← 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
59,000 miles · Aug 10, 2010
Exterior Lighting

THE THIRD HEADLIGHT BULB HAS JUST FAILED ON MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS...I'VE HAD IT! UNDER 60,000 MILES! 3 BULBS? RIDICULOUS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10348597

Mileage unknown · Aug 6, 2010
Exterior Lighting

TOYOTA PRIUS HID HEADLIGHTS GO OUT INTERMITTENTLY. IF YOU POWER THEM OFF AND THEN ON AGAIN, SOMETIMES THEY'LL WORK. SINCE THEY GO OUT WITHOUT WARNING AND IRREGULARLY, IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO TELL IF THEY ARE ACTUALLY ON OR OFF WHILE DRIVING. TOYOTA TECHNICIANS REFUSE TO REPLACE HEADLIGHT IF IT IS WORKING WHEN THEY TEST, LEADING TO F…

Read full complaint

TOYOTA PRIUS HID HEADLIGHTS GO OUT INTERMITTENTLY. IF YOU POWER THEM OFF AND THEN ON AGAIN, SOMETIMES THEY'LL WORK. SINCE THEY GO OUT WITHOUT WARNING AND IRREGULARLY, IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO TELL IF THEY ARE ACTUALLY ON OR OFF WHILE DRIVING. TOYOTA TECHNICIANS REFUSE TO REPLACE HEADLIGHT IF IT IS WORKING WHEN THEY TEST, LEADING TO FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY ON THE PART OF THE DRIVER. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10347767

34,000 miles · Aug 3, 2010
Exterior Lighting

THERE IS A HEADLIGHT SAFETY ISSUE WITH THE TOYOTA PRIUS. IT IS HARD TO IDENTIFY WHEN YOU ARE DRIVING THE VEHICLE BECAUSE THE LIGHTS TURN ON, BUT THEY DO NOT STAY ON. SO WHEN YOU START YOUR CAR AND TURN ON THE LIGHTS THEY BOTH START ON. HOWEVER INTERMITTENTLY THERE IS A TRIGGER THAT CAUSES THE LIGHTS TO GO OUT. SOMETIMES IT IS TH…

Read full complaint

THERE IS A HEADLIGHT SAFETY ISSUE WITH THE TOYOTA PRIUS. IT IS HARD TO IDENTIFY WHEN YOU ARE DRIVING THE VEHICLE BECAUSE THE LIGHTS TURN ON, BUT THEY DO NOT STAY ON. SO WHEN YOU START YOUR CAR AND TURN ON THE LIGHTS THEY BOTH START ON. HOWEVER INTERMITTENTLY THERE IS A TRIGGER THAT CAUSES THE LIGHTS TO GO OUT. SOMETIMES IT IS THE PASSENGER LIGHT, SOMETIMES IT IS BOTH THE PASSENGER AND DRIVER HEADLIGHTS.SOMETIMES THEY DON'T EVER TURN OFF. THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR ABOUT A YEAR AND TOOK THIS LONG TO FIGURE OUT. THE PROBLEM IS THERE IS ALWAYS "SOME" LIGHT COMING FROM ANOTHER LIGHT SOURCE AROUND THE HEADLIGHTS SO WHEN DRIVING, YOU SEE THAT THERE IS SOME LIGHT ON THE ROAD, TRICKING YOU INTO THINKING YOU HAVE BOTH HEADLIGHTS WHEN YOU REALLY DON'T. THIS IS A HUGE SAFETY PROBLEM, ESPECIALLY DRIVING IN RURAL MOUNTAIN AREAS. WHEN THIS STARTED HAPPENING, SINCE I HAD SOME LIGHT ON THE ROAD, I THOUGHT IT WAS MY EYES OR HEALTH AND WENT TO THE EYE DOCTORS, ETC. NOT MY EYES - IT'S THE CAR. IT IS INTERRMITTENT AND BECAUSE THERE WAS SOME LIGHT ON THE ROAD I THOUGHT IT WAS MY VISION NOT THE HEADLIGHTS. WHEN THE LIGHTS DO THIS YOU HAVE A HARD TIME SEEING CURVES IN THE DARK ETC. IT IS HARDER TO DETECT IN CITY DRIVING WHICH WE DO MOSTLY. WE DID RECEIVE A LETTER FRM TOYOTA ABOUT THE HEADLIGHTS INDICATING SOME PEOPLE HAD PROBLEMS WITH THE HEADLIGHTS AND TOYOTA ERRONEOUSLY CHARGED THEM FOR THE SWITCH AND THEY WOULD BE REIMBURSED. HOWEVER, IT DID NOT DESCRIBE THE PROBLEM THE SAME WAY IT HAPPENS SO WE DIDN'T THINK THERE WAS AN ISSUE. THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE ON THE INTERNET REPORTING THIS SERIOUS SAFETY ISSUE AND TOYOTA IS CONSIDERING THIS REGULAR MAINTENANCE AND WANTS EVERYONE TO PAY FOR IT THEMSELVES. THIS SHOULD BE A RECALL NOTICE DESCRIBING EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENS AND THEY SHOULD PAY TO FIX IT. I'M PUTTING THE APPX DATE IT STARTED, BUT I HAVE BEEN DOCUMENTING THE LIGHT BEHAVIOR IN DETAIL THE LAST FEW DAYS. THERE ARE MORE REPORTS OF THIS PROBLEM ON THE INTERNET. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10347053

Mileage unknown · Jul 29, 2010
Exterior Lighting

MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS HEADLAMPS ON THE PASSENGER SIDE BURNED OUT AT 50000 MILES THEN A MONTH LATER THE DRIVER SIDE BURNED OUT. AFTER PAYING 275.00 FOR EACH NEW HEADLIGHT TO BE REPLACED THE PASSENGER SIDE HAS BURNT OUT AGAIN WITH ONLY 30000 MILES USAGE. I PURCHASED THE CAR TO SAVE MONEY ON THE FUEL MILEAGE BUT END UP SAVING NOTHIN…

Read full complaint

MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS HEADLAMPS ON THE PASSENGER SIDE BURNED OUT AT 50000 MILES THEN A MONTH LATER THE DRIVER SIDE BURNED OUT. AFTER PAYING 275.00 FOR EACH NEW HEADLIGHT TO BE REPLACED THE PASSENGER SIDE HAS BURNT OUT AGAIN WITH ONLY 30000 MILES USAGE. I PURCHASED THE CAR TO SAVE MONEY ON THE FUEL MILEAGE BUT END UP SAVING NOTHING DUE TO SERVICE WORK ON REPLACING HEADLAMPS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10346230

46,627 miles · Jul 28, 2010
Exterior Lighting

DRIVER SIDE HID HEADLIGHT REPEATEDLY GOES OUT WHILE DRIVING. HAVE TO STOP VEHICLE AND TURN LIGHTS OFF AND THEN BACK ON TO MAKE THEM WORK AGAIN. DEALER WANTS $700-$1,000 TO REPLACE PARTS WITHOUT KNOWING IF THAT WILL FIX PROBLEM. CAR ONLY HAS 46,627 MILES. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10345887

50,000 miles · Jul 28, 2010
Exterior Lighting

I HAVE A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS WITH HID HEADLIGHTS, 54,000 MILES. TODAY, (7/26/2010) I HAD THE HEADLIGHT BULBS CHANGED FOR THE 3RD TIME, UNDER WARRANTY. FIRST TIME JAN. '09, 2ND TIME, AUG. '09, AND NOW, JULY '10. FIRST TIME WAS UNDER VEHICLE WARRANTY; DEALER SAID REPLACEMENTS HAD 1 YEAR WARRANTY, SO THE LAST 2 TIMES WERE COVERE…

Read full complaint

I HAVE A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS WITH HID HEADLIGHTS, 54,000 MILES. TODAY, (7/26/2010) I HAD THE HEADLIGHT BULBS CHANGED FOR THE 3RD TIME, UNDER WARRANTY. FIRST TIME JAN. '09, 2ND TIME, AUG. '09, AND NOW, JULY '10. FIRST TIME WAS UNDER VEHICLE WARRANTY; DEALER SAID REPLACEMENTS HAD 1 YEAR WARRANTY, SO THE LAST 2 TIMES WERE COVERED. THEY GO OUT AT RANDOM. TODAY, ONE OF THE BULBS WAS SHATTERED. MY OWN OBSERVATION: THESE LIGHTS ARE SO BRIGHT, THAT WHEN ONE GOES OUT, YOU DON'T EVEN NOTICE, (UNTIL YOU GET PULLED OVER BY THE POLICE). THIS IS AN ONGOING TOYOTA PRIUS PROBLEM, IS NOT SAFE, AND A RECALL SHOULD BE INITIATED. THIS IS MY 3RD CONTACT TO NHTSA ON THIS ISSUE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10345792

15,000 miles · Jul 21, 2010
Exterior Lighting

THE CAR WAS USED VERY RARELY AND HEADLIGHTS WERE RARELY TURNED ON. THE DRIVER SIDE HEADLIGHT TURNED OFF ON ITS OWN AND COULD BE TURNED ON AGAIN BY FLIPPING HEADLIGHTS SWITCH OFF THEN ON AGAIN. IT WOULD THEN TURN OFF SHORTLY AGAIN THEREAFTER. A NIGHT DRIVE IN YOSEMITE PROVED TO BE QUITE FRIGHTENING WITH THIS HAPPENING OVER AND OV…

Read full complaint

THE CAR WAS USED VERY RARELY AND HEADLIGHTS WERE RARELY TURNED ON. THE DRIVER SIDE HEADLIGHT TURNED OFF ON ITS OWN AND COULD BE TURNED ON AGAIN BY FLIPPING HEADLIGHTS SWITCH OFF THEN ON AGAIN. IT WOULD THEN TURN OFF SHORTLY AGAIN THEREAFTER. A NIGHT DRIVE IN YOSEMITE PROVED TO BE QUITE FRIGHTENING WITH THIS HAPPENING OVER AND OVER. I COMPLAINED TO TOYOTA WHILE MY CAR WAS STILL UNDER WARRANTY AND THEY DENIED THE PROBLEM BECAUSE THEY COULD NOT REPRODUCE IT. SHORTLY THEREAFTER, THE COMPANY SENT A LETTER TO ALL PRIUS OWNERS CONFIRMING THE PROBLEM. IT'S DISAPPOINTING TO SEE THAT TOYOTA KNEW ABOUT IT YET DENIED IT COMPLETELY. WHEN THE LETTER CAME OUT, MY CAR WAS NO LONGER UNDER WARRANTY. THE PRODUCT WAS DEFECTIVE BECAUSE IT'S LIFESPAN HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE AMOUNT OF TIME IT WAS USED. I THINK TO SAY THE HEADLIGHT FLICKERS IS INCORRECT-IT SHUTS OFF COMPLETELY AND SPORADICALLY. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10344609

75,321 miles · Jul 17, 2010
Exterior Lighting

THE HID HEADLIGHT ON THE PASSENGER SIDE OF MY PRIUS IS STARTING TO FLICKER AND GO ON AND OFF. THE BULB IS SUPPOSED TO LAST 10 YEARS BUT IT'S BEEN ONLY 3 YEARS SINCE I BOUGHT THE CAR. THE BULB OR HEADLIGHT ELECTRONICS IS DEFECTIVE BUT I'VE BEEN TOLD IT COULD COST UP TO $1,000 TO REPAIR. IT SEEMS THIS IS HAPPENING TO A LOT OF P…

Read full complaint

THE HID HEADLIGHT ON THE PASSENGER SIDE OF MY PRIUS IS STARTING TO FLICKER AND GO ON AND OFF. THE BULB IS SUPPOSED TO LAST 10 YEARS BUT IT'S BEEN ONLY 3 YEARS SINCE I BOUGHT THE CAR. THE BULB OR HEADLIGHT ELECTRONICS IS DEFECTIVE BUT I'VE BEEN TOLD IT COULD COST UP TO $1,000 TO REPAIR. IT SEEMS THIS IS HAPPENING TO A LOT OF PRIUS OWNERS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10343703

67,100 miles · Jul 14, 2010
Exterior Lighting

THE HEADLIGHTS IN MY 2007 PRIUS TURN OFF WITHOUT NOTICE. SOMETIMES A SINGLE HEADLIGHT WILL GO OUT,SOMETIMES BOTH WILL. THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL OCCASIONS WHERE I HAVE FOUND MYSELF IN TOTAL DARKNESS WHILE DRIVING. I AM ABLE TO GET THE HEADLIGHTS TO COME BACK ON BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHT OFF/ON LEVER. THE HEADLIGHTS ALWAYS GO OU…

Read full complaint

THE HEADLIGHTS IN MY 2007 PRIUS TURN OFF WITHOUT NOTICE. SOMETIMES A SINGLE HEADLIGHT WILL GO OUT,SOMETIMES BOTH WILL. THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL OCCASIONS WHERE I HAVE FOUND MYSELF IN TOTAL DARKNESS WHILE DRIVING. I AM ABLE TO GET THE HEADLIGHTS TO COME BACK ON BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHT OFF/ON LEVER. THE HEADLIGHTS ALWAYS GO OUT WITHIN THE FIRST MINUTE OR TWO OF STARTING THE VEHICLE, AND CONTINUE TO RANDOMLY GO OFF AS I DRIVE. THE CAR WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR REPAIR. THE LIGHTS WENT OUT AT THE REPAIR SHOP AS IS NOTED IN THE INVOICE. BOTH HEADLIGHT BULBS WERE REPLACED AT A COST OF $345.00. (PART # TOY 90981-20029) IT TOOK 3 LABOR HOURS TO REPLACE THESE BULBS FOR WHICH I WAS CHARGED AN ADDITIONAL $295.00. THE INVOICE STATES: "H.I.D. BALLASTS AND WIRES WITH CONNECTIONS ARE OK AT THIS TIME." THE TOYOTA SERVICE ADVISOR STATED THAT THEY WERE HAVING PROBLEMS WITH THE ORIGINAL BULBS AND THEY NOW USE A DIFFERENT BULB, HOWEVER NOTHING WAS COVERED BY A RECALL. WHILE NO ACCIDENT OCCURRED IN OUR VEHICLE DUE TO HEADLIGHT FAILURE, THERE WAS A SIGNIFICANT POSSIBILITY OF AN ACCIDENT. THERE ARE MANY REPORTS ON THE INTERNET BY OTHER PRIUS DRIVERS OF THIS SAME PROBLEM. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10343355

76,000 miles · Jul 14, 2010
Exterior Lighting

I OWN A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS ; FOR THE PAST 6 MONTHS MY HID HEADLAMPS SPONTANEOUSLY TURN OFF, AND I NEED TO TURN THE LIGHT SWITCH TO OFF THEN BACK ON AGAIN, FOR THEM TO RE-LIGHT. THIS WEEK IT HAPPENED ON A DARK COUNTRY ROAD AND I SUDDENLY HAD NO LIGHTS AT ALL. THANK GOODNESS THERE WERE NO CARS OR PEDESTRIANS ON THE ROAD AT THAT …

Read full complaint

I OWN A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS ; FOR THE PAST 6 MONTHS MY HID HEADLAMPS SPONTANEOUSLY TURN OFF, AND I NEED TO TURN THE LIGHT SWITCH TO OFF THEN BACK ON AGAIN, FOR THEM TO RE-LIGHT. THIS WEEK IT HAPPENED ON A DARK COUNTRY ROAD AND I SUDDENLY HAD NO LIGHTS AT ALL. THANK GOODNESS THERE WERE NO CARS OR PEDESTRIANS ON THE ROAD AT THAT TIME AND THERE WAS NO DAMAGE. I BROUGHT IT TO MY LOCAL TOYOTA DEALER TODAY AND THEY SAY MY LAMPS HAVE BURNED OUT AND NEED REPLACEMENT, TO THE TUNE OF $550. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10343211

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.