← 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
100,000 miles · Apr 29, 2013
Exterior Lighting

MY HEADLIGHT PROBLEM HAS GONE ON FOR AS LONG AS I HAVE OWNED THE CAR.I HAVE ASKED THE DEALER TO CHECK THE LIGHTS ON NUMEROUS SERVICE CALLS AND WAS ALWAYS TOLD THEY COULD NOT FIND A PROBLEM. THE BULB WAS REPLACED AT A COST OF $300 BUT THE PROBLEM PERSISTS. THE RIGHT LIGHT GOES OUT . IT COMES BACK ON IF I TURN THE SWITCH ON AND OF…

Read full complaint

MY HEADLIGHT PROBLEM HAS GONE ON FOR AS LONG AS I HAVE OWNED THE CAR.I HAVE ASKED THE DEALER TO CHECK THE LIGHTS ON NUMEROUS SERVICE CALLS AND WAS ALWAYS TOLD THEY COULD NOT FIND A PROBLEM. THE BULB WAS REPLACED AT A COST OF $300 BUT THE PROBLEM PERSISTS. THE RIGHT LIGHT GOES OUT . IT COMES BACK ON IF I TURN THE SWITCH ON AND OFF, HOWEVER I DO NOT ALWAYS REALIZE THE LIGHT IS OUT. I HAVE BEEN STOPPED NUMEROUS TIMES AND GIVEN WORK ORDERS TO GET MY LIGHT FIXED. I AM TIRED OF THIS PROBLEM AND I DON'T KNOW HOW TO FIX IT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10509965

106,000 miles · Apr 15, 2013
Exterior Lighting

I WAS DRIVING AT NIGHT WHEN MY HEADLIGHTS WENT OUT. I TRIED THE BRIGHTS WITH NO EFFECT. I HAD TO TURN THEM OFF AND TURN THEM BACK ON AGAIN. IT HAS HAPPENED TWICE NOW. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10508273

14,000 miles · Apr 12, 2013
Electrical SystemExterior LightingStructure

THE PLASTIC WELD PROCESS OR OTHER TYPE OF GLUING PROCESS USED TO MAKE THE VEHICLES EXTERIOR FRONT AND REAR TURN SIGNAL, BRAKE AND BACK UP LIGHT LENSE ASSEMBLIES OR HOUSINGS FAILS. ALL FOUR, TWO FRONT AND TWO REAR, EXTERIOR COMBINATION LIGHT LENSE ASSEMBLIES SUFFER THIS PREMATURE AND SERIOUS FAILURE. WHEN THESE EXTERIOR LENSES BE…

Read full complaint

THE PLASTIC WELD PROCESS OR OTHER TYPE OF GLUING PROCESS USED TO MAKE THE VEHICLES EXTERIOR FRONT AND REAR TURN SIGNAL, BRAKE AND BACK UP LIGHT LENSE ASSEMBLIES OR HOUSINGS FAILS. ALL FOUR, TWO FRONT AND TWO REAR, EXTERIOR COMBINATION LIGHT LENSE ASSEMBLIES SUFFER THIS PREMATURE AND SERIOUS FAILURE. WHEN THESE EXTERIOR LENSES BEGIN TO FAIL THEY ALLOW WATER INTRUSION FROM THE EXTERIOR OF THE VEHICLE. THIS ALLOWS MOISTURE TO PENETRATE INTO AREAS OF THE LENSE ASSEMBLY WHICH SUPPORT ALL OF THE LIGHT BULBS USED TO WARN OR SIGNAL OTHER DRIVERS OR PEDESTRIANS. AT A VERY MINIMUM THIS PROBLEM RESULTS IN PREMATURE BULB FAILURE FOR ALL OF THE SIGNALING SYSTEMS SPECIFIED ABOVE. RESEARCHING YOUR SITE THIS PROBLEM HAS BEEN REPORTED TO YOU MANY TIMES AND TOYOTA MOTOR CORP. IS ALSO AWARE OF THIS PROBLEM. WHAT YOU DON'T SEEM TO BE AWARE OF IS THE MOST SERIOUS CONCERN RESULTING FROM THIS PROBLEM; IF THE RIGHT (PASSENGER SIDE) REAR LENSE SUFFERS THIS PROBLEM AND BEGINS LEAKING, THE WATER RUNS OR DRAINS DIRECTLY INTO THE INTERIOR 12VDC STARTER BATTERY WELL. THIS BATTERY WELL IS AS DEEP, OR DEEPER THAN THE FACTORY INSTALLED 12VDC STARTER BATTERY IS TALL AND CAN RESULT IN WATER OVERTOPPING THE BATTERY. THIS CAUSES SHORTING/GROUNDING ACROSS THE POSITIVE/NEGATIVE 12VDC STARTER BATTERY TERMINALS. THIS PREVENTS THE OPERATOR FROM STARTING THE VEHICLE AND CUTS OFF POWER TO ALL 12VDC ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS INCLUDING EMERGENCY FLASHERS. IT COULD EASILY RESULT IN SERIOUS DAMAGE TO THE 12VDC STARTER BATTERY AND MANY EXPENSIVE 12VDC ELECTRONIC COMPONENTS OR SYSTEMS. THIS PROBLEM IS MORE SERIOUS IN AREAS THAT RECEIVE HIGH AMOUNTS OF RAINFALL. I CALLED A TOYOTA AUTHORIZED DEALERSHIP, LUM'S AUTO CENTER, AND REPORTED MY CAR WOULDN'T START. THEY SUGGESTED I BRING IT IN. AFTER 4 DAYS THEY WERE UNABLE TO FIND THE PROBLEM. NO DIAGNOSTIC CODES WERE LOGGED. THIS IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM NEEDING IMMEDIATE ATTENTION! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10506066

50,000 miles · Mar 28, 2013
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

SINCE TWO YEARS OLD THE HEADLIGHTS HAVE OCCASIONALLY FLICKERED, AND THE PASS. SIDE HAS GONE OUT. TURNING THEM OFF MOMENTARILY AND BACK ON SOLVED THE PROBLEM. LATELY IT'S GOTTEN WORSE, AND I FINALLY HAD MY MECHANIC REPLACE THE PASS. SIDE BULB. THE NEW BULB ($85) WAS WORSE AND NOW I'M TOLD THE "BALLAST" NEEDS REPLACEMENT FOR HUNDR…

Read full complaint

SINCE TWO YEARS OLD THE HEADLIGHTS HAVE OCCASIONALLY FLICKERED, AND THE PASS. SIDE HAS GONE OUT. TURNING THEM OFF MOMENTARILY AND BACK ON SOLVED THE PROBLEM. LATELY IT'S GOTTEN WORSE, AND I FINALLY HAD MY MECHANIC REPLACE THE PASS. SIDE BULB. THE NEW BULB ($85) WAS WORSE AND NOW I'M TOLD THE "BALLAST" NEEDS REPLACEMENT FOR HUNDREDS OF DOLLARS. OF COURSE THE SAFETY ISSUE AT NIGHT IS PRIMARY, BUT TOYOTA WAS DERELICT IN THEIR DUTY NOT TO ADVISE CUSTOMERS OF THIS HIGHLY UNUSUAL, POTENTIAL COST WHEN SELLING ME THE CAR. I'VE NEVER PAID MORE THAN $15 FOR A HEADLIGHT AND HAVE ALWAYS REPLACED THEM MYSELF. ALSO, THE OWNERS MANUAL SUGGESTS AN EASY REPLACEMENT. MY MECHANIC HAD TO PARTIALLY REMOVE THE HEADLIGHT ASSEMBLY. THAT WAS ANOTHER MISREPRESENTATION. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10504833

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

110,000 miles · Mar 14, 2013
Exterior Lighting

PASSENGER (RIGHT) HEADLIGHT NOT WORKING. IT COULD BE "TURNED ON" BY SWITCHING LIGHT SWITCH OFF, THEN ON. THIS HAS HAPPENED MULTIPLE TIMES. BRIGHT LIGHTS WOULD NOT TURN ON, EVEN WITH TURNING SWITCH OFF, THEN ON. LOW BEAMS DID WORK AND FAILED LIGHT ON PASSENGER SIDE TURNED BACK ON. TOOK CAR TO DEALERSHIP. PASSENGER BULB WENT OUT D…

Read full complaint

PASSENGER (RIGHT) HEADLIGHT NOT WORKING. IT COULD BE "TURNED ON" BY SWITCHING LIGHT SWITCH OFF, THEN ON. THIS HAS HAPPENED MULTIPLE TIMES. BRIGHT LIGHTS WOULD NOT TURN ON, EVEN WITH TURNING SWITCH OFF, THEN ON. LOW BEAMS DID WORK AND FAILED LIGHT ON PASSENGER SIDE TURNED BACK ON. TOOK CAR TO DEALERSHIP. PASSENGER BULB WENT OUT DURING INSPECTION AND HIGH BEAMS WERE BOTH WORKING. BOTH HEADLIGHTS REPLACED WITH A COST OF $500! THIS IS THE SECOND TIME THE LIGHTS HAD TO BE REPLACED. THE LAST TIME WAS IN 2009.

NHTSA ODI #10503001

66,000 miles · Feb 25, 2013
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

HEADLIGHTS WORK INTERMITTENTLY AND THE PASSENGER SIDE TAILLIGHT ALSO GOES OUT AND COMES BACK ON INTERMITTENTLY. CAR IS NOT DRIVEN OFTEN AT NIGHT AND THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR SEVERAL YEARS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10500051

49,000 miles · Feb 23, 2013
Exterior Lighting

HEADLIGHTS TURN OFF WHILE DRIVING. I CAN TURN OFF THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH AND TURN IT BACK ON AND THE LIGHTS WILL WORK FOR A PERIOD OF TIME AND THAN THE EPISODE IS REPEATED. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10499781

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

51,000 miles · Feb 11, 2013
Exterior Lighting

I BOUGHT A CERTIFIED TOYOTA PRIUS 2007 WITH AROUND 51000 MILES ON IT AND THE HEADLIGHT KEPT GOING OFF , I COULD TURN IT BACK ON BUT IT WOULD JUST SHUT OFF AGAIN IN A FEW MINUTES. WHEN I CALLED THE DEALERSHIP I ASKED ABOUT A RECALL AND THEY KNEW NOTHING SO I TOOK IT TO A DIFFERENT DEALERSHIP AND WAS TOLD THAT I WAS A DEFECT BUT N…

Read full complaint

I BOUGHT A CERTIFIED TOYOTA PRIUS 2007 WITH AROUND 51000 MILES ON IT AND THE HEADLIGHT KEPT GOING OFF , I COULD TURN IT BACK ON BUT IT WOULD JUST SHUT OFF AGAIN IN A FEW MINUTES. WHEN I CALLED THE DEALERSHIP I ASKED ABOUT A RECALL AND THEY KNEW NOTHING SO I TOOK IT TO A DIFFERENT DEALERSHIP AND WAS TOLD THAT I WAS A DEFECT BUT NOT A RECALL AND TOYOTA WOULD PAY FOR IT UP TO 50000 MILES WHICH MY CAR HAD ALREADY SURPASSED. TO REPLACE THE BULB WAS OVER 300 DOLLARS AND HAVING JUST BOUGHT A CERTIFIED VEHICLE I SHOULDN'T HAVE TO SHE'LL OUT THE KIND OF MONEY,I STILL HAVE NOT REPLACED THE HEADLIGHT BUT NOW IT'S COMPLETELY OUT, AND WILL NEED REPLACED BEFORE INSPECTION. I BELIEVE TOYOTA SHOULD PAY FOR A NEW BULB SINCE THEY ARE WELL AWARE OF THE DEFECT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10497754

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.