← 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
61,000 miles · Nov 19, 2012
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

THE FRONT HEADLIGHT STARTED GOING ON AND OFF PERIODICALLY WHILE DRIVING, WE WENT ON A TRIP TO HUNGARY AND THE LIGHT STARTED ACTING UP. WE HAVE TAKEN IT TO TWO TOYOTA DEALERSHIPS WITHIN GERMANY WITH NO RESOLUTION BUT EXPENSIVE BILLS DUE TO THE MECHANICS HOOKING IT UP TO COMPUTER SYSTEMS TO DIAGNOSE THE PROBLEM. THIS IS CAUSING U…

Read full complaint

THE FRONT HEADLIGHT STARTED GOING ON AND OFF PERIODICALLY WHILE DRIVING, WE WENT ON A TRIP TO HUNGARY AND THE LIGHT STARTED ACTING UP. WE HAVE TAKEN IT TO TWO TOYOTA DEALERSHIPS WITHIN GERMANY WITH NO RESOLUTION BUT EXPENSIVE BILLS DUE TO THE MECHANICS HOOKING IT UP TO COMPUTER SYSTEMS TO DIAGNOSE THE PROBLEM. THIS IS CAUSING US SAFETY ISSUES WHILE DRIVING ESPECIALLY ON NOT CLEAR DAYS DUE TO THE EARLY MORNING FOG. I HAVE CONSULTED WITH MY BROTHER'S BODY SHOP TO SEE IF THERE HAS BEEN ANY RECALLS OR DEFECTS ON THE LIGHTS, NOTHING. I AM TAKING IT AGAIN THIS WEEK TO THE TOYOTA SHOP IN MANNHEIM GERMANY. THIS PROBLEM HAS NOT BEEN RESOLVED SINCE FEB 2012. I WOULD APPRECIATE SOME RESOLUTION TO THIS PROBLEM BEFORE THE LIGHTS CAUSE US AN ACCIDENT. I HAVE HAD THE TWO FRONT HEADLIGHT BULBS REPLACED WHICH ARE NOT INEXPENSIVE. THANK YOU IF YOU NEED TO CONTACT ME DO IT VIA EMAIL, THIS IS MY PARENTS PHONE NUMBER IN PA, I CANNOT TYPE IN MY NUMBER IN GERMANY. [XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

NHTSA ODI #10485170

103,000 miles · Nov 18, 2012
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

WHEN I TURNED MY CAR ON TO GO HOME MY DASH LIGHTS DID NOT WORK OR BACKUP CAM OR SEAT BELT ALARM NOTHING WAS SHOWING I COULD NOT TELL IF I WAS GOING FORWARD OR BACKWARDS ETC I PARKED IT TURNED OFF 2 TIMES THEN 5 MINS LATER IT CAN BACK ON AUTOMATICALLY FIXXX THIS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10485083

28,800 miles · Nov 18, 2012
Exterior Lighting

THE HEADLIGHT WAS ON, THEN TURNED OFF AFTER A FEW MINUTES. TOOK THE CAR TO A LOCAL SHOP (DEALER PRICE IS WAY TOO HIGH), REPLACED THE BULB AND BOARD, PROBLEM PERSISTS. SEARCH INTERNET, FOUND A LOT OF POSTS FOR THE SAME ISSUE. IT IS A CAR WE BOUGHT FOR MY 16 YEAR-OLD DAUGHTER. NOW WE ARE HORRIFIED. WE DO NOT KNOW IF THERE IS A FIX…

Read full complaint

THE HEADLIGHT WAS ON, THEN TURNED OFF AFTER A FEW MINUTES. TOOK THE CAR TO A LOCAL SHOP (DEALER PRICE IS WAY TOO HIGH), REPLACED THE BULB AND BOARD, PROBLEM PERSISTS. SEARCH INTERNET, FOUND A LOT OF POSTS FOR THE SAME ISSUE. IT IS A CAR WE BOUGHT FOR MY 16 YEAR-OLD DAUGHTER. NOW WE ARE HORRIFIED. WE DO NOT KNOW IF THERE IS A FIX FOR THIS PROBLEM, AND HOW CAN OUR GOVERNMENT NOT FORCE TOYATA TO FIX THE PROBLEM. WE PAID A BOUNDLE FOR THIS CAR EVEN IT IS USED, NOW WE ARE STUCK AND WILL BE WORRIED TO DEATH WHEN MY DAUGHTER DRIVES IS IN THE DARK. PLEASE TAKE ACTION, IT IS SERIOUS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10485075

30,000 miles · Oct 22, 2012
Exterior Lighting

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE TRAVELING 70 MPH, BOTH LOW BEAM HEADLIGHTS SHUT OFF WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS MERGED TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD WHERE THE LIGHTS WERE RESET AND BEGAN TO FUNCTION NORMALLY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE HEADLIGHTS WOULD SPORADICALLY FAIL. THE VEHICLE WAS NO…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE TRAVELING 70 MPH, BOTH LOW BEAM HEADLIGHTS SHUT OFF WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS MERGED TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD WHERE THE LIGHTS WERE RESET AND BEGAN TO FUNCTION NORMALLY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE HEADLIGHTS WOULD SPORADICALLY FAIL. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED ABOUT THE ISSUE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 30,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 101,000.

NHTSA ODI #10481477

70,000 miles · Oct 19, 2012
Exterior Lighting

I HAVE A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. WAS INFORMED BY PEOPLE AND MECHANIC THAT MY FRONT LEFT HEADLIGHT WAS OUT, THIS STARTED IN 2010. IF I TURNED THE HEADLIGHTS OFF AND ON AGAIN, THE HEADLIGHT WOULD COME BACK ON. GOES OFF RANDOMLY. ASKED TOYOTA TO REPLACE IT AFTER I RECEIVED A NOTICE ABOUT A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT IN CALIF ABOUT THE SAME PR…

Read full complaint

I HAVE A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. WAS INFORMED BY PEOPLE AND MECHANIC THAT MY FRONT LEFT HEADLIGHT WAS OUT, THIS STARTED IN 2010. IF I TURNED THE HEADLIGHTS OFF AND ON AGAIN, THE HEADLIGHT WOULD COME BACK ON. GOES OFF RANDOMLY. ASKED TOYOTA TO REPLACE IT AFTER I RECEIVED A NOTICE ABOUT A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT IN CALIF ABOUT THE SAME PROBLEM WITH TOYOTA PRIUS'S. AGAIN IN 2012 WAS PULLED OVER BY POLICE TWICE AND INFORMED THAT MY FRONT LEFT HEADLIGHT WAS OUT. TURNED LIGHTS OFF AND ON AGAIN, AND LIGHT COMES BACK ON. HAPPENED RANDOMLY. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10481116

96,000 miles · Oct 17, 2012
Exterior Lighting

ABOUT A YEAR AGO, THE PASSENGER HEAD LIGHT STARTED GOING OUT. WE WOULD SELECT THE LIGHTS OFF AND THEN BACK ON AND THEY WOULD COME ON. THIS WOULD HAPPEN A COUPLE OF TIMES IN A 30 MILE TRIP. MORE RECENTLY BOTH HEAD LIGHTS WOULD START GOING OUT. SOMETIMES IT IS THE LEFT, SOMETIMES IT IS THE RIGHT, SOMETIMES IT IS BOTH HEADLIGHT…

Read full complaint

ABOUT A YEAR AGO, THE PASSENGER HEAD LIGHT STARTED GOING OUT. WE WOULD SELECT THE LIGHTS OFF AND THEN BACK ON AND THEY WOULD COME ON. THIS WOULD HAPPEN A COUPLE OF TIMES IN A 30 MILE TRIP. MORE RECENTLY BOTH HEAD LIGHTS WOULD START GOING OUT. SOMETIMES IT IS THE LEFT, SOMETIMES IT IS THE RIGHT, SOMETIMES IT IS BOTH HEADLIGHTS. IT IS GETTING MORE AND MORE FREQUENT. TODAY, AT 6:30AM (STILL VERY DARK OUTSIDE) BOTH HEAD LIGHTS WENT OUT APPROX 6 TIMES IN A 30 MILE TRIP DOWN THE INTERSTATE. I HAVE TALKED TO TOYOTA ABOUT THE ONE HEADLIGHT BEFORE AND THEY SAID THEY ARE AWARE OF THE PROBLEM, BUT THEY WILL NOT COVER ANY CARS OVER 70,000 MILES. THEY SAY THAT THE HEADLIGHTS WILL NEVER GO OUT. FOR ONE LIGHT, IT IS $400. READING FORUMS THEY SAY IT CAN BE A COMPUTER MODULE WHICH RUNS APPROX $3500. I BELIEVE THAT THIS VEHICLE IS INCREDIBLY UNSAFE IF BOTH OF THE HEADLIGHTS ARE GOING OUT WHILE AT HIGH SPEEDS (OR EVEN ANYTIME WHILE IT IS DARK OUTSIDE). *TR

NHTSA ODI #10480911

78,000 miles · Oct 17, 2012
Exterior Lighting

HID HEADLIGHTS TURN OFF WITHOUT WARNING WHILE DRIVING. THEN IF YOU TURN THEM OFF AND TURN THEM ON AGAIN, THEY'LL COME ON AGAIN (SOMETIMES DIMLY) AND THEN TURN OFF. SOMETIMES THE LEFT ONE GOES OUT. SOMETIMES THE RIGHT ONE GOES OUT. SOMETIMES BOTH GO OUT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10480847

35,000 miles · Oct 14, 2012
Exterior Lighting

WHEN I SHIPPED MY CAR OVER TO ITALY FOR MY PERMANENT CHANGE OF DUTY STATION, MY NEIGHBOR NOTICE THAT ONE OF MY HEADLIGHT IS OFF AND THE OTHER IS STILL ON SO HE THOUGHT I HAVE A BAD HEADLIGHT. I CHECK IT BY TURNING IT OFF AND THEN TURNING IT ON AGAIN. IT TURN ON. BUT A FEW WEEK LATER WHILE I WAS DRIVING HOME FROM WORK MY HEADLIGH…

Read full complaint

WHEN I SHIPPED MY CAR OVER TO ITALY FOR MY PERMANENT CHANGE OF DUTY STATION, MY NEIGHBOR NOTICE THAT ONE OF MY HEADLIGHT IS OFF AND THE OTHER IS STILL ON SO HE THOUGHT I HAVE A BAD HEADLIGHT. I CHECK IT BY TURNING IT OFF AND THEN TURNING IT ON AGAIN. IT TURN ON. BUT A FEW WEEK LATER WHILE I WAS DRIVING HOME FROM WORK MY HEADLIGHT SUDDENLY WENT OFF WHILE I WAS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE HIGHWAY. I WAS DRIVING IN THE DARK. I TURNED THE LIGHT OFF AND TURNED IT BACK ON AGAIN AND IT TURNED ON. AFTER THAT IT TURN OFF MORE OFTEN AS TIME GOES ON. ABOUT JULY, 2011 I DID SOME SEARCHING ONLINE AND IT APPEAR TO BE A KNOWN PROBLEM FOR MOST TOYOTA PRIUS OWNER THAT HAVE HID HEADLIGHT. THE HEADLIGHT IS EXPENSIVE TO REPLACED. MY CAR WAS STILL UNDER WARRANTY, SO I TRIED TO CONTACT THE TOYOTA DEALER TO SET UP SOME TYPE OF ARRANGEMENT SO THAT I CAN GET IT FIX OVER HERE. MY TOYOTA DEALER DID NOT REPLY ABOUT THE ISSUE. I ALSO CONTACT THE TOYOTA MAIN COMPANY ONLINE BUT THEY TOLD ME THAT THEY CANNOT DO ANYTHING FOR ME. THEY REFUSE TO SEND ME A NEW PART OR PROVIDE ME WITH ANY REIMBURSEMENT DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE CAR WAS 5 YEARS OLD. MY HEADLIGHT WAS DEFECTED BEFORE THEIR 5 YEARS 50K WARRANTY END. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10480045

60,000 miles · Oct 11, 2012
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

LEFT HEADLIGHT STARTED JUST GOING OFF COMPLETELY AT NITE, NOW BOTH ARE GOING OFF WHILE DRIVING. CHECKING ONLINE, IT SEEMS THAT MANY OTHER TOYOTA OWNERS HAVE HAD SAME PROBLEM, AND ONE OF THE VENDORS OF HEADLIGHTS FOR TOYOTAS MANUFACTURED DEFECTIVE HEADLIGHTS. THUS NOT ALL TOYOTAS HAVE THE PROB, JUST THE ONES WITH THIS VENDOR'S HE…

Read full complaint

LEFT HEADLIGHT STARTED JUST GOING OFF COMPLETELY AT NITE, NOW BOTH ARE GOING OFF WHILE DRIVING. CHECKING ONLINE, IT SEEMS THAT MANY OTHER TOYOTA OWNERS HAVE HAD SAME PROBLEM, AND ONE OF THE VENDORS OF HEADLIGHTS FOR TOYOTAS MANUFACTURED DEFECTIVE HEADLIGHTS. THUS NOT ALL TOYOTAS HAVE THE PROB, JUST THE ONES WITH THIS VENDOR'S HEADLIGHTS. BUT IT STILL SHOWS MANY DO HAVE THE BAD HEADLIGHTS. TOYOTA IS NOT STANDING BEHIND THIS ISSUE AND REPAIRING THE DEFECTIVE ONES AS THEY SHOULD. IT IS A VERY EXPENSIVE...ALMOST 2000 DOLLARS TO REPLACE THE COMPUTER CONTROLLERS AND HEADLIGHTS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10479787

94,587 miles · Oct 9, 2012
Exterior Lighting

LEFT FRONT HEADLIGHT WENT OUT THEN 4 MONTHS LATER THE RIGHT FRONT HEADLIGHT WENT OUT. I CAN MAKE THEM WORK AGAIN BY TOGGLING THE ON/OFF SWITCH. THERE HAS BEEN MANY TIMES THAT BOTH LIGHTS WENT OUT AT THE SAME TIME. I LOOKED AT THE BULBS AND THEY ARE FINE ITS THE LIGHT MODULE THAT IS DEFECTIVE AND NEEDS TO BE REPLACED WHICH IS ABO…

Read full complaint

LEFT FRONT HEADLIGHT WENT OUT THEN 4 MONTHS LATER THE RIGHT FRONT HEADLIGHT WENT OUT. I CAN MAKE THEM WORK AGAIN BY TOGGLING THE ON/OFF SWITCH. THERE HAS BEEN MANY TIMES THAT BOTH LIGHTS WENT OUT AT THE SAME TIME. I LOOKED AT THE BULBS AND THEY ARE FINE ITS THE LIGHT MODULE THAT IS DEFECTIVE AND NEEDS TO BE REPLACED WHICH IS ABOUT 600 PLUS FOR BOTH. KIND OF FIND THIS HARD TO GET FIXED SO I HAVE BEEN DEALING WITH THIS LIGHT ISSUE FOR SOME TIME NOW. THEY SHOULD JUST TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR A POORLY DESIGNED MODULE AND REPLACE THEM! SINCE THEY DID NOT STAND BY THERE PRODUCT I WENT OUT AND BOUGHT A FORD EDGE INSTEAD OF A TOYOTA HIGHLANDER. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10479497

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.