← 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

Electronic Stability Control (esc) complaints

34 reports
Clear category filter
203,202 miles · Jul 5, 2022
Electronic Stability Control (esc)Exterior LightingService Brakes, Hydraulic

The contact owns a 2007 Toyota Prius. The contact stated that while driving the speed was unknown due to the instrument cluster being inoperable. On another occasion while driving approximately 45 MPH, the brake pedal was depressed but failed to operate properly; however, on that occasion the instrument cluster was operating as …

Read full complaint

The contact owns a 2007 Toyota Prius. The contact stated that while driving the speed was unknown due to the instrument cluster being inoperable. On another occasion while driving approximately 45 MPH, the brake pedal was depressed but failed to operate properly; however, on that occasion the instrument cluster was operating as designed. The vehicle stability control, ABS, and brake light warning lights were illuminated. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic and diagnosed with an actuator and brake booster failure. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The approximate failure mileage was 203,202.

NHTSA ODI #11472401

184,000 miles · Aug 22, 2020
Electronic Stability Control (esc)Service Brakes

WHILE DRIVING AROUND A CORNER ON CITY STREETS, BRAKING SUDDENLY BECAME VERY DIFFICULT, AND CAUSED THE VEHICLE TO SKID WHEN BRAKES WERE APPLIED. A HIGH-PITCHED ELECTRONIC SQUEAL CAME FROM THE DASHBOARD, AND THE BRAKE SYSTEM LIGHT, ABS LIGHT, VSC LIGHT, AND MASTER WARNING LIGHT ALL TURNED ON. THESE ARE ALL LISTED AS SYMPTOMS OF A …

Read full complaint

WHILE DRIVING AROUND A CORNER ON CITY STREETS, BRAKING SUDDENLY BECAME VERY DIFFICULT, AND CAUSED THE VEHICLE TO SKID WHEN BRAKES WERE APPLIED. A HIGH-PITCHED ELECTRONIC SQUEAL CAME FROM THE DASHBOARD, AND THE BRAKE SYSTEM LIGHT, ABS LIGHT, VSC LIGHT, AND MASTER WARNING LIGHT ALL TURNED ON. THESE ARE ALL LISTED AS SYMPTOMS OF A FAILED BRAKE ACTUATOR. AFTER CONTACTING A LICENSED TOYOTA DEALERSHIP, I WAS DIRECTED TO THE TOYOTA CUSTOMER CARE DEPARTMENT. AFTER BEING ESCALATED TO A SUPERVISOR, I WAS INFORMED THAT TOYOTA IS AWARE OF THIS PROBLEM, BUT THAT THE WARRANTY EXTENSION THEY USED TO COVER IT EXPIRED IN 2017, AND THEY REFUSED TO COVER THE COST OF REPLACEMENT (~$3000). I BELIEVE THIS ISSUE SHOULD BE CAUSE FOR A SAFETY RECALL, AS IT HAPPENED SUDDENLY AND WITHOUT WARNING WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS IN MOTION. IT WAS PURE LUCK THAT THIS DIDN'T RESULT IN A CRASH.

NHTSA ODI #11350794

320,000 miles · Jan 30, 2020
Electronic Stability Control (esc)Service Brakes

WELL KNOWN ABS ACCUMULATOR FAILURE, LOUD BEEPING NOISE, CAN'T DRIVE CAR SAFELY, HIGH MILEAGE CAR AND WILL BE REPAIRING IT, MY COMPLAINT IS THAT THE PART IS SEVENTEEN HUNDRED DOLLARS $1700 WHICH IS A LOT FOR SOMETHING AS IMPORTANT AS BRAKES AND WITH SUCH A HIGH FAILURE RATE ON ALL OF TOYOTA'S HYBRIDS. THIS PART NEEDS TO BE AVAILA…

Read full complaint

WELL KNOWN ABS ACCUMULATOR FAILURE, LOUD BEEPING NOISE, CAN'T DRIVE CAR SAFELY, HIGH MILEAGE CAR AND WILL BE REPAIRING IT, MY COMPLAINT IS THAT THE PART IS SEVENTEEN HUNDRED DOLLARS $1700 WHICH IS A LOT FOR SOMETHING AS IMPORTANT AS BRAKES AND WITH SUCH A HIGH FAILURE RATE ON ALL OF TOYOTA'S HYBRIDS. THIS PART NEEDS TO BE AVAILABLE FROM 3RD PARTIES SO I AM NOT FORCED TO DEAL WITH JUNK YARD ABS THAT IS JUST AS LIKELY TO FAIL BECAUSE OF A FLAWED DESIGN.

NHTSA ODI #11302947

220,000 miles · Sep 5, 2019
Electrical SystemElectronic Stability Control (esc)Service Brakes

IF I DRIVE ON THE EXPRESSWAY OR AROUND TOWN AND I'M DRIVING A HALF HOUR SOMETIMES LESS MY CAR MAKES A LOUD BUZZING NOISE AND MY INSTRUMENT PANEL THE HAZARD LIGHTS GO ON AND I LOSE MY BRAKES. THIS WAS VERY SCARY. THANK GOODNESS I WASN'T GOING TO FAST TOWARD THE LIGHT AND DIDN'T HIT ANYONE. I'M SCARED TO DRIVE THE CAR BECAUSE IT …

Read full complaint

IF I DRIVE ON THE EXPRESSWAY OR AROUND TOWN AND I'M DRIVING A HALF HOUR SOMETIMES LESS MY CAR MAKES A LOUD BUZZING NOISE AND MY INSTRUMENT PANEL THE HAZARD LIGHTS GO ON AND I LOSE MY BRAKES. THIS WAS VERY SCARY. THANK GOODNESS I WASN'T GOING TO FAST TOWARD THE LIGHT AND DIDN'T HIT ANYONE. I'M SCARED TO DRIVE THE CAR BECAUSE IT DOES THIS ALL THE TIME IF I'M DRIVING FOR A PERIOD OF TIME 1/2 HOUR OR MORE. MY VEHICLE WAS ON CITY STREET AND ON HIGHWAY. I WAS IN MOTION. ON THE HIGHWAY 70MPH AND ON CITY STREETS 35/40 MPH.

NHTSA ODI #11253488

155 miles · Mar 7, 2019
Electronic Stability Control (esc)Service Brakes

IN FEB 2018 I NOTICED THAT SEVERAL LIGHTS CAME ON IN MY CAR THE VSC, ABS, AND PRESSURE SENSOR LIGHT LIT UP. ALSO THE BRAKE INDICATOR LIGHT. I HAD RECENTLY WENT FOR AND INSPECTION ON MY CAR IN JAN AND HAD BRAKES REPLACED AT MY LOCAL MONROE PRIOR TO THIS HAPPENING SO I QUESTIONED THEM ON WHAT ALL THE LIGHTS MEANT AND THEY LOOKED…

Read full complaint

IN FEB 2018 I NOTICED THAT SEVERAL LIGHTS CAME ON IN MY CAR THE VSC, ABS, AND PRESSURE SENSOR LIGHT LIT UP. ALSO THE BRAKE INDICATOR LIGHT. I HAD RECENTLY WENT FOR AND INSPECTION ON MY CAR IN JAN AND HAD BRAKES REPLACED AT MY LOCAL MONROE PRIOR TO THIS HAPPENING SO I QUESTIONED THEM ON WHAT ALL THE LIGHTS MEANT AND THEY LOOKED ON LINE AND SAW THAT THERE WAS A RECALL ON THE BRAKE ACTUATOR FOR MY CAR. THEY ADVISED ME TO GO TO THE TOYOTA DEALER. I WENT TO THE DEALER IN A FEW WEEKS LATER IN MAR AND THEY EXPLAINED THAT THERE WAS A LETTER SENT TO PRIUS OWNERS STATING THEY EXTENDED THE WARRANTY ON BRAKE ACTUATORS UNTIL END OF 2017. THEY HAVE IT IN TWO PHASES, AND IT'S UNLIMITED MILES UNTIL DEC 2017 FOR THE FIRST PHASE, THEN AFTER THAT IT'S 150K MILES/10 YEARS. IT ALSO SAYS THE RED TRIANGLE LIGHT MUST BE ON FOR IT TO BE COVERED (IN OTHER WORDS, IT'S ONLY COVERED IF IT FAILS.) I NEVER RECEIVED THIS LETTER AND THE EXCEED THE 150K MILES BY 5K AND YEARS. THE CSR REP SAID HE WOULD SHE IF THEY COULD HONOR IT BEING THAT IT WAS SO EARLY IN THE 2018 YEAR ONLY A FEW MONTHS PASS THE DEADLINE BUT THE MANAGER ON SITE DECLINED AND TOLD ME TO CONTACT TOYOTA CUSTOMER CARE. THE DEALER QUOTED ME $3,500.00 TO GET THIS REPLACED. I CONTACTED TOYOTA AND OF COURSE THEY SAID THERE IS NOTHING THEY COULD DO BECAUSE THE LETTER STIPULATED A SPECIFIC TIME FRAME OF SERVICE. MY ISSUE IS THAT I #1 NEVER RECEIVED A LETTER ABOUT THIS RECALL/EXTENDED WARRANTY #2 I BROUGHT THIS CAR AT A DEALER CERTIFIED PRE-OWNED TOYOTA DEALER SO THEY SHOULD OF UPDATED MY INFO IN THE SYSTEM (ADDRESS, EX.) #3 MY CAR IS A ELECTRICAL CAR AND NEEDED THIS FIX TO OPERATE PROPERLY... I FEEL LIKE I'M BEING PUNISHED ABOUT A DEFECT UNDISCLOSED TO ME WHICH NOW IS A HEFTY COST. #4 MY ISSUE HAPPEN 2-3 MONTHS AFTER STILL NOT FAR OFF. I'M FILING A COMPLAINT IN HOPES OF FINDING HELP TO RESOLVE THIS ISSUE. .

NHTSA ODI #11184826

35,000 miles · Dec 13, 2018
Electrical SystemElectronic Stability Control (esc)Unknown Or Other

TOYOTA SENT THE EXTENDED WARRANTY NOTICE ON THE COMBINATION METER TO THE WRONG ADDRESS; THEREFORE, I COULD NOT "CONNECT THE DOTS" REGARDING MY DASHBOARD BLACKOUT--MEANING I THOUGHT IT WAS QUIRKY, NOT A DOCUMENTED PROBLEM WITH THE COMBINATION METER. MY 2007 PRIUS WITH ONLY 35,000 MILES ON IT NEEDS A REPLACEMENT COMBINATION METER…

Read full complaint

TOYOTA SENT THE EXTENDED WARRANTY NOTICE ON THE COMBINATION METER TO THE WRONG ADDRESS; THEREFORE, I COULD NOT "CONNECT THE DOTS" REGARDING MY DASHBOARD BLACKOUT--MEANING I THOUGHT IT WAS QUIRKY, NOT A DOCUMENTED PROBLEM WITH THE COMBINATION METER. MY 2007 PRIUS WITH ONLY 35,000 MILES ON IT NEEDS A REPLACEMENT COMBINATION METER BUT TOYOTA WILL NOT PAY FOR IT--CLAIMING IT PROVIDED AN EXTENDED WARRANTY. MY RESPONSE IS: SO WHAT? I AM DRIVING A DANGEROUS VEHICLE WHICH DOES NOT INDICATE THE SPEED I'M DRIVING, THE GAS SUPPLY, THE WARNING LIGHTS, AND BACKUP CAMERA. I HAVE HAD THE REQUISITE SERVICES OVER THE YEARS AND THE PROBLEM IS CLEARLY A DEFECT IN TOYOTA'S MANUFACTURING AND SUPPLY CHAIN. IF TOYOTA REALLY CARES ABOUT THE CUSTOMER, WHY WON'T TOYOTA TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE FAILING PART AND REPAIR MY PERILOUS VEHICLE? THE SITUATION IS DANGEROUS! I CAN'T LOCK THE CAR, KNOW FOR SURE WHEN IT IS TURNED OFF, SEE THE WARNING LIGHTS, KNOW IF THE AIRBAG ALERT IS LEGIT--NON-FUNCTIONAL ALL. TO REPLACE THE FAILED PART WILL COST NEAR $1000, MY MONTHLY SOCIAL SECURITY. THINK ABOUT THIS PRICETAG, TOYOTA HEADQUARTERS AND LOCAL DEALERSHIPS. MY SAFETY IS SEVERELY JEOPARDIZED. PLEASE WORK TO RECALL THESE IMPACTED VEHICLES. THAT MY PRIUS HAS BEEN SERVICED EVERY SINGLE YEAR ACCORDING TO SCHEDULE, THAT THIS MYSTERIOUS DARK SCREEN HAS BEEN POPPING UP FOR YEARS, AND THAT TOYOTA SENT THE NOTICE OF EXTENDED WARRANTY TO THE WRONG ADDRESS SHOULD DEMONSTRATE WHERE THE CULPABILITY LIES. TOYOTA SHOULD TAKE OWNERSHIP OF THIS DANGEROUS SITUATION AND FIX ALL THE DEFECTIVE VEHICLES--BEHAVIOR WHICH DEMONSTRATES THE COMPANY TRULY CARES ABOUT ITS CUSTOMERS!

NHTSA ODI #11161191

15 miles · May 25, 2018
Electrical SystemElectronic Stability Control (esc)Exterior Lighting

HEADLIGHTS FLICKER THEN WILL SHUT OFF COMPLETELYWHILE DRIVING DOWN HIGHWAY.. NO DASH LIGHTS. HAVE TO TURN CAR OFF AND ON

NHTSA ODI #11098035

Mileage unknown · Jan 26, 2018
Electrical SystemElectronic Stability Control (esc)

STARTING MAY 2015 WHOLE DASHBOARD IN MY CAR SPORADICALLY GOES BLACK, I CAN'T SEE HOW FAST I WAS GOING OR HOW MUCH GAS I HAVE LEFT OR USE MY BACKUP CAMERA IN MY CAR. FOR ABOUT AN HOUR I COULDN'T EVEN GET MY CAR TO TURN OFF. THIS HAS BEEN HAPPENING EVER SO OFTEN SINCE MAY OF 2015 AND IS VERY DANGEROUS DRIVING MY CAR IN THAT CONDIT…

Read full complaint

STARTING MAY 2015 WHOLE DASHBOARD IN MY CAR SPORADICALLY GOES BLACK, I CAN'T SEE HOW FAST I WAS GOING OR HOW MUCH GAS I HAVE LEFT OR USE MY BACKUP CAMERA IN MY CAR. FOR ABOUT AN HOUR I COULDN'T EVEN GET MY CAR TO TURN OFF. THIS HAS BEEN HAPPENING EVER SO OFTEN SINCE MAY OF 2015 AND IS VERY DANGEROUS DRIVING MY CAR IN THAT CONDITION. THE OTHER DAY MY CAR RAN OUT OF GAS ON THE BRIDGE FROM THE 5 FREEWAY TO THE 91 FREEWAY AND I WAS STRANDED ON THE SIDE OF THE BRIDGE WITH CARS PASSING AT HIGH VELOCITY BECAUSE I WASNT ABLE O SEE MY GAS METER. TOYOTA HAS KNOWN ABOUT THIS DEFECT AS SHOWN BELOW AND ISSUED A WARRANTY EXTENSION FOR ALL MODELS 2004-2009 AND MY CAR FALLS 2 MONTHS OUTSIDE OF THE WARRANTY PROGRAM AND THEY REFUSE TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY. HTTPS://WWW.TOYOHEADQUARTERS.COM/THREADS/2004-2009-TOYOTA-PRIUS-COMBINATION-METER-WARRANTY-EXTENSION-ZTV.174/

NHTSA ODI #11064997

119,000 miles · Nov 10, 2016
Electrical SystemElectronic Stability Control (esc)Service Brakes

AS I WAS COMING BACK FROM LIVERMORE TO SAN JOSE DOWN THE SUNOL GRANDE LAST WEEKEND, MY DASH LIGHTS SUDDENLY WENT OUT MEANING I HAD NO SPEEDOMETER OR WAIT TO TELL HOW MUCH GAS I HAD AND THE ABS AND STABILITY CONTROL WENT OUT WHILE GOING 65 MILES AN HOUR DOWN A STEEP HILL.LUCKILY I WAS ABLE TO GET HOME AND DON'T ASK ME HOW I FIGUR…

Read full complaint

AS I WAS COMING BACK FROM LIVERMORE TO SAN JOSE DOWN THE SUNOL GRANDE LAST WEEKEND, MY DASH LIGHTS SUDDENLY WENT OUT MEANING I HAD NO SPEEDOMETER OR WAIT TO TELL HOW MUCH GAS I HAD AND THE ABS AND STABILITY CONTROL WENT OUT WHILE GOING 65 MILES AN HOUR DOWN A STEEP HILL.LUCKILY I WAS ABLE TO GET HOME AND DON'T ASK ME HOW I FIGURED OUT TO GET THE CAR TO TURN OFF. I CALLED THE ONE 800 TOYOTA NUMBER AND IT TURNS OUT THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH SOMETHING CALLED THE COMBO METER ON THESE CARS AND IT HAD AN EXTENDED WARRANTY FOR A TOTAL OF NINE YEARS. MY WARRANTY EXPIRED THEY SAID APRIL 2016. THIS SEEMS LIKE A SERIOUS SAFETY ISSUE THAT TOYOTA SHOULD COVER IF THEY ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THEIR CUSTOMERS SAFETY.

NHTSA ODI #10925285

83,000 miles · Nov 3, 2016
Electrical SystemElectronic Stability Control (esc)Service Brakes

DRIVING ON A RAINY DAY, ABS AND VSC LIGHTS ON DASH CAME ON. MY CAR VIOLENTLY FISHTAILED ALMOST 180 DEGREES, BACK AND FORTH 6 TIMES ON A CURVE GETTING OFF A FREEWAY (ABOUT 45 MPH) NEARLY CRASHED. I PROCEEDED VERY SLOWLY TO SIDE STREET. CAR SHIMMIED TO RIGHT MAKING A LEFT TURN. FELT LIKE I WAS DRIVING ON ICE. CALLED A TOW TRUCK. D…

Read full complaint

DRIVING ON A RAINY DAY, ABS AND VSC LIGHTS ON DASH CAME ON. MY CAR VIOLENTLY FISHTAILED ALMOST 180 DEGREES, BACK AND FORTH 6 TIMES ON A CURVE GETTING OFF A FREEWAY (ABOUT 45 MPH) NEARLY CRASHED. I PROCEEDED VERY SLOWLY TO SIDE STREET. CAR SHIMMIED TO RIGHT MAKING A LEFT TURN. FELT LIKE I WAS DRIVING ON ICE. CALLED A TOW TRUCK. DEALERSHIP FOUND RODENT DAMAGE TO WIRES TO WHEEL SPEED SENSOR. I DISCOVERED MANUFACTURERS USING SOY OIL ON WIRING. $1300 REPAIR. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10924179

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.