← 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

Exterior Lighting complaints

1,060 reports
Clear category filter
54,000 miles · Dec 25, 2008
Exterior Lighting

HID LIGHTS WENT OUT WHILE DRIVING ON HIGHWAY. PULLED OVER AND TURNED LIGHTS OFF AND BACK ON, THEN IT WORKED AGAIN. BUT AFTER APPROX. 20 MINS. OF DRIVING, HID LIGHTS WENT OUT AGAIN. ONE TIME I DIDN'T EVEN REALIZE THAT IT WENT OUT, BECAUSE I WAS DRIVING IN TOWN, UNTIL I GOT PULLED OVER BY AN POLICE OFFICER, WHO TOLD ME ABOUT IT, B…

Read full complaint

HID LIGHTS WENT OUT WHILE DRIVING ON HIGHWAY. PULLED OVER AND TURNED LIGHTS OFF AND BACK ON, THEN IT WORKED AGAIN. BUT AFTER APPROX. 20 MINS. OF DRIVING, HID LIGHTS WENT OUT AGAIN. ONE TIME I DIDN'T EVEN REALIZE THAT IT WENT OUT, BECAUSE I WAS DRIVING IN TOWN, UNTIL I GOT PULLED OVER BY AN POLICE OFFICER, WHO TOLD ME ABOUT IT, BUT AFTER TURNING IT OFF AND BACK ON, THE LIGHTS WORKED AGAIN. IT SEEMS TO HAPPEN RANDOMLY AND BUT MORE FREQUENTLY DURING LONG TRIPS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10252770

33,800 miles · Dec 23, 2008
Exterior Lighting

I OWN A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. I HAVE NOTICED ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS (SOMETIMES OTHER DRIVERS POINT IT OUT) THAT ONE OF THE HEADLIGHTS GOES OUT. THEN, AT OTHER TIMES THE OTHER HEADLIGHT GOES OUT. USUALLY, WHEN IT HAPPENS, TURNING THE LIGHTS OFF THEN BACK ON CORRECT THE PROBLEM. HOWEVER, THIS DOESN'T ALWAYS WORK AND USUALLY IT DOES…

Read full complaint

I OWN A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. I HAVE NOTICED ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS (SOMETIMES OTHER DRIVERS POINT IT OUT) THAT ONE OF THE HEADLIGHTS GOES OUT. THEN, AT OTHER TIMES THE OTHER HEADLIGHT GOES OUT. USUALLY, WHEN IT HAPPENS, TURNING THE LIGHTS OFF THEN BACK ON CORRECT THE PROBLEM. HOWEVER, THIS DOESN'T ALWAYS WORK AND USUALLY IT DOESN'T LAST VERY LONG. I TOOK THE CAR INTO OUR LOCAL TOYOTA DEALERSHIP. BOTH HEADLIGHTS WERE WORKING AT THE TIME. TOYOTA REFUSED TO DO ANYTHING STATING THAT IN ORDER FOR THEM TO DIAGNOSE THE PROBLEM I WOULD HAVE TO BRING IT BACK WHEN ONE OR BOTH OF THE LIGHTS FAIL. THIS IS A KNOWN ISSUE (A "BULLETIN" HAS BEEN ISSUED). I CALLED TOYOTA CORPORATE AND THEY AGREED WITH THE POLICY. THE PROBLEM IS A SAFETY HAZARD (THE FAILURES OCCUR RANDOMLY. ALSO, I'M AFRAID THAT, LIKE OTHER COMPLAINTS THAT I HAVE READ, I WILL BE PULLED OVER BY THE POLICE AND TICKETED. IN THAT EVENT, IF THE HEADLIGHTS ARE WORKING WHEN I AM ABLE TO DRIVE TO THE DEALERSHIP, TOYOTA WILL REFUSE TO FIX THE DESIGN FLAW AND DRIVING WITHOUT YOUR HEADLIGHT AT NIGHT IS DEFINITELY A SAFETY HAZARD. I DON'T KNOW WHY THIS DOESN'T QUALIFY AS A RECALL. THE CAR IS STILL UNDER WARRANTY. MILEAGE IS ABOUT 33,800. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10252663

50,000 miles · Dec 18, 2008
Exterior Lighting

THE HEADLAMPS ON MY VEHICLE IS OFTEN DIM AND FLICKERS SOMETIMES. FROM OCTOBER OF 2008, DRIVER SIDE HEADLIGHT TURNS ON BUT WON'T STAY LIT. IT CAN BE FIXED BY TURNING LIGHT ON AGAIN, BUT IT TURNS OFF AGAIN ALMOST ALL THE TIME. I TOOK TO TOYOTA OF NORTH HOLLYWOOD AND ERIC IN THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT TOLD ME I NEED BULBS AND E.C.U.(HE…

Read full complaint

THE HEADLAMPS ON MY VEHICLE IS OFTEN DIM AND FLICKERS SOMETIMES. FROM OCTOBER OF 2008, DRIVER SIDE HEADLIGHT TURNS ON BUT WON'T STAY LIT. IT CAN BE FIXED BY TURNING LIGHT ON AGAIN, BUT IT TURNS OFF AGAIN ALMOST ALL THE TIME. I TOOK TO TOYOTA OF NORTH HOLLYWOOD AND ERIC IN THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT TOLD ME I NEED BULBS AND E.C.U.(HEADLIGHT COMPUTER)NEEDS TO BE REPLACED FOR $700. I'M SEARCHING FOR AN ALTERNATIVE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10252241

37,000 miles · Dec 18, 2008
Exterior Lighting

2007 TOYOTA PRIUS HEADLIGHTS KEEP GOING OUT. THE LIGHTS WILL JUST CUT OFF FOR NO REASON. IF I NOTICE THIS WHILE DRIVING I JUST TURN THE LIGHTS OFF AND BACK ON AND THE HEADLIGHT COMES BACK ON. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10252211

44,000 miles · Dec 17, 2008
Exterior Lighting

THE RIGHT HEADLIGHT WAS INTERMITTENTLY GOING OUT. ALSO, OCCASIONALLY, BOTH LIGHTS WOULD GO OUT. IF I TURNED THE LIGHT SWITCH OFF AND BACK ON, THE LIGHT(S) WOULD COME BACK ON. I TOOK THE CAR TO THE DEALER AND THEY INDICATED THAT I NEEDED NEW BULBS ($250 PER BULB AND $200 TO CHANGE THE BULBS). I HAD 49,000 MILES ON A CAR I P…

Read full complaint

THE RIGHT HEADLIGHT WAS INTERMITTENTLY GOING OUT. ALSO, OCCASIONALLY, BOTH LIGHTS WOULD GO OUT. IF I TURNED THE LIGHT SWITCH OFF AND BACK ON, THE LIGHT(S) WOULD COME BACK ON. I TOOK THE CAR TO THE DEALER AND THEY INDICATED THAT I NEEDED NEW BULBS ($250 PER BULB AND $200 TO CHANGE THE BULBS). I HAD 49,000 MILES ON A CAR I PURCHASED NEW IN AUG 2007. SINCE THE CAR IS OUT OF WARRANTY (3YRS/36K MILES), THE DEALER WOULD NOT COVER IT. THE DEALER DID "COMP" ONE OF THE BULBS SO IT ENDED UP COSTING ME $400. SUBSEQUENTLY, I ACCESSED THE INTERNET AND FOUND OUT THAT THIS IS HAPPENING TO A LARGE NUMBER OF PRIUS'. THESE ARE THE HID BULBS. I AM WORKING WITH THE TOYOTA CUSTOMER RELATIONS ON THIS ISSUE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10252153

38,000 miles · Dec 12, 2008
Exterior Lighting

THERE WERE NO PARTICULAR EVENTS LEADING UP TO THE INTERMITTENT FAILURE OF MY DRIVERS-SIDE HID HEADLIGHT. IT IS CONSTANTLY TURNING OFF WHILE DRIVING (EVEN AT NIGHT) AND WILL ONLY TURN ON AGAIN IF I TURN OFF BOTH HEADLIGHTS, AND TURN THEM BACK ON. I AM CONSTANTLY REQUIRED TO DO THIS WHILE DRIVING AT NIGHT, AND IT IS A SEVERE SAFET…

Read full complaint

THERE WERE NO PARTICULAR EVENTS LEADING UP TO THE INTERMITTENT FAILURE OF MY DRIVERS-SIDE HID HEADLIGHT. IT IS CONSTANTLY TURNING OFF WHILE DRIVING (EVEN AT NIGHT) AND WILL ONLY TURN ON AGAIN IF I TURN OFF BOTH HEADLIGHTS, AND TURN THEM BACK ON. I AM CONSTANTLY REQUIRED TO DO THIS WHILE DRIVING AT NIGHT, AND IT IS A SEVERE SAFETY RISK. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10251555

28,000 miles · Dec 11, 2008
Exterior Lighting

HEADLIGHTS ON 2007 PRIUS FAILED INTERMITTENTLY. THEY WILL WORK WHEN THE VEHICLE IS FIRST TURNED ON BUT WILL SOMETIMES TURN OFF. I BROUGHT IT IN WITHIN 30,000 MILES AND HAD THE ENTIRE HEADLIGHT ASSEMBLY REPLACED BY THE DEALER AND IT SEEMED TO RESOLVE THE ISSUE FOR A WHILE. HOWEVER IT IS HAPPENING AGAIN TO THE OTHER SIDE AT 42000 …

Read full complaint

HEADLIGHTS ON 2007 PRIUS FAILED INTERMITTENTLY. THEY WILL WORK WHEN THE VEHICLE IS FIRST TURNED ON BUT WILL SOMETIMES TURN OFF. I BROUGHT IT IN WITHIN 30,000 MILES AND HAD THE ENTIRE HEADLIGHT ASSEMBLY REPLACED BY THE DEALER AND IT SEEMED TO RESOLVE THE ISSUE FOR A WHILE. HOWEVER IT IS HAPPENING AGAIN TO THE OTHER SIDE AT 42000 MILES, THESE ARE HID HEADLIGHTS AND HAVE APPROXIMATELY 1000-1500 HOURS OF USE TO THEM. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10251494

40,000 miles · Dec 10, 2008
Exterior Lighting

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING AT AN UNKNOWN SPEED, THE HEADLIGHTS FAILED. THE DEALER STATED THAT THEY WOULD NOT REPAIR THE VEHICLE UNDER WARRANTY, WHICH WOULD COST SEVERAL HUNDRED DOLLARS TO REPAIR. THE DEALER BANGED ON THE HEADLIGHTS AND THEY ILLUMINATED AGAIN. THE CONTACT WAS ADVISED THAT IF SHE BA…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE DRIVING AT AN UNKNOWN SPEED, THE HEADLIGHTS FAILED. THE DEALER STATED THAT THEY WOULD NOT REPAIR THE VEHICLE UNDER WARRANTY, WHICH WOULD COST SEVERAL HUNDRED DOLLARS TO REPAIR. THE DEALER BANGED ON THE HEADLIGHTS AND THEY ILLUMINATED AGAIN. THE CONTACT WAS ADVISED THAT IF SHE BANGED ON THE HEADLIGHTS, THEY WOULD FUNCTION CORRECTLY. THE FAILURE WAS NOT DUE TO THE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM. IN ADDITION, THE TWO BRAKE LIGHTS ALSO FAILED. SHE CONTINUED TO DRIVE THE VEHICLE BECAUSE THE FAILURE DID NOT RECUR FOR SOME TIME. IN NOVEMBER OF 2008, WHILE DRIVING AND ENTERING THE HIGHWAY, THE PASSENGER SIDE HEADLIGHT DIMMED AGAIN. ALMOST IMMEDIATELY, THE CONTACT WAS PULLED OVER BY THE POLICE AND GIVEN A WARNING ABOUT THE HEADLIGHTS. THE DEALER STATED THAT THEY WOULD INSPECT THE FAILURE AND, IF THE BANGING WORKED, THIS WOULD REMEDY THE ISSUE UNLESS THE CONTACT CHOSE TO REPAIR THE ISSUE AT HER OWN EXPENSE. SHE SCHEDULED AN APPOINTMENT WITH THE DEALER, BUT HAD TO CANCEL. IN DECEMBER OF 2008, WHILE DRIVING WITH ONE HEADLIGHT, THE OTHER HEADLIGHT FAILED. AS A RESULT, NEITHER HEADLIGHTS WERE ILLUMINATED. WHILE READING OTHER COMPLAINTS ON THE ISSUE, THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT ONE CONSUMER STATED THAT WHEN THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH WAS TURNED OFF AND THEN ON AGAIN, THEY WORKED PROPERLY. THIS REMEDY WAS SUCCESSFUL IN ALLEVIATING THE CONTACT'S FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 53,000 AND FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 40,000.

NHTSA ODI #10251269

28,000 miles · Dec 9, 2008
Exterior Lighting

HEADLIGHTS TURN OFF RANDOMLY. SOMETIMES LEFT, SOMETIMES RIGHT, SOMETIMES BOTH. AFTER READING ONLINE CHAT FORUMS, MANY OTHER PEOPLE ARE HAVING THIS SAME ISSUE, SPANNING MULTIPLE YEARS OF THE PRIUS. THE DEALER WORKED ON MY CAR YESTERDAY AND 'FIXED IT' BUT LAST NIGHT THE PROBLEM CAME BACK.. IT SEEMS THE DEALER DOESN'T WANT TO RE…

Read full complaint

HEADLIGHTS TURN OFF RANDOMLY. SOMETIMES LEFT, SOMETIMES RIGHT, SOMETIMES BOTH. AFTER READING ONLINE CHAT FORUMS, MANY OTHER PEOPLE ARE HAVING THIS SAME ISSUE, SPANNING MULTIPLE YEARS OF THE PRIUS. THE DEALER WORKED ON MY CAR YESTERDAY AND 'FIXED IT' BUT LAST NIGHT THE PROBLEM CAME BACK.. IT SEEMS THE DEALER DOESN'T WANT TO REPLACE THE $1,100 PART THAT CAUSES THIS ISSUE, THE HID CIRCUIT BOARD. I HAVE HAD THIS PROBLEM FOR ABOUT 3 MONTHS NOW, AND SINCE THIS IS A SAFETY ISSUE, TOYOTA SHOULD BE FORCED TO RECALL THESE DEFECTIVE COMPONENTS. WHEN YOU TURN THE LIGHTS OFF AND THEN BACK ON, THE LIGHT WILL FUNCTION AGAIN FOR A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME, AND THEN GO OFF AGAIN. THE DEALER SUGGESTED HITTING THE HEADLIGHT, (NOT EASY TO DO WHEN YOU ARE ON THE HIGHWAY) I AM AFRAID TO DRIVE MY CAR AT NIGHT, WITH THE POTENTIAL TO GET PULLED OVER BY POLICE, OR HAVE AN ACCIDENT DUE TO LACK OF HEADLIGHTS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10251163

40,000 miles · Dec 4, 2008
Exterior Lighting

MY HEADLIGHTS GO OFF INTERMITTENTLY. WHEN I TURN THE LIGHTS OFF AND ON AGAIN, THE PROBLEM GOES AWAY. (UNTIL THE NEXT TIME.) THE DEALER SAYS I NEED TO REPLACE THE HID HEADLAMPS AT A COST OF OVER $400. MY EXTENDED WARRANTY (FROM TOYOTA) WILL NOT COVER THIS DEFECT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10250747

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.