← 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

Fuel/propulsion System complaints

11 reports
Clear category filter
Mileage unknown · Jan 15, 2026
Fuel/propulsion System

2007 Toyota Prius touring edition WILL NOT TAKE ANY FUEL PROPERLY AND WILL OVERFILL AND "BURP" CAUSING GAS TO FLOW EXPLOSIVELY OUT OF THE FILLER NECK AND HOLE. Tank will not fill, at all, causing risk of running out of gas while on highway. FUEL GAUGE DOES NOT WORK AT ALL. FUEL TANK will not fill properly, if at all, overfills a…

Read full complaint

2007 Toyota Prius touring edition WILL NOT TAKE ANY FUEL PROPERLY AND WILL OVERFILL AND "BURP" CAUSING GAS TO FLOW EXPLOSIVELY OUT OF THE FILLER NECK AND HOLE. Tank will not fill, at all, causing risk of running out of gas while on highway. FUEL GAUGE DOES NOT WORK AT ALL. FUEL TANK will not fill properly, if at all, overfills and burps causing fuel to blow out of the filler hole with force. THIS IS A FIRE HAZARD as gas can spill all over near the filler area and possibly catch fire. Stopping the filler hose will not help, as the tank refuses to take any gas, even when close to empty. People need to put gas in, not guess. The car will ONLY TAKE BARELY 2 gallons in winter without overflowing. THIS IS A LIFE SAFETY AND FIRE HAZARD AS THIS OVERFLOWING GAS AND REVERSE FUEL FLOW CAN IGNITE, or catch fire. THE BLADDER IN THE TANK STOPS WORKING AND WILL NOT ALLOW FUELING ANS SPITS FUEL BACK OUT OF THE FILLER NECK AND HOLE.

NHTSA ODI #11711145

162,000 miles · Jan 27, 2020
Electrical SystemFuel/propulsion SystemPower Train

OUR DAUGHTER WAS DRIVING OUR 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS TO WORK IN THE DARK IN RUSH HOUR ON THE HIGHWAY, DRIVING STRAIGHT, AT HIGHWAY SPEED, IN LOS ANGELES, AND THE INSTRUMENT PANEL INSTANTLY BLACKED OUT, WITH THE CAR COMPLETELY DEAD AND HALTED. IT COULD NOT EVEN BE SHIFTED INTO NEUTRAL! THE CAR STOPPED RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE HIGHW…

Read full complaint

OUR DAUGHTER WAS DRIVING OUR 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS TO WORK IN THE DARK IN RUSH HOUR ON THE HIGHWAY, DRIVING STRAIGHT, AT HIGHWAY SPEED, IN LOS ANGELES, AND THE INSTRUMENT PANEL INSTANTLY BLACKED OUT, WITH THE CAR COMPLETELY DEAD AND HALTED. IT COULD NOT EVEN BE SHIFTED INTO NEUTRAL! THE CAR STOPPED RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE HIGHWAY. SHE CALLED 911, AND A WRECKER WAS DISPATCHED TO LIFT THE CAR OFF THE FREEWAY. THANKFULLY SHE WAS NOT INJURED OR KILLED! I THEN RESEARCHED THE LIKELY CAUSE AND DIAGNOSED IT EXACTLY. IT WAS THE "HYBRID WATER PUMP" ALSO KNOWN AS THE "INVERTER PUMP," PART #G9020-47031. THAT PART WAS RECALLED IN 2012, NHTSA RECALL # 12V536000. I HAD IT TOWED TO A NEARBY TOYOTA DEALER, NORTH HOLLYWOOD TOYOTA, TO HAVE IT REPAIRED. THAT DEALER LOOKED UP THE VEHICLE'S RECORDS AND SAID THE RECALL HAD BEEN PERFORMED IN 2013. WAS IT REALLY? IF SO, THEN A RECALLED PART THAT CAUSES A COMPLETE, INSTANT BLACKOUT ON A PRIUS ALREADY FAILED AGAIN. THE RECEIPT FOR THE REPAIR IS ATTACHED, INCLUDING THE NHTSA RECALLED PART #. THE REPAIR COST $699.09 + TAX, AND CAUSED AN EXTREMELY DANGEROUS INSTANT STOPPAGE OF THE VEHICLE ON A JAM-PACKED HIGHWAY. I E-MAILED TOYOTA USA CUSTOMER SERVICE TO APPEAL THE SITUATION, AND THEY SENT ME A REPLY AND ASKED THAT I CALL THEM. ON THE CALL, THEY CLAIMED THERE IS NO RECOURSE FOR ME TO PURSUE. I'M A 51 YEAR OLD U.S. ARMY OFFICER VETERAN AND HAVE NEVER EXPERIENCED OR KNOWN OF ANYTHING THIS SUSPICIOUS AND DANGEROUS IN THE AUTOMOBILE SPACE. THANK YOU, [XXX] REDACTED TO PROTECT PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *CC *TR

NHTSA ODI #11302378

Mileage unknown · Mar 1, 2018
Fuel/propulsion System

THE PRIUS' CHARCOAL CANISTER HAS FAILED, TRIGGERING REPEATED "CHECK ENGINE" LIGHT WARNINGS. THIS SEEMS TO BE AN ISSUE PROMPTING A RECALL OF OTHER 2007 PRIUSES, LIKE MINE, BUT TOYOTA SAYS MY VEHICLE ISN'T COVERED. SEE: HTTPS://PAULTAN.ORG/2016/06/29/TOYOTA-CHARCOAL-CANISTER-RECALL/ HTTPS://WWW.JUST-AUTO.COM/NEWS/AIRBAG-AND-CA…

Read full complaint

THE PRIUS' CHARCOAL CANISTER HAS FAILED, TRIGGERING REPEATED "CHECK ENGINE" LIGHT WARNINGS. THIS SEEMS TO BE AN ISSUE PROMPTING A RECALL OF OTHER 2007 PRIUSES, LIKE MINE, BUT TOYOTA SAYS MY VEHICLE ISN'T COVERED. SEE: HTTPS://PAULTAN.ORG/2016/06/29/TOYOTA-CHARCOAL-CANISTER-RECALL/ HTTPS://WWW.JUST-AUTO.COM/NEWS/AIRBAG-AND-CARBON-CANISTER-RECALLS-FOR-29M-TOYOTA-VEHICLES_ID170365.ASPX HTTPS://REPAIRPAL.COM/CHARCOAL-CANISTER

NHTSA ODI #11075664

55,700 miles · May 18, 2016
Fuel/propulsion System

FUEL GAUGE NOT READING PROPERLY IN CAR. CAR LABEL STATES 11.9 GALLON CAPACITY IN FUEL TANK. GAS GAUGE SHOWS ONE BAR OF GAS LEFT IN CAR, BUT IT TAKES ONLY SIX GALLONS OF GAS TO FILL UP AUTOMOBILE. THIS MISLEADING GAS GAUGE MEANS DRIVERS DO NOT KNOW WHAT THE TRUE READING OF GAS IS REMAINING IN THEIR FUEL TANKS WHICH COULD LEAD TO …

Read full complaint

FUEL GAUGE NOT READING PROPERLY IN CAR. CAR LABEL STATES 11.9 GALLON CAPACITY IN FUEL TANK. GAS GAUGE SHOWS ONE BAR OF GAS LEFT IN CAR, BUT IT TAKES ONLY SIX GALLONS OF GAS TO FILL UP AUTOMOBILE. THIS MISLEADING GAS GAUGE MEANS DRIVERS DO NOT KNOW WHAT THE TRUE READING OF GAS IS REMAINING IN THEIR FUEL TANKS WHICH COULD LEAD TO THE CAR RUNNING OUT OF FUEL IN THE WRONG PLACE AT THE WRONG TIME. THIS OCCURS WHEN THE CAR IS MOVING.

NHTSA ODI #10865573

40,002 miles · Feb 3, 2016
Fuel/propulsion SystemService BrakesCrash

I HAVE OWNED TWO 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. BOTH HAVE BEEN TOTALED DUE TO WHAT I BELIEVE IS A FAILURE OF THE HYBRID DRIVETRAIN TO DISENGAGE DURING EMERGENCY BRAKING. THIS REPORT IS REGARDING THE FIRST VEHICLE. I HAVE FILED A SEPARATE REPORT FOR THE SECOND VEHICLE WHICH I STILL HAVE IN MY POSSESSION. FIRST 2007 PRIUS, PURCHASED NEW …

Read full complaint

I HAVE OWNED TWO 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. BOTH HAVE BEEN TOTALED DUE TO WHAT I BELIEVE IS A FAILURE OF THE HYBRID DRIVETRAIN TO DISENGAGE DURING EMERGENCY BRAKING. THIS REPORT IS REGARDING THE FIRST VEHICLE. I HAVE FILED A SEPARATE REPORT FOR THE SECOND VEHICLE WHICH I STILL HAVE IN MY POSSESSION. FIRST 2007 PRIUS, PURCHASED NEW IN 2007. ON DEC 9, 2009, TO AVOID A COLLISION, I FULLY PRESSED THE BRAKES WITH FULL FORCE HOWEVER THE PRIUS CONTINUED TO PROPEL FORWARD. I SHOULD EASILY HAVE BEEN ABLE TO STOP THE VEHICLE IN TIME. AS IT CONTINUED TO PROPEL FORWARD, I COLLIDED WITH THE OTHER CAR. THE SPEED AT THE MOMENT OF IMPACT WAS APPROX 25 MPH. NO AIRBAGS WERE DEPLOYED. THE VEHICLE WAS DEEMED A TOTAL LOSS DUE TO THE EXTENSIVE COST OF REPAIRING THE HYBRID SYSTEM. I HAVE THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE ACCIDENT AND THE POLICE REPORT. SECOND TOYOTA PRIUS: I PURCHASED AN EXACT REPLACEMENT USED 2007 PRIUS IN DEC 2009. ON OCTOBER 17, 2015, A CAR STOPPED ABRUPTLY IN FRONT OF MY WIFE WHO WAS DRIVING AT APPROX 40 MPH. SHE REPORTED PRESSING ON THE BRAKES WITH FULL FORCE BUT THAT THE PRIUS CONTINUED TO PROPEL FORWARD. SHE HIT CAR IN FRONT THEN SWERVED TO THE RIGHT AS THE PRIUS CONTINUED TO PROPEL FORWARD. SHE STEERED TO THE LEFT INTO THE CENTER MEDIAN AND THE PRIUS STOPPED. THE CAR THEN CAUGHT ON FIRE. NO AIRBAGS WERE DEPLOYED. I HAVE THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE VEHICLE AND THE POLICE REPORT. I CONTACTED TOYOTA IN NOV 2015. AN INVESTIGATION WAS OPENED. A TOYOTA 'FIELD TECHNICAL SPECIALIST' INSPECTED THE VEHICLE. I SIGNED AN 'EDR CONSENT FORM' FOR TOYOTA TO READ ANY DATA FROM THE VEHICLE. HOWEVER DUE TO THE FIRE, THEY WERE NOT ABLE TO READ ANY DATA. ON JANUARY 26, 2016 I RECEIVED A LETTER FROM A LEGAL CLAIMS ADMINISTRATOR AT TOYOTA MOTOR SALES, USA, INC., STATING 'OUR INSPECTION WAS UNABLE TO CONFIRM ANY EVIDENCE OF A MANUFACTURING OR DESIGN DEFECT IN YOUR VEHICLE'.

NHTSA ODI #10823998

102,000 miles · Feb 3, 2016
Fuel/propulsion SystemService BrakesCrashFire

I HAVE OWNED TWO 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. BOTH HAVE BEEN TOTALED DUE TO WHAT I BELIEVE IS A FAILURE OF THE HYBRID DRIVETRAIN TO DISENGAGE DURING EMERGENCY BRAKING. FIRST 2007 PRIUS, PURCHASED NEW IN 2007. ON DEC 9, 2009, TO AVOID A COLLISION, I FULLY PRESSED THE BRAKES WITH FULL FORCE HOWEVER THE PRIUS CONTINUED TO PROPEL FORWARD. …

Read full complaint

I HAVE OWNED TWO 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. BOTH HAVE BEEN TOTALED DUE TO WHAT I BELIEVE IS A FAILURE OF THE HYBRID DRIVETRAIN TO DISENGAGE DURING EMERGENCY BRAKING. FIRST 2007 PRIUS, PURCHASED NEW IN 2007. ON DEC 9, 2009, TO AVOID A COLLISION, I FULLY PRESSED THE BRAKES WITH FULL FORCE HOWEVER THE PRIUS CONTINUED TO PROPEL FORWARD. I SHOULD EASILY HAVE BEEN ABLE TO STOP THE VEHICLE IN TIME. AS IT CONTINUED TO PROPEL FORWARD, I COLLIDED WITH THE OTHER CAR. THE SPEED AT THE MOMENT OF IMPACT WAS APPROX 25 MPH. NO AIRBAGS WERE DEPLOYED. THE VEHICLE WAS DEEMED A TOTAL LOSS DUE TO THE EXTENSIVE COST OF REPAIRING THE HYBRID SYSTEM. I HAVE THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE ACCIDENT AND THE POLICE REPORT. SECOND TOYOTA PRIUS: I PURCHASED AN EXACT REPLACEMENT USED 2007 PRIUS IN DEC 2009. ON OCTOBER 17, 2015, A CAR STOPPED ABRUPTLY IN FRONT OF MY WIFE WHO WAS DRIVING AT APPROX 40 MPH. SHE REPORTED PRESSING ON THE BRAKES WITH FULL FORCE BUT THAT THE PRIUS CONTINUED TO PROPEL FORWARD. SHE HIT CAR IN FRONT THEN SWERVED TO THE RIGHT AS THE PRIUS CONTINUED TO PROPEL FORWARD. SHE STEERED TO THE LEFT INTO THE CENTER MEDIAN AND THE PRIUS STOPPED. THE CAR THEN CAUGHT ON FIRE. NO AIRBAGS WERE DEPLOYED. I HAVE THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE VEHICLE AND THE POLICE REPORT. I CONTACTED TOYOTA IN NOV 2015. AN INVESTIGATION WAS OPENED. A TOYOTA 'FIELD TECHNICAL SPECIALIST' INSPECTED THE VEHICLE. I SIGNED AN 'EDR CONSENT FORM' FOR TOYOTA TO READ ANY DATA FROM THE VEHICLE. HOWEVER DUE TO THE FIRE, THEY WERE NOT ABLE TO READ ANY DATA. ON JANUARY 26, 2016 I RECEIVED A LETTER FROM A LEGAL CLAIMS ADMINISTRATOR AT TOYOTA MOTOR SALES, USA, INC., STATING 'OUR INSPECTION WAS UNABLE TO CONFIRM ANY EVIDENCE OF A MANUFACTURING OR DESIGN DEFECT IN YOUR VEHICLE'. I CONTINUE TO OWN THE VEHICLE AND HAVE IT IN MY POSSESSION AT THIS TIME.

NHTSA ODI #10823988

110,000 miles · Jan 23, 2016
Fuel/propulsion System

VEHICLE ONLY HAS 110K MILES ON IT. CHECK ENGINE STARTING GOING ON WHEN ACCELERATING ON UPHILL. FULL UP GAS TANK & LIGHT WOULD GO OFF. THEN CHECK ENGINE WOULD GO ON WHEN LOW GAS LEVEL. TOLD TO CHANGE GASCAP. DID NOT RESOLVE ISSUE. FILLING PULLED CODES IT WAS CATALYTIC CONVERTER. PART COST $1700.00 FOR PART ALONE FOR A PART T…

Read full complaint

VEHICLE ONLY HAS 110K MILES ON IT. CHECK ENGINE STARTING GOING ON WHEN ACCELERATING ON UPHILL. FULL UP GAS TANK & LIGHT WOULD GO OFF. THEN CHECK ENGINE WOULD GO ON WHEN LOW GAS LEVEL. TOLD TO CHANGE GASCAP. DID NOT RESOLVE ISSUE. FILLING PULLED CODES IT WAS CATALYTIC CONVERTER. PART COST $1700.00 FOR PART ALONE FOR A PART THAT IS SUPPOSE TO LAST LIFETIME OF CAR.

NHTSA ODI #10821846

105,800 miles · Sep 13, 2015
EngineFuel/propulsion System

I'M THE ORIGINAL OWNER AND DO MY OWN REGULAR OIL CHANGES AT THE MANUFACTURE SPECIFIED INTERVALS OF 5000 MILES. THIS LAST TIME I NOTICED NOT MUCH OIL COMING OUT OF THE DRAIN PAN, POURED IT BACK INTO AN EMPTY OIL JUG TO MEASURE AND YES ONLY 1.5 QUARTS DRAINED OUT. I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY SMOKE OR SMELLED ANY OIL BURNING AND NO OBVIOUS …

Read full complaint

I'M THE ORIGINAL OWNER AND DO MY OWN REGULAR OIL CHANGES AT THE MANUFACTURE SPECIFIED INTERVALS OF 5000 MILES. THIS LAST TIME I NOTICED NOT MUCH OIL COMING OUT OF THE DRAIN PAN, POURED IT BACK INTO AN EMPTY OIL JUG TO MEASURE AND YES ONLY 1.5 QUARTS DRAINED OUT. I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY SMOKE OR SMELLED ANY OIL BURNING AND NO OBVIOUS LEAKS. I DON'T RUN THE ENGINE HARD OR AT HIGH SPEEDS (LESS THAN HALF MY DRIVING IS INTERSTATE) BUT CAN'T FIGURE OUT WHY IT'S ALL OF A SUDDEN STARTED USING OIL. WHEN I SEARCHED ONLINE IT SEEMS TO BE A COMMON FAILURE WITH PRIUS OVER 100K MILES. I WANT TO ADD MY OTHER TOYOTA AND HONDA VEHICLES HAVE LASTED WELL OVER 200K AND 180K MILES WITH NO ENGINE TROUBLES AT ALL (I ALSO DO THE MAINTENANCE ON THEM)

NHTSA ODI #10763352

100,000 miles · Mar 3, 2015
Fuel/propulsion System

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING AT AN UNKNOWN SPEED, THE VEHICLE WOULD SUDDENLY SHUT OFF WITHOUT WARNING. THE CONTACT DISCOVERED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS OUT OF FUEL ALTHOUGH THE FUEL GAUGE INDICATED THAT 1/2 TANK OF FUEL WAS PRESENT. THE CONTACT INDICATED THAT THE FAILURE HAD OCCURRED …

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING AT AN UNKNOWN SPEED, THE VEHICLE WOULD SUDDENLY SHUT OFF WITHOUT WARNING. THE CONTACT DISCOVERED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS OUT OF FUEL ALTHOUGH THE FUEL GAUGE INDICATED THAT 1/2 TANK OF FUEL WAS PRESENT. THE CONTACT INDICATED THAT THE FAILURE HAD OCCURRED ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS. THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 100,000.

NHTSA ODI #10691720

86,642 miles · Oct 14, 2014
Electrical SystemFuel/propulsion System

I WAS DRIVING HOME LAST NIGHT AND VARIOUS WARNING LIGHTS CAME ON. WITHIN A SHORT TIME THE VEHICLE LOST ALL POWER (ENTERED A FAILSAFE MODE) AND THE HYBRID SYSTEM SHUT DOWN WHILE I WAS DRIVING. THE RESULT WAS A COMPLETE LOSS OF POWER AND THE VEHICLE CAME TO A STOP IN TRAFFIC. I WAS CLOSE TO THE CURB AND TURNED ON MY EMERGENCY F…

Read full complaint

I WAS DRIVING HOME LAST NIGHT AND VARIOUS WARNING LIGHTS CAME ON. WITHIN A SHORT TIME THE VEHICLE LOST ALL POWER (ENTERED A FAILSAFE MODE) AND THE HYBRID SYSTEM SHUT DOWN WHILE I WAS DRIVING. THE RESULT WAS A COMPLETE LOSS OF POWER AND THE VEHICLE CAME TO A STOP IN TRAFFIC. I WAS CLOSE TO THE CURB AND TURNED ON MY EMERGENCY FLASHERS. CALLED A TOW TRUCK AND WILL TAKE THIS TO THE DEALER. I CALLED TOYOTA CUSTOMER SERVICE TO SEE IF OTHERS HAD EXPERIENCED ANYTHING SIMILAR AND THEY HAD NO ACCESS TO ANY INFORMATION ABOUT OTHER CUSTOMER'S EXPERIENCES. THEY DID SAY THAT THERE ARE NO ACTIVE RECALLS FOR THIS MAKE AND MODEL YEAR. A RECALL FOR THE 2010 - 2014 TOYOTA PRIUS WAS ISSUED IN FEBRUARY 2014 FOR WHAT SOUNDS LIKE A SIMILAR PROBLEM. WHILE THIS WASN'T A LIFE THREATENING ISSUE FOR ME LAST NIGHT, IN A PRESS RELEASE DRIVERS WHO'VE EXPERIENCED SIMILAR ISSUES WERE WARNED TO GET OUT OF THEIR VEHICLES BECAUSE THEY COULD BE IN DANGER FROM BEING REAR ENDED. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10644563

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.