REALLY DANGEROUS BECAUSE I THINK THERE IS A PROBLEM AND I LOOK THEY ARE OKAY. THEN SOMEONE TELLS ME MY HEADLIGHT IS OFF AND IT IS BUT WHEN I LOOK AT IT LATER, THEY ARE WORKING. I S…

Read full complaint

THE HEADLIGHTS ON MY 2007 PRIUS COME AND GO. THE PROBLEM IS A DEFECT IN THE HEADLIGHTS AND THE FIX IS MORE THAN $500. FOR THE HEADLIGHTS. THIS IS REALLY DANGEROUS BECAUSE I THINK THERE IS A PROBLEM AND I LOOK THEY ARE OKAY. THEN SOMEONE TELLS ME MY HEADLIGHT IS OFF AND IT IS BUT WHEN I LOOK AT IT LATER, THEY ARE WORKING. I SUSPECT THAT THEY HAVE BEEN DOING THIS A LONG TIME BUT I DID NOT REALIZE IT. THIS IS DANGEROUS. I WANT A RECALL!! THIS IS WORSE THAN THE PEDAL PROBLEM. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10331312

84,320 miles · May 12, 2010
Electrical SystemExterior LightingParking Brake

SUMMARY: MY CAR BEGAN ACCELERATING WHILE I WAS IN PARK. I OWN A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. TWO DAYS AGO, I DROVE TO MY DESTINATION, PULLED INTO A PARKING SPOT, AND TURNED OFF THE CAR. I WAS EARLY, SO I TURNED THE CAR BACK ON (SO I COULD LISTEN TO THE RADIO WHILE I WAITED). THE CAR WAS IN PARK AND I DID NOT HAVE MY FEET ON ANY PEDA…

Read full complaint

SUMMARY: MY CAR BEGAN ACCELERATING WHILE I WAS IN PARK. I OWN A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. TWO DAYS AGO, I DROVE TO MY DESTINATION, PULLED INTO A PARKING SPOT, AND TURNED OFF THE CAR. I WAS EARLY, SO I TURNED THE CAR BACK ON (SO I COULD LISTEN TO THE RADIO WHILE I WAITED). THE CAR WAS IN PARK AND I DID NOT HAVE MY FEET ON ANY PEDALS. THE CAR WAS ON FOR LESS THAN A MINUTE WHEN IT BEGAN TO DRIVE FORWARD. I BOTH HEARD THE SOUND OF THE MOTOR ENGAGING AND VISUALLY PROCESSED THAT THE CAR WAS MOVING. I IMMEDIATELY STEPPED ON THE BRAKE HARD AND THE CAR IMMEDIATELY CAME TO A STOP. MY 4-YEAR-OLD WAS DISTRESSED BECAUSE THE ROLLING AND HARD STOP MADE A BIG JOLT. THE CAR WAS STILL IN PARK. I RELEASED THE BRAKE PEDAL AND THE CAR STAYED STILL. I DO NOT KNOW IF THIS IS RELATED, BUT MY CAR HEADLIGHTS RANDOMLY TURN OFF WHILE I AM DRIVING. IF I TOGGLE THE SWITCH OFF AND BACK ON, THEY ALWAYS COME BACK ON. I TOOK IT TO THE LOCAL DEALER, WHERE THE REPAIR GUY TOLD ME THEY FREQUENTLY SEE THIS PROBLEM, AND ALL THEY DO IS REPLACE THE HEADLIGHTS (WHICH MADE NO SENSE TO ME, BECAUSE THE BULBS AREN'T BURNED OUT). I WOULD SAY THIS PROBLEM HAPPENS ABOUT ONCE A WEEK. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10330198

35,000 miles · Apr 28, 2010
Electrical SystemService Brakes, HydraulicStructure

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING AT 48 MPH, THE BRAKES SUDDENLY LOCKED UP AND SWAYED TO THE LEFT SIDE WHEN HE DEPRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALERSHIP FOR DIAGNOSIS. THE DEALER REPAIRED THE AXLE AND DRIVER SIDE BODY BUT IT WAS UNKNOWN IF THE DEALER…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING AT 48 MPH, THE BRAKES SUDDENLY LOCKED UP AND SWAYED TO THE LEFT SIDE WHEN HE DEPRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALERSHIP FOR DIAGNOSIS. THE DEALER REPAIRED THE AXLE AND DRIVER SIDE BODY BUT IT WAS UNKNOWN IF THE DEALER REPAIRED THE BRAKE SYSTEM. THE CONTACT BELIEVED THAT THE RAIN WAS A FACTOR IN THE FAILURE AS IT CAUSED THE COMPUTER CHIP FOR THE BRAKE PEDAL TO MALFUNCTION. THE BRAKING SYSTEM FOR THE VEHICLE FAILED PERIODICALLY IN RAINY WEATHER. THE VIN WAS UNAVAILABLE AT THE TIME OF THE COMPLAINT. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 35,000. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 60,000.

NHTSA ODI #10327870

Mileage unknown · Apr 19, 2010
Electrical System

TL*- THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT ATTEMPTED TO START THE IGNITION. THE ENGINE FAILED TO START AS A RESULT OF A DEAD BATTERY. THE ENGINE FUNCTIONED AFTER A JUMP-STARTING THE VEHICLE. THE FAILURE OCCURRED ON TWO SEPARATE OCCASIONS, AND APPROXIMATELY TWO WEEKS AFTER THE FIRST OCCURRENCE. THE BATTERY HAD BEEN RE…

Read full complaint

TL*- THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT ATTEMPTED TO START THE IGNITION. THE ENGINE FAILED TO START AS A RESULT OF A DEAD BATTERY. THE ENGINE FUNCTIONED AFTER A JUMP-STARTING THE VEHICLE. THE FAILURE OCCURRED ON TWO SEPARATE OCCASIONS, AND APPROXIMATELY TWO WEEKS AFTER THE FIRST OCCURRENCE. THE BATTERY HAD BEEN REPLACED TWICE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER WITH AN ESTIMATION OF FIVE DIFFERENT TIMES. A SPECIALIST DIAGNOSED THE VEHICLE AND STATED THE VEHICLE WAS OPERATING NORMALLY. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS UNKNOWN. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 35,000.

NHTSA ODI #10326409

67,535 miles · Apr 9, 2010
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

INTERMITTENT HEADLIGHT OPERATION ON HID HEADLIGHTS 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. BOTH HEADLIGHTS WENT OUT AT THE SAME TIME WHILE TRAVELING ON I75 LAST NIGHT. AFTER ALMOST WRECKING, WE PULLED TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. AFTER TURNING LIGHTS OFF FOR A WHILE THEY CAME BACK ON AND STARTED WORKING AGAIN. THIS SEEMS TO BE A FREQUENT OCCURRENCE …

Read full complaint

INTERMITTENT HEADLIGHT OPERATION ON HID HEADLIGHTS 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. BOTH HEADLIGHTS WENT OUT AT THE SAME TIME WHILE TRAVELING ON I75 LAST NIGHT. AFTER ALMOST WRECKING, WE PULLED TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. AFTER TURNING LIGHTS OFF FOR A WHILE THEY CAME BACK ON AND STARTED WORKING AGAIN. THIS SEEMS TO BE A FREQUENT OCCURRENCE ACCORDING TO BLOGS ON THE INTERNET. I CONTACTED THE DEALER AND THEY SAID IF THEY HAD TO REPLACE THE UNIT IT WOULD BE IN THE THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS!!!!! ($1100 FOR HEADLIGHT COMPUTER, $500- $600+ FOR HEADLIGHT BULBS AND ANOTHER $1100 FOR LIGHT KITS) I THINK THAT IS COMPLETELY RIDICULOUS TO EXPECT SOMEONE TO PAY THAT MUCH JUST TO BE ABLE TO DRIVE THERE CAR SAFELY! NONE OF THIS WAS REVEALED WHEN THE CAR WAS PURCHASED! HOW COULD ANYONE EXPECT TO PAY THAT KIND OF MONEY TO KEEP THERE HEADLIGHTS WORKING? PLEASE HELP, WE CANNOT AFFORD TO DRIVE SAFELY NOW! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10324684

Mileage unknown · Apr 2, 2010
Electrical SystemVehicle Speed Control

2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. CONSUMER STATES UNINTENDED ACCELERATION. *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED HE WAS PARKING THE VEHICLE AND WHEN HE SHIFTED THE GEAR FROM DRIVE TO NEUTRAL, WITH HIS FOOT ON THE BRAKE, THE RPM ACCELERATED TO APPROXIMATELY 4000, SO HE PUSHED THE POWER OFF BUTTON TO TURN THE VEHICLE OFF.

NHTSA ODI #10324233

Mileage unknown · Mar 23, 2010
Electrical System

2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. CONSUMER STATES VEHICLE IS A LEMON. *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED SHE HAD NUMEROUS PROBLEMS WITH THE VEHICLE. THE BATTERY WAS DEAD, BUT TESTED GOOD, THE TOUCH SCREEN DISPLAY WAS INOPERABLE DUE TO A LOOSE CONNECTION AT THE REAR OF THE MULTI DISPLAY/ HATCH AREA. A SHORT WIRE WAS FOUND. THE BATTERY DIED FIVE MORE TI…

Read full complaint

2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. CONSUMER STATES VEHICLE IS A LEMON. *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED SHE HAD NUMEROUS PROBLEMS WITH THE VEHICLE. THE BATTERY WAS DEAD, BUT TESTED GOOD, THE TOUCH SCREEN DISPLAY WAS INOPERABLE DUE TO A LOOSE CONNECTION AT THE REAR OF THE MULTI DISPLAY/ HATCH AREA. A SHORT WIRE WAS FOUND. THE BATTERY DIED FIVE MORE TIMES DUE TO A SHORT. THE HEADLIGHT BULBS HAD TO BE REPLACED, DUE TO THEM GOING OUT AFTER DRIVING FOR AN HOUR. THE HID MODULE HAD AN INTERMITTENT SHORT. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10318660

48,000 miles · Mar 14, 2010
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

WHEN THE CAR IS FIRST STARTED, THE DRIVER SIDE HEADLIGHT USUALLY GOES OUT WITHIN THE FIRST FEW MINUTES OF DRIVING. IT IS ALMOST ALWAYS THE DRIVER SIDE BUT IT HAS HAPPENED A FEW TIMES WITH THE PASSENGER SIDE. WHEN I TURN THE HEADLIGHTS OFF AND THEN BACK ON BOTH HEADLIGHTS FUNCTION, ALTHOUGH THE LIGHT THAT HAD BEEN OUT INITIALLY…

Read full complaint

WHEN THE CAR IS FIRST STARTED, THE DRIVER SIDE HEADLIGHT USUALLY GOES OUT WITHIN THE FIRST FEW MINUTES OF DRIVING. IT IS ALMOST ALWAYS THE DRIVER SIDE BUT IT HAS HAPPENED A FEW TIMES WITH THE PASSENGER SIDE. WHEN I TURN THE HEADLIGHTS OFF AND THEN BACK ON BOTH HEADLIGHTS FUNCTION, ALTHOUGH THE LIGHT THAT HAD BEEN OUT INITIALLY IS NOT AS BRIGHT AS THE OTHER. THIS HAPPENS INTERMITTENTLY FOR THE FIRST 10-20 MINUTES OF DRIVING AND THEN BOTH HEADLIGHTS SEEM TO FUNCTION PROPERLY. I RECENTLY DROVE AT NIGHT FOR NEARLY 5 HOURS AND ONLY HAD THIS PROBLEM DURING THE FIRST 20 MINUTES OF DRIVING. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10319536

23,406 miles · Mar 11, 2010
Electrical SystemService Brakes, Hydraulic

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 40 MPH, APPROACHING A TRAFFIC LIGHT. WHEN THE BRAKE PEDAL WAS ENGAGED, THE BRAKES FAILED TO RESPOND IN A TIMELY MANNER. ADDITIONALLY, THE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM FAILED WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC. THE VEHICLE WAS IN TH…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 40 MPH, APPROACHING A TRAFFIC LIGHT. WHEN THE BRAKE PEDAL WAS ENGAGED, THE BRAKES FAILED TO RESPOND IN A TIMELY MANNER. ADDITIONALLY, THE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM FAILED WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC. THE VEHICLE WAS IN THE PROCESS OF BEING REPAIRED WHEN THE COMPLAINT WAS FILED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 23,406. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 30,000.

NHTSA ODI #10318991

1,000 miles · Mar 11, 2010
Electrical System

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 35 MPH, PROCEEDING TO A TRAFFIC LIGHT. WHILE COMING FROM A COMPLETE STOP WITH THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL DEPRESSED; THE PEDAL WAS NON RESPONSIVE. THE CONSUMER TURNED THE ENGINE OFF AND THEN RESTARTED IT. THE VEHICLE ACCELERATOR PEDAL BECAME OPERABLE. IN AD…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 35 MPH, PROCEEDING TO A TRAFFIC LIGHT. WHILE COMING FROM A COMPLETE STOP WITH THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL DEPRESSED; THE PEDAL WAS NON RESPONSIVE. THE CONSUMER TURNED THE ENGINE OFF AND THEN RESTARTED IT. THE VEHICLE ACCELERATOR PEDAL BECAME OPERABLE. IN ADDITION, ON A SEPARATE OCCASION TRAVELING AT 45 MPH THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO DECREASE IN SPEED. THE IDENTICAL FAILURE OCCURRED WITHOUT WARNING. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED ON TWO SEPARATE OCCASIONS, AND HE ADVISED HER TO HAVE THE VEHICLE TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER FOR INSPECTION. THE AUTHORIZED DEALER WAS UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE FAILURE OR DETECT ANY DIAGNOSTIC CODES. THE VEHICLE HAS NOT BEEN REPAIRED FOR THE MALFUNCTION. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 1,000. THE CURRENT WAS 15,500. UPDATED 08/03/10. *LJ THE CONSUMER STATED SHE HAS EXPERIENCED A SUDDEN LOSS OF POWER WHILE DRIVING. WHEN SHE APPLIED THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL THERE WAS NO RESPONSE. SHE TRIED SHIFTING INTO DRIVE SEVERAL TIMES, AND THERE WAS STILL NO RESPONSE. UPDATED 09/02/10*JB

NHTSA ODI #10318962

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.