← 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
91,000 miles · Oct 2, 2012
Exterior Lighting

RECENTLY PURCHASED VEHICLE APPROXIMATELY 4 MONTHS AGO. HEADLIGHTS SUDDENLY GO OUT WHILE DRIVING, ARE UNPREDICTABLE AND AT TIMES WILL NOT STAY ON. THEY MAY WORK FOR DAYS AND THEN SUDDENLY WILL START GOING OUT. ONE HEADLIGHT, BOTH HEADLIGHTS, HI BEAMS, LO BEAMS, NO PATTERN TO WHAT GOES OUT OR WORKS WHEN PROBLEM STARTS TO OCCUR.…

Read full complaint

RECENTLY PURCHASED VEHICLE APPROXIMATELY 4 MONTHS AGO. HEADLIGHTS SUDDENLY GO OUT WHILE DRIVING, ARE UNPREDICTABLE AND AT TIMES WILL NOT STAY ON. THEY MAY WORK FOR DAYS AND THEN SUDDENLY WILL START GOING OUT. ONE HEADLIGHT, BOTH HEADLIGHTS, HI BEAMS, LO BEAMS, NO PATTERN TO WHAT GOES OUT OR WORKS WHEN PROBLEM STARTS TO OCCUR. EACH TIME HEADLIGHTS ARE TURNED OFF AND BACK ON THE RESULT OF WHAT IS WORKING OR NOT WORKING IS DIFFERENT. AT TIMES TURNING ON HIGH BEAMS RESULTS IN ALL LIGHTS GOING OUT AT THE SAME TIME. PRESENTS A DANGEROUS SITUATION MAKING IT UNSAFE TO BE CAUGHT AWAY FROM HOME WITH THE CAR AT DUSK. MY 19 YEAR OLD SON SPENT HIS HARD EARNED MONEY TO BUY THIS TOYOTA FOR TRANSPORTATION WHILE AWAY FROM HOME AT COLLEGE. TOYOTA IS UNWILLING TO ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR COSTLY REPAIRS IN A HIT AND MISS GAME OF LETS THROW MONEY AT THE PROBLEM REPLACING PARTS TRYING TO RESOLVE IT UNTIL THEY "FIX IT". I HAVE NO COMFORT THAT THE PROBLEM IS EVER FIXED REGARDLESS OF HOW MUCH MONEY IS SPENT SINCE THE PROBLEM IS INTERMITTENT AND MAY NOT BE SEEN FOR WEEKS AT A TIME. HOW CAN TOYOTA GET AWAY WITH NOT ADDRESSING THIS SAFETY HAZARD? *TR

NHTSA ODI #10478312

90,000 miles · Sep 24, 2012
Exterior Lighting

THE HID HEADLIGHTS ON MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS GO OFF WITHOUT WARNING - IT WAS ONCE THE DRIVER'S SIDE, AND YESTERDAY IT WAS THE PASSENGER SIDE - BUT THEY COMEBACK NEXT TIME I TURN THEM ON - *TR

NHTSA ODI #10476787

70,000 miles · Sep 14, 2012
Exterior Lighting

MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS HID LEFT/RIGHT LIGHTS GOES OFF INTERMITTENTLY WHEN DRIVING!! SOMETIMES BOTH OF THEM GO OUT AT THE SAME TIME, IT IS SO DANGEROUS. I CONTACTED THE TOYOTA DEALER AND THEY WANT $300 TO REPLACE HEAD LAMPS, BUT DO NOT GUARANTEE THAT IT WILL FIX THE ISSUE. LAST NIGHT I WAS STOPPED BY POLICE BECAUSE MY DRIVER SIDE H…

Read full complaint

MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS HID LEFT/RIGHT LIGHTS GOES OFF INTERMITTENTLY WHEN DRIVING!! SOMETIMES BOTH OF THEM GO OUT AT THE SAME TIME, IT IS SO DANGEROUS. I CONTACTED THE TOYOTA DEALER AND THEY WANT $300 TO REPLACE HEAD LAMPS, BUT DO NOT GUARANTEE THAT IT WILL FIX THE ISSUE. LAST NIGHT I WAS STOPPED BY POLICE BECAUSE MY DRIVER SIDE HEAD LAMPS WAS OUT, BUT I HAD TURN OFF, THEN ON THE LIGHTS, AND IT WAS BACK ON. I BELIEVED THIS IS A WELL KNOWN ISSUE WITH THE TOYOTA PRIUS AND TOYOTA SHOULD DO THE RIGHT THING AND FIXED IT. I HOPE THAT TOYOTA DOES NOT WAIT FOR A MAJOR ACCIDENT TO DO THE RIGHT THING. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10475418

600,200 miles · Aug 24, 2012
Exterior Lighting

WHILE DRIVING, THE CAR'S HEADLIGHTS SUDDENLY TURN OFF WHETHER IT BE THE RIGHT OR LEFT LIGHT. THE ONLY WAY TO MAKE THE LIGHT TURN ON AGAIN IS TO FLIP YOUR HEADLIGHTS OFF THEN ON AGAIN. AND EVEN THEN, THE LIGHTS WOULD SEEM TO DO THE SAME THING BUT IN SHORTER INTERVALS OF TIME. I HAPPENED TO RECEIVE A TICKET FOR "DRIVING WITHOUT HE…

Read full complaint

WHILE DRIVING, THE CAR'S HEADLIGHTS SUDDENLY TURN OFF WHETHER IT BE THE RIGHT OR LEFT LIGHT. THE ONLY WAY TO MAKE THE LIGHT TURN ON AGAIN IS TO FLIP YOUR HEADLIGHTS OFF THEN ON AGAIN. AND EVEN THEN, THE LIGHTS WOULD SEEM TO DO THE SAME THING BUT IN SHORTER INTERVALS OF TIME. I HAPPENED TO RECEIVE A TICKET FOR "DRIVING WITHOUT HEADLIGHTS" WHEN IN FACT THEY JUST TURNED OFF WITHOUT MY KNOWLEDGE. I HAVE BROUGHT MY CAR INTO TOYOTA WITH THIS BEING A POPULAR MANUFACTURING DEFECT AMONGST OTHER 2006-07 PRIUS MODELS, BUT TO MY SURPRISE, THE COST FOR BULB REPAIR WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY $660. EVEN AFTER SUCH PAYMENT WAS GIVEN AND REPAIRS WERE PERFORMED, THAT WOULD NOT FULLY GUARANTEE A FULL FIX ON THE PROBLEM. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10472383

120,000 miles · Aug 14, 2012
Exterior Lighting

LOW BEAM HEADLIGHTS BURNING OUT CONSISTENTLY AFTER A VERY SHORT TIME. LAST ONE ONLY LASTED ABOUT 3 WEEKS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10470522

103,046 miles · Aug 11, 2012
Exterior Lighting

HEADLIGHTS (LEFT, RIGHT AND/OR BOTH) INTERMITTENTLY GO OFF AND ON WHILE DRIVING. THIS HAS HAPPENED BEFORE AND TOYOTA REPLACED THE BULBS (I THINK) AS A DEFECT. SEVERAL BLOGS REPORT THIS PROBLEM. IT IS DANGEROUS AND COULD RESULT IN AN ACCIDENT AT WORST AND A TICKET AT BEST. TOYOTA SHOULD RECALL AND CORRECT THE PROBLEM PERMANENT…

Read full complaint

HEADLIGHTS (LEFT, RIGHT AND/OR BOTH) INTERMITTENTLY GO OFF AND ON WHILE DRIVING. THIS HAS HAPPENED BEFORE AND TOYOTA REPLACED THE BULBS (I THINK) AS A DEFECT. SEVERAL BLOGS REPORT THIS PROBLEM. IT IS DANGEROUS AND COULD RESULT IN AN ACCIDENT AT WORST AND A TICKET AT BEST. TOYOTA SHOULD RECALL AND CORRECT THE PROBLEM PERMANENTLY AND NOT REQUIRE OWNERS TO PAY FOR WHAT IS AN OBVIOUS DESIGN DEFECT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10470255

45 miles · Aug 7, 2012
Exterior Lighting

I WAS ISSUED A WARNING TICKET FOR HAVING ONE HEADLIGHT OUT. WHEN I TRIED TO INVESTIGATE THE FAILED HEADLIGHT, I COULD NOT REPLICATE THE PROBLEM... EVERY TIME I LOOKED AT MY HEADLIGHTS THEY WERE BOTH ON AND FULLY FUNCTIONAL. ONE WEEK LATER I WAS DRIVING IN THE DESERT ON A ROAD WITH NO STREET LIGHTS AND BOTH HEADLIGHTS WENT …

Read full complaint

I WAS ISSUED A WARNING TICKET FOR HAVING ONE HEADLIGHT OUT. WHEN I TRIED TO INVESTIGATE THE FAILED HEADLIGHT, I COULD NOT REPLICATE THE PROBLEM... EVERY TIME I LOOKED AT MY HEADLIGHTS THEY WERE BOTH ON AND FULLY FUNCTIONAL. ONE WEEK LATER I WAS DRIVING IN THE DESERT ON A ROAD WITH NO STREET LIGHTS AND BOTH HEADLIGHTS WENT OUT WHILE I WAS DRIVING OVER 45 MPH WHILE HEADING INTO A CURVE. FORTUNATELY I WAS ABLE TO KEEP THE CAR UNDER CONTROL AND ARRIVE SAFELY AT A STOP, AS IT WAS PITCH BLACK OUTSIDE. I WAS ABLE TO TURN THE LIGHTS OFF AND BACK ON TO RESTORE LIGHTING, BUT IT HAPPENED AGAIN 5 MINUTES LATER. WEATHER CONDITION WAS MID-70'S AND A CLEAR DRY NIGHT. WHEN I BROUGHT THE CAR TO THE DEALERSHIP THEY SAID THEY SAW ONE HEADLIGHT GOING BAD AFTER LEAVING THE LIGHTS ON FOR TEN MINUTES, BUT WOULDN'T DEAL WITH THE OTHER HEADLIGHT OR INVESTIGATE ANY PROBLEM THAT MAY HAVE LED TO THE INCIDENT. THEY INSISTED THAT THERE WAS NO PROBLEM AND THAT THE ONLY WAY THEY COULD TEST IT IS IF I PURCHASED AND PAID FOR INSTALLATION OF 2 NEW HID LAMPS... OVER $800. THEY SAID TOYOTA'S OFFICIAL POSITION WAS TO NOT TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR IT AND THAT BOTH LAMPS MUST BE REPLACED. THEY WOULD NOT ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS PERTAINING TO TESTING THE BALLAST, NOR WOULD THEY ADDRESS WHY BOTH HEADLIGHTS FAILED WITHIN LESS THAN A WEEK OF ONE ANOTHER. ULTIMATELY, THE DEALER'S SOLUTION WAS TO TELL ME TO JUST TURN MY LIGHTS ON AND OFF REAL QUICKLY. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10469591

42,540 miles · Jul 31, 2012
Exterior Lighting

HEAD KEEPS GOING OUT - WE'VE REPLACED IT AND NOW WERE HAVING THE SAME PROBLEM AGAIN. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10468456

45,000 miles · Jul 17, 2012
Exterior Lighting

DRIVERS SIDE HEADLIGHT AND PASSENGER SIDE HEADLIGHT WILL GO OUT RANDOMLY AT ANYTIME BUT SO FAR BOTH HAVEN'T GONE OUT AT ONCE... HAVE BEEN STOPPED BY THE POLICE NUMEROUS TIMES FOR THIS. WHEN I TURN THE HEADLIGHTS OFF AND BACK ON AGAIN THEN THEY COME BACK ON. THIS HAS HAPPENED IN THE WINTER AND AGAIN THIS SUMMER. SOMETHING NEE…

Read full complaint

DRIVERS SIDE HEADLIGHT AND PASSENGER SIDE HEADLIGHT WILL GO OUT RANDOMLY AT ANYTIME BUT SO FAR BOTH HAVEN'T GONE OUT AT ONCE... HAVE BEEN STOPPED BY THE POLICE NUMEROUS TIMES FOR THIS. WHEN I TURN THE HEADLIGHTS OFF AND BACK ON AGAIN THEN THEY COME BACK ON. THIS HAS HAPPENED IN THE WINTER AND AGAIN THIS SUMMER. SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE ABOUT THIS PROBLEM AS IT IS VERY ANNOYING AND DANGEROUS ESPECIALLY AT NIGHT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10466314

70,000 miles · Jul 13, 2012
Exterior Lighting

THIS IS A WELL PUBLICIZED PROBLEM. THIS PROBLEM NOW OCCURS MULTIPLE TIMES EVERY DAY> I TOOK POSSESSION OF THIS VEHICLE IN MARCH, 2011 AT ABOUT 40,000 MILES. IT IS NOT POSSIBLE FOR ME TO VERIFY THAT THE PROBLEM WAS OR WAS NOT OCCURRING FROM THE FIRST DAY I HAD THE VEHICLE.. I FIRST NOTICED THE RANDOM AND VARIABLE HEADLIGHT F…

Read full complaint

THIS IS A WELL PUBLICIZED PROBLEM. THIS PROBLEM NOW OCCURS MULTIPLE TIMES EVERY DAY> I TOOK POSSESSION OF THIS VEHICLE IN MARCH, 2011 AT ABOUT 40,000 MILES. IT IS NOT POSSIBLE FOR ME TO VERIFY THAT THE PROBLEM WAS OR WAS NOT OCCURRING FROM THE FIRST DAY I HAD THE VEHICLE.. I FIRST NOTICED THE RANDOM AND VARIABLE HEADLIGHT FAILURE ABOUT FOUR MONTHS AGO... IT OCCURS ON A REGULAR BASIS NOW.... AND IS TEMPORARILY "FIXED" BY CYCLING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH.... IT IS NOT ALWAYS THE SAME HEADLIGHT THAT FAILS, WHICH SHOULD TELL YOU IT IS NOT THE BULB... WHICH SO MANY DEALERS ARE HAPPILY CHARGING TO REPLACE. MY VEHICLE NOW HAS OVER 84000 MILES ON IT AND THE PROBLEM PERSISTS.... SO WHOEVER DECIDED THAT 50,000 MILES IS A REASONABLE CUT-OFF FOR TOYOTA'S RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE PROBLEM.... I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY WERE THINKING... THOUSANDS OF CARS DO NOT FAIL OVER 5 MODEL YEARS STARTING AT AS LOW AS 20,000 MILES FROM "NORMAL WEAR AND TEAR AGING AND FAILURE".... THIS IS A SERIOUS AND INEXCUSABLE DESIGN FLAW WHICH SHOULD HAVE BEEN ADDED TO THE LONG LIST OF RECALLS WHICH TODAY'S TOYOTA IS COMING TO BE KNOWN FOR.... THEY RESISTED A RECALL BECAUSE EVEN PEOPLE WHO HAVE SPENT ALMOST $2,000 FOR THE DEALER TO FIX THIS ISSUE HAVE REPORTED THAT IT RECURS AFTER THE SO-CALLED "FIX". TOYOTA MUST KNOW THAT THERE IS NO EASY FIX, AND IS NOT WILLING TO TAKE THE HIT FOR CORRECTING THEIR DEFECTIVE DESIGN. I GUESS IT WILL TAKE SEVERAL WRONGFUL DEATHS DUE TO HEADLIGHT FAILURE BEFORE THIS ISSUE CAN BE RAISED TO A NEW LEVEL OF INTERVENTION.... THE CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT WAS AN EXERCISE IN MORONIC IRRESPONSIBILITY... MOSTLY BY THE COURTS FOR ALLOWING SUCH A PITIFUL AND INEFFECTIVE RULING. ONE MORE EXHIBIT TO DEMONSTRATE THAT CORPORATIONS RUN THE WORLD TODAY.... NOT GOVERNMENTS..... PATHETIC...... *TR

NHTSA ODI #10465546

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.