NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Electrical System complaints
248 reportsClear category filter50,000 miles · May 4, 2009
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting
ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS ONE OR BOTH OF THE HEADLIGHTS ON MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS HAVE GONE OUT WITHOUT WARNING. THE LIGHTS COME BACK ON WHEN I TURN THE LIGHT CONTROL COMPLETELY OFF AND THEN TURN IT BACK ON. THE LIGHTS WILL THEN WORK FOR AWHILE BEFORE TURNING OFF AGAIN. THERE IS NO ALARM OR NOTICE THE HEADLIGHTS HAVE GONE OFF. …
Read full complaint
ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS ONE OR BOTH OF THE HEADLIGHTS ON MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS HAVE GONE OUT WITHOUT WARNING. THE LIGHTS COME BACK ON WHEN I TURN THE LIGHT CONTROL COMPLETELY OFF AND THEN TURN IT BACK ON. THE LIGHTS WILL THEN WORK FOR AWHILE BEFORE TURNING OFF AGAIN. THERE IS NO ALARM OR NOTICE THE HEADLIGHTS HAVE GONE OFF. I REPORTED THE PROBLEM TO TOYOTA (800-331-4331) TWO WEEKS AGO. WHEN AND IF THEY RETURN MY CALLS, IT'S TYPICALLY RIGHT BEFORE THE PERSON CALLS GOES HOME FOR THE DAY. ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS, I HAVE CALLED AND THERE HAVE BEEN "COMMUNICATIONS ERRORS" ON THE TOYOTA END. THEY TELL ME SOMEONE WILL CALL WITHIN 24-72 HOURS AND WE START ALL OVER AGAIN. IN MY OPINION, THEY ARE AVOIDING ME. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10267656
30,000 miles · Apr 14, 2009
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting
THE PASSENGER SIDE HEADLIGHT TURNS OFF INTERMITTENTLY AT NIGHT. COMES ON AND GOES OFF RANDOMLY, EVEN WHEN ON A FLAT SURFACE OR SITTING STILL. RECENTLY I WAS DRIVING ON A DARK, WINDING ROAD AND IT WENT OUT PRESENTING AN EXTREMELY DANGEROUS CONDITION. ACCORDING TO THE DISCUSSION BOARDS, THIS IS A VERY COMMON INDICATION AND VERY…
Read full complaint
THE PASSENGER SIDE HEADLIGHT TURNS OFF INTERMITTENTLY AT NIGHT. COMES ON AND GOES OFF RANDOMLY, EVEN WHEN ON A FLAT SURFACE OR SITTING STILL. RECENTLY I WAS DRIVING ON A DARK, WINDING ROAD AND IT WENT OUT PRESENTING AN EXTREMELY DANGEROUS CONDITION. ACCORDING TO THE DISCUSSION BOARDS, THIS IS A VERY COMMON INDICATION AND VERY EXPENSIVE REMEDIATION ITEM WHICH WILL PREVENT MANY FROM FIXING DURING OUT CURRENT ECONOMIC CRISIS. I AM VERY WORRIED ABOUT MY WIFE DRIVING AT NIGHT IN THIS CAR DON'T WANT MY CHILDREN IN IT AT NIGHT. THIS IS A VERY SERIOUS ISSUE IN THAT THE DRIVER COULD HIT SOMETHING RESULTING IN INJURY TO THE OCCUPANTS, OR ANOTHER CAR COULD BECOME CONFUSED BY THE HEADLIGHT FAILURE RESULTING IN AN INCIDENT. AGAIN, THE MESSAGE BOARDS ARE LOADED WITH DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10265206
48,000 miles · Apr 13, 2009
Electrical System
HID HEADLAMPS ON MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS DO NOT FUNCTION PROPERLY. FOR THE PAST SEVERAL MONTHS THEY HAVE FLICKERED OFF AND ON. TURNING THE LIGHT OFF AND THEN ON, WHILE DRIVING CORRECTED THE PROBLEM FOR A WHILE. NOW ONE LAMP ONLY STAYS ON FOR 1 MINUTE OR LESS. THE OTHER STILL GOES OFF AND WILL TURN BACK ON IF THE LIGHTS ARE TURNED O…
Read full complaint
HID HEADLAMPS ON MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS DO NOT FUNCTION PROPERLY. FOR THE PAST SEVERAL MONTHS THEY HAVE FLICKERED OFF AND ON. TURNING THE LIGHT OFF AND THEN ON, WHILE DRIVING CORRECTED THE PROBLEM FOR A WHILE. NOW ONE LAMP ONLY STAYS ON FOR 1 MINUTE OR LESS. THE OTHER STILL GOES OFF AND WILL TURN BACK ON IF THE LIGHTS ARE TURNED OFF AND THEN BACK ON. TOYOTA'S RESPONSE IS TO WANT TO CHARGE ME $350 FOR A NEW BULB OR OVER $1000 FOR A CONTROLLER BOARD FOR THE COMPUTER. FROM WHAT I HAVE READ ON LINE MY CAR IS NOT THE ONLY PRIUS WITH THIS PROBLEM. WE NEED A RECALL NOW BEFORE SOME ONE'S LIGHTS FAIL AT NIGHT AND THEY DIE! *TR
NHTSA ODI #10265099
30,000 miles · Mar 23, 2009
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE HIGH INTENSITY (HID) HEADLIGHTS WOULD BECOME INOPERABLE INTERMITTENTLY. THE DEALER STATED THAT THERE WAS A WIRE DEFECT THAT CAUSED THE SHORTAGE IN THE HEADLIGHTS. THE FRONT DRIVER'S SIDE HEADLIGHT WAS REPLACED FOR $400 AT THE CONTACT'S EXPENSE. LESS THAN SI…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE HIGH INTENSITY (HID) HEADLIGHTS WOULD BECOME INOPERABLE INTERMITTENTLY. THE DEALER STATED THAT THERE WAS A WIRE DEFECT THAT CAUSED THE SHORTAGE IN THE HEADLIGHTS. THE FRONT DRIVER'S SIDE HEADLIGHT WAS REPLACED FOR $400 AT THE CONTACT'S EXPENSE. LESS THAN SIX MONTHS LATER, THE PASSENGER SIDE HEADLIGHT WAS REPLACED. IN ADDITION, THE ENTIRE LIGHTING ASSEMBLY WAS REPLACED FOR $350 AT THE CONTACT'S EXPENSE. THE VIN WAS UNKNOWN. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 30,000 AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS LESS THAN 48,000. UPDATED 04-17-09 UPDATED 04/21/09.*JB
NHTSA ODI #10262763
26,000 miles · Feb 18, 2009
Electrical SystemVehicle Speed ControlCrash
AT 4:45 PM ON 2/5/2009 , I DROVE MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS WEST ON SW ANDOVER ST. IN SEATTLE WA. I SLOWED AS I MADE A RIGHT TURN TO PARK PERPENDICULAR TO THE STREET WITH A 6 FOOT HIGH CHAIN-LINK FENCE IN FRONT OF ME ON TOP OF A RETAINING WALL. THE BOTTOM OF THE WALL IS 6 FEET BELOW STREET LEVEL ON A PAVED PARKING AREA. AS THE PRI…
Read full complaint
AT 4:45 PM ON 2/5/2009 , I DROVE MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS WEST ON SW ANDOVER ST. IN SEATTLE WA. I SLOWED AS I MADE A RIGHT TURN TO PARK PERPENDICULAR TO THE STREET WITH A 6 FOOT HIGH CHAIN-LINK FENCE IN FRONT OF ME ON TOP OF A RETAINING WALL. THE BOTTOM OF THE WALL IS 6 FEET BELOW STREET LEVEL ON A PAVED PARKING AREA. AS THE PRIUS APPROACHED THE FENCE, I BRAKED TO STOP, BUT THE CAR DID NOT SLOW ,SO I FLOORED THE BRAKE. THE CAR HIT A FENCE POST, PULLING IT OUT OF ITS MOUNT AND THEN THE CAR MOVED OVER THE TOP OF THE WALL PUSHING THE POLE AND FENCE OVER ITS HOOD & ROOF,. THE FRONT OF THE PRIUS DROPPED TO THE AREA BELOW THE WALL WHILE THE REAR REMAINED ON THE TOP. THE FENCE MESH STRETCHED BUT SLOWED THE PRIUS'S FORWARD MOVEMENT AND KEPT THE REAR FROM GOING OVER THE WALL.. THE DASHBOARD WAS STILL LIT AND I LOWERED THE ELECTRICAL WINDOWS AND YELLED FOR HELP. THE FIRST ARRIVAL TOLD ME TO "TURN OFF THE CAR". THIS IS SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE THE ONLY WAY HE COULD HAVE KNOWN THE CAR WAS RUNNING WAS IF HE HEARD THE SOUND OF THE PRIUS'S GASOLINE ENGINE THAT ONLY KICKS IN AT HIGHER SPEEDS. I OPENED THE DOOR AND JUMPED DOWN TO THE PAVEMENT. THE POLICE CAME AND MADE A REPORT. I DID NOT RECEIVE A CITATION. THE PRIUS WAS EXTRACTED BY A TOW COMPANY AND HAULED AWAY. FORTUNATELY I RECEIVED NO PHYSICAL INJURY. THE CHAIN LINK FENCE WAS TRULY A SAFETY NET. ON 2./12/ 2009, MY INSURANCE COMPANY , USAA, DECLARED MY PRIUS "TOTALED" AND MADE A SETTLEMENT PAYMENT. I THOUGHT PERHAPS MY BRAKES HAD FAILED. I HAD MY PRIUS RECEIVE A ROUTINE 25,000 MILE CHECK AT THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP JUST EIGHT DAYS BEFORE THE ACCIDENT. FROM ARTICLES ON WWW.CONSUMERSAFETY.COM I LEARNED THAT SIMILAR ACCIDENTS WITH THE PRIUS HAVE HAPPENED TO OTHER PEOPLE. AFTER READING THEIR EXPERIENCES, I NOW BELIEVE THAT "UNINTENDED ACCELERATION" WAS THE MORE LIKELY CAUSE OF MY ACCIDENT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10259227
29,520 miles · Jan 7, 2009
Electrical System
I OWNED A 2007 PRIUS AND LATELY IT HAS THESE PROBLEMS. THE LEFT HEAD LIGHT GOES OUT WHILE DRIVING MORE OFTEN THAN THE RIGHT HEADLIGHT. ON SEVERAL OCCASION, BOTH HEADLIGHTS WENT OUT ON IT'S OWN DURING DRIVING. THIS IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM THAT CAN LEAD TO DEATH IF DRIVERS WERE NEARS HAZARDOUS ROAD SUCH AS CALIFORNIA HWY 1 WHERE D…
Read full complaint
I OWNED A 2007 PRIUS AND LATELY IT HAS THESE PROBLEMS. THE LEFT HEAD LIGHT GOES OUT WHILE DRIVING MORE OFTEN THAN THE RIGHT HEADLIGHT. ON SEVERAL OCCASION, BOTH HEADLIGHTS WENT OUT ON IT'S OWN DURING DRIVING. THIS IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM THAT CAN LEAD TO DEATH IF DRIVERS WERE NEARS HAZARDOUS ROAD SUCH AS CALIFORNIA HWY 1 WHERE DRIVERS CAN FALL OFF THE CLIFF ON TURNS WITH SUDDEN HEADLIGHTS WENT OUT. TO RESET THE LIGHTS BY TURN OFF AND ON AGAIN BUT THE PROBLEM REPEAT WITH ONE LIGHT GOES OUT EVERY 5 MINUTES WHILE DRIVING. I THINK TOYOTA NEEDS TO ISSUE A RECALL BEFORE SOMEONE GOT SERIOUS INJURY FROM THIS CLEARLY A FLAW IN DESIGN. STEVE *TR
NHTSA ODI #10254104
31,000 miles · Dec 31, 2008
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting
I'VE BEEN HAVING ISSUES WITH MY RIGHT HEADLIGHT GOING OUT INTERMITTENTLY. IF I CYCLE THE POWER THE HEADLIGHT USUALLY COMES BACK ON. THE DEALER SAYS THERE'S NOTHING WRONG. I'VE BEEN PULLED OVER ONCE FOR AN EQUIPMENT VIOLATION ALREADY. LAST NIGHT THE HEADLIGHT WENT OUT LEAVING ME WITH LIMITED VISIBILITY. AS I ROUNDED A CORNER I AL…
Read full complaint
I'VE BEEN HAVING ISSUES WITH MY RIGHT HEADLIGHT GOING OUT INTERMITTENTLY. IF I CYCLE THE POWER THE HEADLIGHT USUALLY COMES BACK ON. THE DEALER SAYS THERE'S NOTHING WRONG. I'VE BEEN PULLED OVER ONCE FOR AN EQUIPMENT VIOLATION ALREADY. LAST NIGHT THE HEADLIGHT WENT OUT LEAVING ME WITH LIMITED VISIBILITY. AS I ROUNDED A CORNER I ALMOST HIT A DEER STANDING ON THE SHOULDER AS I COULDN'T SEE HIM/HER DUE TO THE LIMITED VISIBILITY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10253381
37,000 miles · Dec 3, 2008
Electrical System
I HAVE A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS WITH ABOUT 40,000 MILES ON IT NOW. AT ABOUT 37,000 MILES, MY DRIVER'S SIDE HID HEADLIGHT WOULD PERIODICALLY GO OUT WHILE DRIVING. SOON AFTERWARDS, THE PASSENGER SIDE HEADLIGHT WOULD GO OUT, AN ONCE BOTH WENT OUT. THE LIGHTS WOULD COME BACK ON IF THE SWITCH WAS TURNED OFF AND THEN BACK ON. I HAD THE CA…
Read full complaint
I HAVE A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS WITH ABOUT 40,000 MILES ON IT NOW. AT ABOUT 37,000 MILES, MY DRIVER'S SIDE HID HEADLIGHT WOULD PERIODICALLY GO OUT WHILE DRIVING. SOON AFTERWARDS, THE PASSENGER SIDE HEADLIGHT WOULD GO OUT, AN ONCE BOTH WENT OUT. THE LIGHTS WOULD COME BACK ON IF THE SWITCH WAS TURNED OFF AND THEN BACK ON. I HAD THE CAR CHECKED BY TOYOTA AND HAD TO REPLACE THE DRIVER'S SIDE BULB FOR ABOUT $400. NOW, THE PASSENGER SIDE BULB IS STARTING TO GO OFF MORE FREQUENTLY AND WILL HAVE TO BE REPLACED. I WAS SHOCKED THAT THESE HID BULBS DID NOT HAVE A LONGER LIFE, FAILED SO SUDDENLY AND AT THEIR HIGH COST OF REPLACEMENT. IT IS A SERIOUS DANGER TO BE DRIVING AT NIGHT AND HAVE YOUR HEADLIGHTS FAIL, PARTICULARLY WHEN REPLACEMENT IS NOT A SIMPLE OR INEXPENSIVE TASK. THE BULBS ARE NOT EASILY ACCESSIBLE. PUBLIC FORUMS SHOW THAT THIS IS A COMMON OCCURRENCE IN THE TOYOTA PRIUS, THE REPLACEMENTS ARE FROM A DIFFERENT MANUFACTURER AND HAVE NO REPORTED PROBLEMS, YET NO RECALL WAS MADE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10250653
36,500 miles · Nov 22, 2008
Electrical SystemVisibility
I OWN AND OPERATE A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. TO DATE I HAVE BEEN EXTREMELY SATISFIED WITH THE VEHICLE. HOWEVER, RECENTLY I HAVE BEEN EXPERIENCING INTERMITTENT FAILURE OF MY PASSENGER HEADLIGHT AND OCCASIONALLY THE BRAKE LIGHT ON THE PASSENGER SIDE. THIS IS A SAFETY CONCERN BECAUSE I DO NOT KNOW WHEN THE LIGHT IS ON OR OFF. THE OTHER D…
Read full complaint
I OWN AND OPERATE A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. TO DATE I HAVE BEEN EXTREMELY SATISFIED WITH THE VEHICLE. HOWEVER, RECENTLY I HAVE BEEN EXPERIENCING INTERMITTENT FAILURE OF MY PASSENGER HEADLIGHT AND OCCASIONALLY THE BRAKE LIGHT ON THE PASSENGER SIDE. THIS IS A SAFETY CONCERN BECAUSE I DO NOT KNOW WHEN THE LIGHT IS ON OR OFF. THE OTHER DAY I WAS PULLED OVER BY THE POLICE AND RECEIVED A REPAIR ORDER. THE COST FROM THE DEALER TO REPLACE THE BULB IS $535.00, APPARENTLY THIS IS MAINTENANCE AND A NON WARRANTY ITEM. PERSONALLY I THINK THERE IS A DESIGN FLAW IF IT REQUIRES A MECHANIC TO CHANGE A LIGHTBULB. I AM POSTING A MESSAGE HERE IN HOPES THAT THIS WILL CONVERT INTO A SAFETY RECALL. I AM GOING TO WORK WITH THE DEALER AND TOYOTA TO TRY AND GET THIS REPAIR COVERED. WISH ME LUCK! *TR
NHTSA ODI #10249546
Mileage unknown · Nov 13, 2008
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting
STARTED NOTICING MY PASSENGER SIDE HEAD LIGHT GOING OUT SPORADICALLY. JUST AS THE OTHERS, BY TURNING THEM OFF, THEN ON, THE LIGHTS COME BACK ON. WAS ACTUALLY STOPPED BY A VA STATE TROOPER, WHO ADVISED HIS FATHER-IN-LAW HAD THE SAME PROBLEM & THAT THIS WAS A MANUFACTURER ERROR. SO, I TOOK THIS ISSUE TO MY DEALER DUE TO HAVING AN …
Read full complaint
STARTED NOTICING MY PASSENGER SIDE HEAD LIGHT GOING OUT SPORADICALLY. JUST AS THE OTHERS, BY TURNING THEM OFF, THEN ON, THE LIGHTS COME BACK ON. WAS ACTUALLY STOPPED BY A VA STATE TROOPER, WHO ADVISED HIS FATHER-IN-LAW HAD THE SAME PROBLEM & THAT THIS WAS A MANUFACTURER ERROR. SO, I TOOK THIS ISSUE TO MY DEALER DUE TO HAVING AN EXTENDED WARRANTY. THEY CALLED MY WARRANTY COMPANY BEFORE STARTING WORK TO FIX THIS $500 ISSUE (WHICH, ALL THEY DID WAS REPLACE THE BULB). IT THEN STARTED OCCURRING ON MY DRIVER SIDE. WHEN I TOOK IT IN TO HAVE THIS FIXED / LOOKED AT, WAS ADVISED THE WARRANTY COMPANY HAD DENIED THE CHARGE WITH THE DEALER & THE DEALER HAD COMP'D THE CHARGE AS A COURTESY. BASED ON THESE REPORTS, I JUST CALLED THE DEALER TO ADVISE THEM OF THESE ISSUES & AM HOPING FOR A RESOLUTION TO THIS ISSUE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10248689
Official recalls
4Nov 14, 2012
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Hybrid Propulsion System: Inverter
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.
Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Engine And Engine Cooling
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.
Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Nov 14, 2012
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Steering:gear Box:shaft Sector
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.
Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Steering
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.
Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Feb 3, 2010
SOUTHEAST TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2005-2011 PASSENGER VEHICLES FOR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 110, "TIRE SELECTION AND RIMS." THESE VEHICLES WERE SOLD WITHOUT THE REQUISITE LOAD CARRYING CAPACITY MODIFICATION LABELS.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A DRIVER MAY OVERLOAD A VEHICLE WHICH MAY INCREASE THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL MAIL TO CONSUMERS THE CORRECTED LABEL OR THE CUSTOMER WILL HAVE THE OPTION FOR DEALERS TO INSTALL THE LABEL FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON MAY 27, 2010. OWNERS MAY CONTACT SOUTHEAST TOYOTA AT 1-800-301-6859.
Oct 5, 2009
TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2004-2010 PASSENGER VEHICLES. THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL CAN GET STUCK IN THE WIDE OPEN POSITION DUE TO ITS BEING TRAPPED BY AN UNSECURED OR INCOMPATIBLE DRIVER'S FLOOR MAT.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A STUCK OPEN ACCELERATOR PEDAL MAY RESULT IN VERY HIGH VEHICLE SPEEDS AND MAKE IT DIFFICULT TO STOP THE VEHICLE, WHICH COULD CAUSE A CRASH, SERIOUS INJURY OR DEATH.
Remedy: TOYOTA FILED AN AMENDED DEFECT REPORT ON NOVEMBER 25, 2009, STATING THAT DEALERS WILL MODIFY THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL AND, ON CERTAIN VEHICLES, ALTER THE SHAPE OF THE FLOOR SURFACE UNDER THE PEDAL. THESE CHANGES ADDRESS THE RISK OF PEDAL ENTRAPMENT DUE TO INTERFERENCE WITH THE FLOOR MAT. REDESIGNED ACCELERATOR PEDALS WILL BECOME AVAILABLE BEGINNING IN APRIL 2010 AND DEALERS WILL REPLACE ANY MODIFIED PEDAL WITH THE NEW PEDAL IF DESIRED. ALSO, DEALERS WILL REPLACE ANY GENUINE TOYOTA OR LEXUS ALL-WEATHER FLOOR MATS WITH REDESIGNED ALL-WEATHER MATS, OR REPURCHASE THE PREVIOUS MATS FROM OWNERS WHO DO NOT WANT THE NEW ONES. ADDITIONALLY, SOFTWARE MODIFICATIONS WILL BE INSTALLED ON CAMRY, AVALON AND LEXUS ES 350, IS 350 AND IS 250 MODELS THAT WILL ENSURE THAT THE BRAKE OVERRIDES THE ACCELERATOR IN THE EVENT BOTH BRAKE AND ACCELERATOR PEDALS ARE APPLIED. TOYOTA WILL BEGIN MAILING LETTERS TO OWNERS ON DECEMBER 31, 2009. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331, LEXUS AT 1-800-255-3987.
Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗
NHTSA investigations
3DP22005 · Pedestrian Alert Sounds
Opened Jan 27, 2023 · Closed Aug 7, 2023
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Electrical System:propulsion System
NHTSA received a petition on or about July 18, 2022, requesting that Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 141 be applied to all electric and hybrid vehicles operating in the United States. The petition can be reviewed at NHTSA.gov under ODI Number 11486072. FMVSS 141 establishes performance requirements for pedestrian alert sounds for motor vehicles. The standard applies to hybrid and electric vehicles that have a gross vehicle weight rating of 4,536 KG or less or are defined as low-speed vehicles. The standard became fully applicable to all such vehicles manufactured on or after March 1, 2021.On January 27, 2023, NHTSA opened Defect Petition (DP) 22-005 to evaluate the subject matter described in the petition. On June 24, 2023 and as supplemented on June 25, 2023, the petitioner notified NHTSA he was withdrawing his petition. The petitioner indicated that, based on his review of data, there is no justification for asserting potential benefits that could be derived from actions sought by my petition. Based on the petitioner's withdrawal, DP22-005 is closed. Closure of this DP does not represent a determination by NHTSA regarding the subject matter of the petition.
DP13001 · Intermediate Steering Shaft Separation
Opened Feb 21, 2013 · Closed Apr 8, 2020
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Steering; Steering:column; Steering:linkages
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606
Additional source detail variants (3)
Steering:column
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606
Steering:linkages
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606
Steering
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606
PE09019 · Headlight Failure
Opened Apr 17, 2009 · Closed Aug 27, 2009
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Exterior Lighting; Exterior Lighting:headlights
ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION AFTER RECEIVING REPORTS THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS WOULD GO OUT, OR EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH HIGH INTENSITY DISCHARGE (HID) HEADLAMPS THAT OPERATE ON INDEPENDENT LAMPS AND ECU'S (ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNITS) FOR EACH HEADLIGHT, MEANING THAT EACH HEADLIGHT RUNS INDEPENDENTLY OF THE OTHER, AND A FAILURE IN ONE LAMP OR ECU DOES NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN A FAILURE OF THE OTHER.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, A RANDOM SAMPLE OF FORTY CONSUMERS WAS CONTACTED BY ODI IN A TELEPHONE SURVEY TO VERIFY THEIR EXPERIENCES.THE CONSUMERS STATED IN COMPLAINTS TO TOYOTA THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS FAILED AT THE SAME TIME.ODI DISCOVERED THROUGH TALKING WITH THESE COMPLAINANTS THAT IN FACT ONE HEADLIGHT WOULD BEGIN TO FLICKER AND THEN CUT OFF.THE OTHER HEADLIGHT WOULD STILL BE OPERATIONAL.IN A FEW CASES WHERE NO ACTION WAS TAKEN, SOME COMPLAINANTS STATED THAT AFTER A FEW MONTHS BOTH HEADLAMPS WOULD BEGIN TO FAIL RESULTING IN NO HEADLIGHTS; HOWEVER NONE REPORTED THAT BOTH LAMPS FAILED SIMULTANEOUSLY.COMPLAINANTS ALSO STATED THAT THEY COULD TOGGLE THE HEADLAMP SWITCH ON AND OFF TO TEMPORARILY RESTORE LIGHTING WHEN THIS CONDITION OCCURRED, EVEN IN CASES WERE BOTH HEADLAMPS WERE EXTINGUISHED.THE RESULTS OF THIS SURVEY ARE LARGELY CONSISTENT WITH ODI'S ASSESSMENT OF THE REPORTS AND WARRANTY DATA.TOYOTA SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER THAT, GENERALLY SPEAKING, ONLY ONE LAMP FAILED AT A TIME, AND THAT TOGGLING THE SWITCH RESTORED THE LAMP.TOYOTA REQUESTED A MEETING WITH ODI AND ON AUGUST 6, 2009, PRESENTED THEIR ASSESSMENT OF HEADLAMP FAILURE.TOYOTA CONFIRMED THAT A HEADLAMP COULD EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING DUE TO A BULB FAILURE, AND THAT IT COULD BE TEMPORARILY RESTORED BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH ON AND OFF, AND THAT SIMULTANEOUS FAILURE OF BOTH HEADLAMPS WAS RARE AND UNLIKELY.TOYOTA ALSO BRIEFLY DISCUSSED THEIR INTENTION TO CONDUCT A CUSTOMER SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO ADDRESS CONSUMER DISSATISFACTION WITH HID BULB FAILURES.SINCE THERE IS STILL ONE HEADLIGHT OPERATING WHEN THE OTHER ONE CUTS OFF, THERE IS STILL LIGHTING AVAILABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR FACILITY.THUS, A SAFETY DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Exterior Lighting:headlights
ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION AFTER RECEIVING REPORTS THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS WOULD GO OUT, OR EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH HIGH INTENSITY DISCHARGE (HID) HEADLAMPS THAT OPERATE ON INDEPENDENT LAMPS AND ECU'S (ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNITS) FOR EACH HEADLIGHT, MEANING THAT EACH HEADLIGHT RUNS INDEPENDENTLY OF THE OTHER, AND A FAILURE IN ONE LAMP OR ECU DOES NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN A FAILURE OF THE OTHER.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, A RANDOM SAMPLE OF FORTY CONSUMERS WAS CONTACTED BY ODI IN A TELEPHONE SURVEY TO VERIFY THEIR EXPERIENCES.THE CONSUMERS STATED IN COMPLAINTS TO TOYOTA THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS FAILED AT THE SAME TIME.ODI DISCOVERED THROUGH TALKING WITH THESE COMPLAINANTS THAT IN FACT ONE HEADLIGHT WOULD BEGIN TO FLICKER AND THEN CUT OFF.THE OTHER HEADLIGHT WOULD STILL BE OPERATIONAL.IN A FEW CASES WHERE NO ACTION WAS TAKEN, SOME COMPLAINANTS STATED THAT AFTER A FEW MONTHS BOTH HEADLAMPS WOULD BEGIN TO FAIL RESULTING IN NO HEADLIGHTS; HOWEVER NONE REPORTED THAT BOTH LAMPS FAILED SIMULTANEOUSLY.COMPLAINANTS ALSO STATED THAT THEY COULD TOGGLE THE HEADLAMP SWITCH ON AND OFF TO TEMPORARILY RESTORE LIGHTING WHEN THIS CONDITION OCCURRED, EVEN IN CASES WERE BOTH HEADLAMPS WERE EXTINGUISHED.THE RESULTS OF THIS SURVEY ARE LARGELY CONSISTENT WITH ODI'S ASSESSMENT OF THE REPORTS AND WARRANTY DATA.TOYOTA SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER THAT, GENERALLY SPEAKING, ONLY ONE LAMP FAILED AT A TIME, AND THAT TOGGLING THE SWITCH RESTORED THE LAMP.TOYOTA REQUESTED A MEETING WITH ODI AND ON AUGUST 6, 2009, PRESENTED THEIR ASSESSMENT OF HEADLAMP FAILURE.TOYOTA CONFIRMED THAT A HEADLAMP COULD EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING DUE TO A BULB FAILURE, AND THAT IT COULD BE TEMPORARILY RESTORED BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH ON AND OFF, AND THAT SIMULTANEOUS FAILURE OF BOTH HEADLAMPS WAS RARE AND UNLIKELY.TOYOTA ALSO BRIEFLY DISCUSSED THEIR INTENTION TO CONDUCT A CUSTOMER SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO ADDRESS CONSUMER DISSATISFACTION WITH HID BULB FAILURES.SINCE THERE IS STILL ONE HEADLIGHT OPERATING WHEN THE OTHER ONE CUTS OFF, THERE IS STILL LIGHTING AVAILABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR FACILITY.THUS, A SAFETY DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Exterior Lighting
ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION AFTER RECEIVING REPORTS THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS WOULD GO OUT, OR EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH HIGH INTENSITY DISCHARGE (HID) HEADLAMPS THAT OPERATE ON INDEPENDENT LAMPS AND ECU'S (ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNITS) FOR EACH HEADLIGHT, MEANING THAT EACH HEADLIGHT RUNS INDEPENDENTLY OF THE OTHER, AND A FAILURE IN ONE LAMP OR ECU DOES NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN A FAILURE OF THE OTHER.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, A RANDOM SAMPLE OF FORTY CONSUMERS WAS CONTACTED BY ODI IN A TELEPHONE SURVEY TO VERIFY THEIR EXPERIENCES.THE CONSUMERS STATED IN COMPLAINTS TO TOYOTA THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS FAILED AT THE SAME TIME.ODI DISCOVERED THROUGH TALKING WITH THESE COMPLAINANTS THAT IN FACT ONE HEADLIGHT WOULD BEGIN TO FLICKER AND THEN CUT OFF.THE OTHER HEADLIGHT WOULD STILL BE OPERATIONAL.IN A FEW CASES WHERE NO ACTION WAS TAKEN, SOME COMPLAINANTS STATED THAT AFTER A FEW MONTHS BOTH HEADLAMPS WOULD BEGIN TO FAIL RESULTING IN NO HEADLIGHTS; HOWEVER NONE REPORTED THAT BOTH LAMPS FAILED SIMULTANEOUSLY.COMPLAINANTS ALSO STATED THAT THEY COULD TOGGLE THE HEADLAMP SWITCH ON AND OFF TO TEMPORARILY RESTORE LIGHTING WHEN THIS CONDITION OCCURRED, EVEN IN CASES WERE BOTH HEADLAMPS WERE EXTINGUISHED.THE RESULTS OF THIS SURVEY ARE LARGELY CONSISTENT WITH ODI'S ASSESSMENT OF THE REPORTS AND WARRANTY DATA.TOYOTA SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER THAT, GENERALLY SPEAKING, ONLY ONE LAMP FAILED AT A TIME, AND THAT TOGGLING THE SWITCH RESTORED THE LAMP.TOYOTA REQUESTED A MEETING WITH ODI AND ON AUGUST 6, 2009, PRESENTED THEIR ASSESSMENT OF HEADLAMP FAILURE.TOYOTA CONFIRMED THAT A HEADLAMP COULD EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING DUE TO A BULB FAILURE, AND THAT IT COULD BE TEMPORARILY RESTORED BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH ON AND OFF, AND THAT SIMULTANEOUS FAILURE OF BOTH HEADLAMPS WAS RARE AND UNLIKELY.TOYOTA ALSO BRIEFLY DISCUSSED THEIR INTENTION TO CONDUCT A CUSTOMER SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO ADDRESS CONSUMER DISSATISFACTION WITH HID BULB FAILURES.SINCE THERE IS STILL ONE HEADLIGHT OPERATING WHEN THE OTHER ONE CUTS OFF, THERE IS STILL LIGHTING AVAILABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR FACILITY.THUS, A SAFETY DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Illustration