← 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

Engine complaints

37 reports
Clear category filter
63,145 miles · Jul 11, 2013
EngineVehicle Speed Control

WHILE TRAVELING ON THE HIGHWAY AT 55 MPH, THE POWER WAS LOST AND THE ACCELERATOR DID NOT RESPOND TO BEING DEPRESSED. THE CAR WAS STEERED FROM THE MIDDLE LANE ON A THREE LANE HIGHWAY TO GRADUALLY COAST INTO THE SAFETY LANE OFF THE HIGHWAY WHERE THE BRAKE WAS USED TO STOP THE VEHICLE. THE POWER BUTTON WAS THEN DEPRESSED AND THE EN…

Read full complaint

WHILE TRAVELING ON THE HIGHWAY AT 55 MPH, THE POWER WAS LOST AND THE ACCELERATOR DID NOT RESPOND TO BEING DEPRESSED. THE CAR WAS STEERED FROM THE MIDDLE LANE ON A THREE LANE HIGHWAY TO GRADUALLY COAST INTO THE SAFETY LANE OFF THE HIGHWAY WHERE THE BRAKE WAS USED TO STOP THE VEHICLE. THE POWER BUTTON WAS THEN DEPRESSED AND THE ENGINE RESTARTED AND WE REENTERED THE HIGHWAY. THIS WAS THE ONLY SUCH INCIDENT IN SEVEN YEARS OF OWNERSHIP OF THIS VEHICLE. THIS INCIDENT HAS NOT RECURRED. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10524449

56,000 miles · Jun 6, 2013
Engine

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 72 MPH, A BRIGHT RED EXCLAMATION POINT ICON ILLUMINATED ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL AS THE VEHICLE STALLED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A DEALER FOR DIAGNOSIS BUT THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE WAS UNDETERMINED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE V…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 72 MPH, A BRIGHT RED EXCLAMATION POINT ICON ILLUMINATED ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL AS THE VEHICLE STALLED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A DEALER FOR DIAGNOSIS BUT THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE WAS UNDETERMINED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE HAD NOT BEEN REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 56,000.

NHTSA ODI #10515417

86,000 miles · Mar 26, 2013
EngineService Brakes

I EXPERIENCED A SCARY SITUATION WITH MY 2007 PRIUS TODAY. WHILE I WAS DRIVING ALL OF A SUDDEN THE ABS BRAKE LIGHT AND DSC LIGHT AND (!) LIGHT AND BRAKE LIGHT CAME ON AND STAYED ON. THE CAR ALSO MADE A LOUD BUZZING NOISE IN THE CABIN. I PUMPED THE BRAKES AND IT WAS NOT VERY RESPONSIVE. LUCKILY NOBODY WAS AROUND BECAUSE I FELT HAD…

Read full complaint

I EXPERIENCED A SCARY SITUATION WITH MY 2007 PRIUS TODAY. WHILE I WAS DRIVING ALL OF A SUDDEN THE ABS BRAKE LIGHT AND DSC LIGHT AND (!) LIGHT AND BRAKE LIGHT CAME ON AND STAYED ON. THE CAR ALSO MADE A LOUD BUZZING NOISE IN THE CABIN. I PUMPED THE BRAKES AND IT WAS NOT VERY RESPONSIVE. LUCKILY NOBODY WAS AROUND BECAUSE I FELT HAD I NEEDED TO STOP ON A DIME, I PROBABLY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO. I LOOKED AROUND ONLINE TO FIND IF OTHERS HAVE HAD THIS PROBLEM AND IT APPEARS THERE ARE PLENTY OF CASES WHERE THIS TYPE OF SUDDEN FAILURE HAS OCCURRED UNDER 2007 ABS TOYOTA PRIUS BRAKE MODULE COMPLAINTS. I BELIEVE THAT THERE IS A RECALL FOR THIS ISSUE FROM THE MANUFACTURER. PLEASE CONTACT ME - I NEED HELP! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10504503

30,000 miles · Mar 21, 2013
EngineExterior LightingVisibility/wiper

I HAVE BEEN HAVING PROBLEMS FOR ABOUT A YEAR NOW WITH MY PRIUS 2007 WHEN I APPLY THE BRAKES. THE CAR STUTTERS WHEN IT CHANGES FROM HYBRID TO GAS. SERVICED ONLY BY TOYOTA. WHEN I BROUGHT THE CAR IN FOR A RECALL I ASKED THEM TO FIX THE PROBLEM . THEY COULD NOT IDENTIFY THE PROBLEM AND CALLED IN A SPECIALIST AND SUBSEQUENTLY …

Read full complaint

I HAVE BEEN HAVING PROBLEMS FOR ABOUT A YEAR NOW WITH MY PRIUS 2007 WHEN I APPLY THE BRAKES. THE CAR STUTTERS WHEN IT CHANGES FROM HYBRID TO GAS. SERVICED ONLY BY TOYOTA. WHEN I BROUGHT THE CAR IN FOR A RECALL I ASKED THEM TO FIX THE PROBLEM . THEY COULD NOT IDENTIFY THE PROBLEM AND CALLED IN A SPECIALIST AND SUBSEQUENTLY WAS TOLD THAT THIS IS TYPICAL WEAR ON A CAR THIS OLD (5 YEARS, 59,000 MILES). THIS WAS FROM A REPAIR SPECIALIST SENT FROM TOYOTA WHEN THE REGULAR SERVICE DEPARTMENT COULD NOT IDENTIFY THE PROBLEM. I DRIVE ON HIGHWAY S EVERYDAY TO WORK AND HOME AND I AM A NERVOUS WRECK, WORRYING THAT THE CAR WILL JUST COME TO A STOP IN THE MIDDLE OF TRAFFIC. OVER THE PAST 2 YEARS WHEN I GO THRU A CAR WASH THE FRONT DRIVER SIDE HEADLIGHT GETS MOISTURE INSIDE. WHEN I BROUGHT THIS TO THE ATTENTION OF THE SERVICE DEPT AT TOYOTA I WAS TOLD IT WOULD COST APPROXIMATELY $600 TO REPLACE THE HEADLIGHT. THIS WAS WAY BEFORE IT HAD FALLEN OUT OF WARRANTY (36,000) BUT OF COURSE THEY DID NOT TELL ME THAT IT WAS COVERED, IN FACT THEY TOLD ME WHAT IT WOULD COST TO REPLACE! NOW THE BULB IS ALSO FLICKERING ON AND OFF IN THIS SAME HEADLIGHT. DEFINITELY A SAFETY ISSUE. TOYOTA QUOTED ME $270.00 TO CHANGE THE LIGHT BULB. THE REASON I WAS GIVEN WAS THAT THEY HAVE TO TAKE OFF THE ENTIRE FRONT BUMPER TO CHANGE AN $11.00 BULB AT AUTOZONE. WE WERE TOLD THAT IF MY HAND WAS SMALL ENOUGH I COULD TRY TO DO IT MYSELF. I CALLED TOYOTA CORPORATE, AND WAS TOLD THAT TOYOTA WAS DISCOUNTING THE BULB, IT NORMALLY SHOULD COST $420.00. THEY WERE AWARE OF THE PROBLEM AND EXTENDED THE WARRANTY TO 50,000 MILES BUT DID NOT ISSUE A RECALL FOR THIS ISSUE EITHER. I ONLY FOUND OUT BECAUSE THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT WAS DRAGGING ITS FEET IN DIAGNOSING THE PROBLEM WITH THE BRAKING SYSTEM SO I CALLED CORPORATE AND MENTIONED THE MOISTURE PROBLEM AND THAT WAS HOW I FOUND OUT THAT IT WAS NOT ONLY MY CAR. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10503944

102,200 miles · Mar 5, 2013
EnginePower Train

MASTER WARNING LIGHT CAME ON ALONG WITH VEHICLE STABILITY CONTROL, BRAKE & CHECK ENGINE LIGHTS. TOOK IT TO MY TOYOTA DEALER (RICE TOYOTA, GREENSBORO, NC). I WORK 79 MILES FROM HOME. I CALLED MY TOYOTA DEALER, A SERVICE REP SAID IT WAS OK TO DRIVE AS LONG AS THE WARNING LIGHTS WEREN'T FLASHING.DIAGNOSTIC CODES INDICATED THE HYBRI…

Read full complaint

MASTER WARNING LIGHT CAME ON ALONG WITH VEHICLE STABILITY CONTROL, BRAKE & CHECK ENGINE LIGHTS. TOOK IT TO MY TOYOTA DEALER (RICE TOYOTA, GREENSBORO, NC). I WORK 79 MILES FROM HOME. I CALLED MY TOYOTA DEALER, A SERVICE REP SAID IT WAS OK TO DRIVE AS LONG AS THE WARNING LIGHTS WEREN'T FLASHING.DIAGNOSTIC CODES INDICATED THE HYBRID CONVERTER/INVERTER WAS BAD, THEY CLEARED WARNING LIGHTS, WHICH STAYED OFF. THEY SAID IT MAY HAVE BEEN A "GLITCH", IF WARNING LIGHTS RETURNED, BRING IT BACK. THEY RETURNED ON 3/1/13 WHILE DRIVING TO WORK. I LOST POWER WHILE ON I-540, PULLED OVER ONTO SHOULDER, TURNED OFF ENGINE, RESTARTED IT, GOT BACK ONTO I-540 & EXITED AT NEAREST EXIT. LOST POWER AGAIN. PULLED OVER, WENT THRU STOP/START PROCESS, DROVE 3 MILES TO WORK. DROVE HOME WITH WARNING LIGHTS BUT NO POWER LOSSES. TOOK IT TO RICE TOYOTA NEXT MORNING. THIS OCCURRED BARELY 2 WEEKS AFTER THE 100,000 MILE POWERTRAIN WARRANTY EXPIRED, GALLING TO SAY THE LEAST, AS THIS PART "IS" THE HYBRID SYSTEM PER THE SERVICE REP. HAVE YOU RECEIVED OTHER COMPLAINTS ABOUT THIS COMPONENT? *TR

NHTSA ODI #10501380

40,000 miles · Feb 12, 2013
Electrical SystemEngineExterior Lighting

THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED INCIDENTS HAVE TAKEN PLACE AT LEAST THREE TIMES WITH NO WARNING. UPON STARTING THE VEHICLE THERE IS NO INSTRUMENT PANEL DISPLAY WHICH IS DIGITAL. THE VEHICLE COULD STILL BE DRIVEN. THE VEHICLE'S ENGINE WOULD NOT TURN OFF WITHOUT MAKING NUMEROUS ATTEMPTS.THIS HAS SOMETIMES TAKEN UP TO 10 MIN.. THEN FOR WH…

Read full complaint

THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED INCIDENTS HAVE TAKEN PLACE AT LEAST THREE TIMES WITH NO WARNING. UPON STARTING THE VEHICLE THERE IS NO INSTRUMENT PANEL DISPLAY WHICH IS DIGITAL. THE VEHICLE COULD STILL BE DRIVEN. THE VEHICLE'S ENGINE WOULD NOT TURN OFF WITHOUT MAKING NUMEROUS ATTEMPTS.THIS HAS SOMETIMES TAKEN UP TO 10 MIN.. THEN FOR WHATEVER REASONS AFTER SEVERAL HOURS THE MENTIONED MALFUNCTIONS STOP AND EVERYTHING WORKS CORRECTLY.I AM VERY CONCERNED THE DASH DISPLAY SHOWING SPEED AND OTHER NECESSARY INFORMATION WILL MALFUNCTION WHILE THE VEHICLE IS BEING DRIVEN.ESPECIALLY AT NIGHT.BEING ABLE TO TURN THE VEHICLE OFF IMMEDIATELY IS ALSO IMPORTANT.THIS VEHICLE IS REGULARLY SERVICED BY TOYOTA WHO HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO LOCATE OR CORRECT THE PROBLEM. I HAVE RESEARCHED THIS ISSUE ONLINE AND HAVE FOUND THAT THERE IS A LARGE NUMBER OF TOYOTA PRIUS OWNERS HAVING THE SAME TYPE OF SAFETY ISSUES WITH THEIR VEHICLES. I HAVE READ BUT NOT CONFIRMED THAT TOYOTA IS AWARE OF THE MENTIONED PROBLEMS WITH THE PRIUS. THERE ARE SOME SERIOUS SAFETY ISSUES WITH THIS MAKE AND MODEL OF VEHICLE THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. I HOPE NHTSA WILL BE ABLE TO ASSIST IN THIS MATTER. THANK YOU. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10497910

68,000 miles · Jul 12, 2012
Engine

THE 2007 PRIUS ENGINE AND SAFETY WARNING LIGHTS CAME ON WHILE DRIVING AND THE CAR STALLED ON THE HIGHWAY. THIS HAS OCCURRED 4 TO 5 TIMES IN THE LAST 4 MONTHS. WE HAVE TAKEN IT TO THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP, WHERE THEY HAVE DRIVEN IT, KEPT IT OVERNIGHT, AND COULD NOT DETERMINE THE PROBLEM. THE THIRD TIME, THE DEALER SAID IT WAS THE 12…

Read full complaint

THE 2007 PRIUS ENGINE AND SAFETY WARNING LIGHTS CAME ON WHILE DRIVING AND THE CAR STALLED ON THE HIGHWAY. THIS HAS OCCURRED 4 TO 5 TIMES IN THE LAST 4 MONTHS. WE HAVE TAKEN IT TO THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP, WHERE THEY HAVE DRIVEN IT, KEPT IT OVERNIGHT, AND COULD NOT DETERMINE THE PROBLEM. THE THIRD TIME, THE DEALER SAID IT WAS THE 12 VOLT BATTERY, WHICH WE REPLACED FOR $348.85. THE CAR STALLED AGAIN - SAME SAFETY CONCERNS - STALLED WHILE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY. LUCKILY THE CAR BEHIND ME DID NOT HIT ME AND I WAS ABLE TO COAST TO A SIDE STREET. THERE WAS NOT ANY POWER. THE WINDOWS AND AIR CONDITIONING WERE NOT WORKING AS WELL. I SAT IN THE ARIZONA HEAT FOR SEVERAL MINUTES AND THAN GOT IT TO START BY PUTTING THE CAR IN PARK OVER AND OVER. ALL SAFETY WARNING LIGHTS WERE ON, AS I DROVE IT TO THE DEALERSHIP. I WAS SHAKING AND IN TEARS, FEARFUL FOR MY LIFE AND THE LIFE OF OTHERS AS I DROVE IT TO THE DEALERSHIP LESS THAN TWO MONTHS SINCE THE 12 VOLT BATTERY HAD BEEN REPLACED. I HAVE GOTTEN THE CAR SERVICED AT THE DEALERSHIP AS STATED IN THE MANUAL - EVERYTIME. THE STALLING OF THE ENGINE WHILE DRIVING AND THE LACK OF THE DEALER TO FIX THE PROBLEM IS OF GRAVE CONCERN. I AM VERY LUCKY THAT I HAVE NOT BEEN REAR-ENDED OR KILLED WHEN THE CAR HAS STALLED. THIS IS A HUGE SAFETY CONCERN AND IT APPEARS THAT THIS HAS HAPPENED IN MANY PRIUS VEHICLES. THE DEALERSHIP KEEPS SAYING THAT THEY DO NOT KNOW WHAT IS THE PROBLEM. SOMETHING NEEDS TO HAPPEN TO PROTECT AMERICANS THAT DRIVE THESE CARS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REASONS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10465476

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.