← 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
36,500 miles · Feb 25, 2011
Exterior Lighting

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING 50 MPH WHEN BOTH HEADLIGHTS FAILED. THE CONTACT ENGAGED THE HEAD LIGHT ON/OFF SWITCH SEVERAL TIMES BEFORE THE HEADLIGHTS WOULD RE-ILLUMINATE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE THE CONTACT WAS ADVISED THAT THE HEADLIGHTS WERE PERFORMING AS DESIGNED. THE CON…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING 50 MPH WHEN BOTH HEADLIGHTS FAILED. THE CONTACT ENGAGED THE HEAD LIGHT ON/OFF SWITCH SEVERAL TIMES BEFORE THE HEADLIGHTS WOULD RE-ILLUMINATE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE THE CONTACT WAS ADVISED THAT THE HEADLIGHTS WERE PERFORMING AS DESIGNED. THE CONTACT DISAGREED AND STATED THAT THE HEADLIGHTS SHOULD NOT SHUT OFF INDEPENDENTLY WITHOUT WARNING. BOTH HEADLIGHTS WERE REPLACED BY THE DEALER. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 36,500.

NHTSA ODI #10384468

57,100 miles · Feb 24, 2011
Exterior Lighting

WHILE DRIVING HOME FROM SALT LAKE CITY DURING THE EVENING OUR SECOND HID HEADLIGHT WENT OUT ON US JUST OUTSIDE OF POCATELLO. WE HAD FOG LIGHTS SO USED THOSE TO GET HOME. OUR OTHER HEADLIGHT HAD BEEN OUT FOR A FEW MONTHS. I HAD CONTACTED TOYOTA ABOUT THE FIRST HEADLIGHT SINCE THIS WAS THE THIRD TIME THAT OUR LIGHTS HAD FAILED. TH…

Read full complaint

WHILE DRIVING HOME FROM SALT LAKE CITY DURING THE EVENING OUR SECOND HID HEADLIGHT WENT OUT ON US JUST OUTSIDE OF POCATELLO. WE HAD FOG LIGHTS SO USED THOSE TO GET HOME. OUR OTHER HEADLIGHT HAD BEEN OUT FOR A FEW MONTHS. I HAD CONTACTED TOYOTA ABOUT THE FIRST HEADLIGHT SINCE THIS WAS THE THIRD TIME THAT OUR LIGHTS HAD FAILED. THE FIRST TIME THEY REPLACED THE BULB BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT TOYOTA SAID TO DO SINCE THE HEADLIGHT ASSEMBLY WAS A MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE PART AND THEY COULD NOT TELL IF IT WAS A BULB ISSUE OR ASSEMBLY ISSUE. THE SECOND TIME THEY REPLACED THE HEADLIGHT ASSEMBLY. THE THIRD TIME THE SAID IT WAS THE BULB AND THEY WOULD NOT REPLACE IT FOR FREE. THEY WANTED $160.00 FOR THE BULB PLUS 2 HOURS OF LABOR. ABOUT A $400.00 DOLLAR REPAIR. I REMINDED THEM OF THE LAST TIME THIS HAPPENED & SAID HOW DO YOU KNOW IT'S THE BULB THIS TIME. THEY SAID THE ASSEMBLY IS NOT THE ISSUE. I CALLED TOYOTA DIRECT AND COMPLAINED. I THEN RECEIVED A FOLLOW-UP CALL FROM TOYOTA GETTING ALL THE INFORMATION ONCE AGAIN. THEY SAID THEY WOULD BE IN TOUCH WITH OUR LOCAL DEALER. THE LOCAL DEALER FOLLOWED UP AND SAID HE WAS GOING TO CHECK WITH HIS "PARTS" GUY TO SEE IF THEY WOULD GIVE USE THE $160.00 BULB AND ONLY CHARGE US FOR LABOR. TO THIS DATE THEY HAVE NOT FOLLOWED UP. AFTER LOSING MY LIGHTING ON THE INTERSTATE I DID A TON OF ONLINE RESEARCH AND FOUND HOW TO CHANGE THE BULBS MYSELF WITHOUT THE REMOVAL OF THE ENTIRE FRONT BUMPER, AS TOYOTA STATES THIS IS HOW IT NEEDS TO BE DONE WHICH IS RIDICULOUS FOR A PART THAT OBVIOUSLY MUST BE EASILY REPLACED. THE BULB REPLACEMENT IS STILL NOT AN EASY PROCESS. I ORDERED REPLACEMENT BULBS ONLINE, 2 BULBS FOR $39.00. MY COMPLAINT IS THE LACK OF SERVICE AND FOLLOW-UP FROM TOYOTA AND THE DIFFICULTY OF REPLACING THESE BULBS. TOYOTA SHOULD MAKE THESE BULBS REPLACEABLE BY THE AVERAGE CONSUMER AND THE BULBS SHOULD BE AVAILABLE IN THE AUTO PARTS STORE.

NHTSA ODI #10385108

127,000 miles · Feb 24, 2011
Exterior Lighting

PASSENGER SIDE HEADLIGHT KEEPS GOING OUT ON 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. DEALERSHIP HAS REPLACED HEADLIGHT NOW WANTS 1100 FOR WHOLE ASSEMBLY BUT I SEE THIS COMPLAINT ALL OVER THE INTERNET AND THE TOYOTA PEOPLE SAY TOYOTA IS AWARE OF ISSUE BUT HAS DONE NOTHING ABOUT IT. THE CAR IS TO DANGEROUS TO DRIVE I HAVE RECEIVED TWO TICKETS FOR MY …

Read full complaint

PASSENGER SIDE HEADLIGHT KEEPS GOING OUT ON 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. DEALERSHIP HAS REPLACED HEADLIGHT NOW WANTS 1100 FOR WHOLE ASSEMBLY BUT I SEE THIS COMPLAINT ALL OVER THE INTERNET AND THE TOYOTA PEOPLE SAY TOYOTA IS AWARE OF ISSUE BUT HAS DONE NOTHING ABOUT IT. THE CAR IS TO DANGEROUS TO DRIVE I HAVE RECEIVED TWO TICKETS FOR MY LIGHT BEING OUT EVEN THOUGH I SHOW THEM THE SERVICE RECEIPTS. A COP TOLD ME NOT TO DRIVE THE CAR. THE LIGHT WORKS AS SOON AS YOU TURN IT OFF AND BACK ON. VERY DANGEROUS WHILE ON THE INTERSTATE AT NIGHT TO BE TURNING YOUR LIGHTS ON AND OFF. VERY UPSET TOYOTA OWNER AT THE LACK OF REACTION FROM THE MANUFACTURER. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10384420

32,122 miles · Feb 24, 2011
Exterior Lighting

I OWN A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. LAST FALL, THE HID LAMP ON THE DRIVER'S SIDE WENT ON AND OFF AND ON AND OFF THEN BURNED OUT. IT WAS COVERED BY WARRANTY AND REPLACED. MY CURRENT MILEAGE: 32, 122. THE HID LAMP ON THE PASSENGER SIDE WENT ON AND OFF, ON AND OFF AND WAS REPLACED 2/23/11 AT CONSIDERABLE COST TO ME. I WAS TOLD BY THE DEALE…

Read full complaint

I OWN A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. LAST FALL, THE HID LAMP ON THE DRIVER'S SIDE WENT ON AND OFF AND ON AND OFF THEN BURNED OUT. IT WAS COVERED BY WARRANTY AND REPLACED. MY CURRENT MILEAGE: 32, 122. THE HID LAMP ON THE PASSENGER SIDE WENT ON AND OFF, ON AND OFF AND WAS REPLACED 2/23/11 AT CONSIDERABLE COST TO ME. I WAS TOLD BY THE DEALER THAT THIS IS A COMMON PROBLEM WITH THIS VEHICLE. CONSUMERAFFAIR.COM REPORTS THE SEVERAL COMPLAINTS, AS DOES THE PRIUS CHAT LINE. I CONTACTED TOYOTA'S MAIN OFFICE, FILED A COMPLAINT AND WAS TOLD BY THE CSR THAT HE'S HAD SEVERAL COMPLAINTS FILED. THERE IS A MAJOR SAFETY ISSUE FOR NIGHT DRIVING WITH THESE HID LAMPS. SO MANY FOLKS ARE AWARE OF THE PROBLEM BUT TOYOTA DOESN'T SEEM TO BE CLAIMING ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR THESE - WHAT SEEM TO BE - DEFECTIVE HID LAMPS. PART OF THE SAFETY ISSUE IS THAT THEY GO OFF AND ON SO THE DRIVER MAY HAVE NO IDEA THAT ONE OR BOTH LAMPS ARE DARK UNLESS REFLECTED IN THE REAR OF A CAR IN FRONT OF THE DRIVER. AT WHAT POINT WILL TOYOTA COMMENCE A RECALL FOR THESE HID LAMPS -. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10384294

Mileage unknown · Feb 22, 2011
Exterior Lighting

HID HEADLIGHTS SUDDENLY GO OFF WHILE DRIVING RESULTING IN NO ILLUMINATION. IF LIGHT SWITCH IS TURNED OFF THEN ON LIGHTS WILL COME BACK ON FOR A LITTLE WHILE AND THEN SHUT OFF AGAIN. THIS IS A VERY SERIOUS SAFETY ISSUE AND THESE BULB FAILURES ARE EXTREMELY COMMON WITH THESE VEHICLES EVEN WITH VEHICLES THAT ARE FAIRLY NEW AND WITH…

Read full complaint

HID HEADLIGHTS SUDDENLY GO OFF WHILE DRIVING RESULTING IN NO ILLUMINATION. IF LIGHT SWITCH IS TURNED OFF THEN ON LIGHTS WILL COME BACK ON FOR A LITTLE WHILE AND THEN SHUT OFF AGAIN. THIS IS A VERY SERIOUS SAFETY ISSUE AND THESE BULB FAILURES ARE EXTREMELY COMMON WITH THESE VEHICLES EVEN WITH VEHICLES THAT ARE FAIRLY NEW AND WITH VERY LOW MILES. TOYOTA CLAIMS THESE LIGHTS SHOULD LAST MUCH LONGER THAN NORMAL BULBS, BUT THIS HAS NOT BEEN THE CASE. ADDITIONALLY THESE BULBS ARE EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE TO REPLACE. ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THE POOR QUALITY IN RECENT TOYOTA VEHICLES WHICH HAVE BEEN WELL DOCUMENTED. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10383946

60,000 miles · Feb 17, 2011
Exterior Lighting

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 30 MPH WITH THE HEADLIGHTS ON WHEN THEY SUDDENLY FAILED TO FUNCTION. THE FAILURE OCCURRED AT VARIOUS SPEEDS. THE CONTACT REPLACED BOTH HEADLAMP BULBS. THE FAILURE CONTINUED TO OCCUR AFTER THE REPLACEMENT OF THE BULBS. THE CONTACT STATED THE FAILURE WA…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 30 MPH WITH THE HEADLIGHTS ON WHEN THEY SUDDENLY FAILED TO FUNCTION. THE FAILURE OCCURRED AT VARIOUS SPEEDS. THE CONTACT REPLACED BOTH HEADLAMP BULBS. THE FAILURE CONTINUED TO OCCUR AFTER THE REPLACEMENT OF THE BULBS. THE CONTACT STATED THE FAILURE WAS RELATED TO THE HEADLAMP ASSEMBLY. THE VEHICLE HAD NOT BEEN DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 60,000.

NHTSA ODI #10383129

Mileage unknown · Feb 17, 2011
Exterior Lighting

MY 2007 PRIUS HEADLIGHTS KEEP GOING OFF FOR NO REASON. WHEN THEY GO OFF YOU CAN TURN THE LIGHTS SWITCH OFF THEN BACK ON AND THEY BOTH COME BACK ON. THE DRIVERS SIDE HAS DONE IT THREE TIMES AND THEY BOTH HAVE GONE OFF ONCE WHILE DRIVING AT NIGHT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10383089

28,000 miles · Feb 17, 2011
Exterior Lighting

2007 PRIUS WITH 28,000 MILES HEADLIGHTS GO ON AND OFF. STARTED WITH THE DRIVERS SIDE NOW BOTH LIGHTS GO OFF. TURN THEM OFF/ON AND THE LIGHTS COME BACK ON FOR A WHILE. TOYOTA DEALER SAID THEY DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THE CLASS ACTION LAW SUIT. CALLED TOYOTA CORPORATE AND THEY WOULD NOT COMMIT TO REPAIRING THE LIGHTS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10383058

58,000 miles · Feb 9, 2011
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

I OWN A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS AND THE DRIVER HEADLIGHT INTERMITTENTLY TURN OFF. I CAN TURN THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH OFF AND BACK ON AND IT USUALLY TURNS LIGHT BACK ON FOR AWHILE. THE DEALER COST FOR THE HEADLIGHT WAS $300.00 PLUS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10381241

42,000 miles · Feb 1, 2011
Exterior Lighting

THE LIGHTS ON MY 07 PRIUS KEEP TURING OFF AS I DRIVE. I CAN'T TURN ON AND OFF THE BRIGHTS TO GET THE LIGHTS TO TURN ON I HAVE TO TURN THE LIGHTS OFF THEN ON MAKING IT A REAL HAZARD AT NIGHT ESPECIALLY ON HIGHWAYS. THERE IS NO TIME OR FUNCTION THAT HAS TO HAPPEN FOR THEM TO GO OUT. I COULD JUST BE SITTING AT A LIGHT OR GOING DOW…

Read full complaint

THE LIGHTS ON MY 07 PRIUS KEEP TURING OFF AS I DRIVE. I CAN'T TURN ON AND OFF THE BRIGHTS TO GET THE LIGHTS TO TURN ON I HAVE TO TURN THE LIGHTS OFF THEN ON MAKING IT A REAL HAZARD AT NIGHT ESPECIALLY ON HIGHWAYS. THERE IS NO TIME OR FUNCTION THAT HAS TO HAPPEN FOR THEM TO GO OUT. I COULD JUST BE SITTING AT A LIGHT OR GOING DOWN THE HIGHWAY. ONCE ONE LIGHT GOES OUT IT DOESN'T TAKE LONG FOR THE OTHER TO FOLLOW. THE FOG AND BREAK AND BACK LIGHTS ALL WORK FINE. ITS JUST THE HEAD LIGHTS. IF THE HEADLIGHTS ARE OUT THEN NOT EVEN THE BRIGHTS WILL TURN ON OR FIX THE PROBLEM. IF IM DRIVING WITH JUST THE BRIGHTS, THE SAME THING HAPPENS. ONE WILL GO OUT FOLLOWED LATER BY THE OTHER. AND I CAN'T JUST TAKE IT OUT OF THE BRIGHTS SETTING. I HAVE TO TURN THE LIGHTS COMPLETELY OFF. *LN

NHTSA ODI #10379891

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.