← 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

Power Train complaints

41 reports
Clear category filter
90,952 miles · Oct 1, 2014
Power Train

I WAS DRIVING ON I-10 WESTBOUND WHEN THE RED TRIANGLE LIGHT CAME ON. I PULLED OVER AND READ THE BOOKLET WHICH SAID TO GET IMMEDIATE HELP. I DROVE IT ABOUT 5 MILES AND PULLED INTO WEST COVINA TOYOTA. THEY PERFORMED HEALTH CHECK CODE POA2B AND C23128. SOMETHING WITH THE TRANSMISSION CONTROL OR ASSEMBLY. AFTER 4 DAYS THEY COULD…

Read full complaint

I WAS DRIVING ON I-10 WESTBOUND WHEN THE RED TRIANGLE LIGHT CAME ON. I PULLED OVER AND READ THE BOOKLET WHICH SAID TO GET IMMEDIATE HELP. I DROVE IT ABOUT 5 MILES AND PULLED INTO WEST COVINA TOYOTA. THEY PERFORMED HEALTH CHECK CODE POA2B AND C23128. SOMETHING WITH THE TRANSMISSION CONTROL OR ASSEMBLY. AFTER 4 DAYS THEY COULD NOT TELL ME WHAT NEEDED TO BE DONE, SO I HAD IT TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT AND PAID $2800 FOR A REBUILT TRANSMISSION. I WAS WITHOUT MY CAR FOR 5 WEEKS! I BELIEVE THAT TOYOTA SHOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO CORRECTLY DIAGNOSE THIS AND IT PROBABLY IS RELATED TO OTHER COMPLAINTS OF EITHER POWER TRAIN OR ELECTRIC OR DASHBOARD LIGHTS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10640588

136,000 miles · Sep 23, 2014
Power Train

VEHICLE WILL NOT STAY IN DRIVE, ESPECIALLY AFTER SITTING IN THE HOT SUN FOR SEVERAL HOURS. THIS IS A WELL DOCUMENTED ISSUE ON MANY FORUMS SUCH AS HTTP://WWW.TOYOTANATION.COM/FORUM/62-PRIUS-FORUM/343977-08-PRIUS-WON-T-STAY-GEAR-3.HTML. PEOPLE HAVE EVEN MENTIONED CLAIMS OF THE TRANSMISSION SHIFTING TO NEUTRAL WHILE THEY ARE DRIV…

Read full complaint

VEHICLE WILL NOT STAY IN DRIVE, ESPECIALLY AFTER SITTING IN THE HOT SUN FOR SEVERAL HOURS. THIS IS A WELL DOCUMENTED ISSUE ON MANY FORUMS SUCH AS HTTP://WWW.TOYOTANATION.COM/FORUM/62-PRIUS-FORUM/343977-08-PRIUS-WON-T-STAY-GEAR-3.HTML. PEOPLE HAVE EVEN MENTIONED CLAIMS OF THE TRANSMISSION SHIFTING TO NEUTRAL WHILE THEY ARE DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD. I CALLED MY LOCAL TOYOTA DEALERSHIP AND THEY SAID THEY HAVE HEARD ISSUES AND IT'S A SHIFTER KNOB REPLACEMENT TO RESOLVE. AT FIRST I WAS PLEASED UNTIL I LEARNED THE SHIFTER IS $400 + $100 FOR LABOR. THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE TOYOTA - I HAVE BEEN A LONG TIME TOYOTA CUSTOMER DUE TO THE RELIABILITY. THIS LOOKS LIKE AN UNADDRESSED RECALL ISSUE TO ME. THANKS FOR INVESTIGATING THIS NHTSA. [XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

NHTSA ODI #10638524

Mileage unknown · Sep 10, 2014
Power Train

TRACTION CONTROL FUNCTION CANNOT BE DEACTIVATED ON THE 2007 PRIUS AND SHOULD BE CONSIDERED A HAZARDOUS FUNCTION. IN SLIPPERY CONDITIONS WHILE MAKING TURNS FROM A FULL STOP (IF SOMEWHAT AGGRESSIVE ACCELERATION IS APPLIED) THE TRACTION CONTROL IS ACTIVATED AND THE POWER (ACCELERATION) GOES TO ZERO. IT'S THE EQUIVALENT OF RELEASING…

Read full complaint

TRACTION CONTROL FUNCTION CANNOT BE DEACTIVATED ON THE 2007 PRIUS AND SHOULD BE CONSIDERED A HAZARDOUS FUNCTION. IN SLIPPERY CONDITIONS WHILE MAKING TURNS FROM A FULL STOP (IF SOMEWHAT AGGRESSIVE ACCELERATION IS APPLIED) THE TRACTION CONTROL IS ACTIVATED AND THE POWER (ACCELERATION) GOES TO ZERO. IT'S THE EQUIVALENT OF RELEASING THE ACCELERATOR (ACCELERATOR IS UNRESPONSIVE). THE VEHICLE IS COASTING INTO TRAFFIC AND CAN TAKE UP TO 2 SECONDS TO REGAIN ACCELERATION CAPABILITY. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10632309

78,000 miles · Sep 7, 2014
Power Train

THE PRIUS WILL SHIFT ITSELF OUT OF DRIVE AND INTO NEUTRAL WHEN THE CAR HAS BEEN SITTING IN THE HOT SUN AND THE INTERIOR HEATS UP. THIS HAS HAPPENED AT LEAST 10 TIMES OVER THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS. I HAVE TO MANUALLY HOLD THE GEAR SHIFT INTO DRIVE IN ORDER TO DRIVE THE CAR. I DROVE IT TO THE DEALER AND SHOWED THEM THE PROBLEM …

Read full complaint

THE PRIUS WILL SHIFT ITSELF OUT OF DRIVE AND INTO NEUTRAL WHEN THE CAR HAS BEEN SITTING IN THE HOT SUN AND THE INTERIOR HEATS UP. THIS HAS HAPPENED AT LEAST 10 TIMES OVER THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS. I HAVE TO MANUALLY HOLD THE GEAR SHIFT INTO DRIVE IN ORDER TO DRIVE THE CAR. I DROVE IT TO THE DEALER AND SHOWED THEM THE PROBLEM AND THEY HAD NO IDEA WHY IT DID THAT AND SAID THEY HAD NEVER HEARD OF THIS PROBLEM BEFORE. AFTER THE CAR COOLS DOWN IT RESUMES NORMAL FUNCTION. I HAVE HAD TO LEARN TO LEAVE THE WINDOWS PARTIALLY OPENED DURING THE SUMMER IN ORDER TO AVOID THIS PROBLEM. IF THE SERVICE PERSONNEL AT THE DEALER DO NOT KNOW HOW TO FIX THIS PROBLEM, WHO DOES? *TR

NHTSA ODI #10631306

56,634 miles · Aug 1, 2014
Power Train

TRANSAXLE FAILURE RESULTING IN REPAIR BILL OF $4948. PLEASE SEE DETAILS UNDER FUEL/PROPULSION SYSTEM CATEGORY AS I DIDN'T SELECT THE PROPER "AFFECTED PART" CLASSIFICATION WHEN I MADE THE COMPLAINT. ODI # 10616528. WHILE DOING RESEARCH TODAY I FOUND A SIMILAR COMPLAINT MADE 4/27/14 ID # 10586065. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10618197

127,800 miles · May 1, 2014
Power Train

LAST WEEK MY WIFE WAS DRIVING WHEN OUR CAR LOST POWER, BEGAN MAKING UNUSUAL NOISES, AND MULTIPLE WARNING LIGHTS BECAME ILLUMINATED ON THE DASH. SHE STOPPED THE CAR, TURNED OFF THE POWER, AND RESTARTED THE ENGINE; AGAIN THE WARNING LIGHTS REMAINED LIT. WE IMMEDIATELY TOOK THE CAR TO OUR LOCAL DEALER AND LEFT IT OVERNIGHT. THE NE…

Read full complaint

LAST WEEK MY WIFE WAS DRIVING WHEN OUR CAR LOST POWER, BEGAN MAKING UNUSUAL NOISES, AND MULTIPLE WARNING LIGHTS BECAME ILLUMINATED ON THE DASH. SHE STOPPED THE CAR, TURNED OFF THE POWER, AND RESTARTED THE ENGINE; AGAIN THE WARNING LIGHTS REMAINED LIT. WE IMMEDIATELY TOOK THE CAR TO OUR LOCAL DEALER AND LEFT IT OVERNIGHT. THE NEXT DAY THEY INFORMED ME THE TRANSMISSION HAD FAILED AND CHARGED ME $5400 TO REPAIR IT. THE DAY FOLLOWING THE REPAIR THE "CHECK ENGINE" WARNING LIGHT CAME ON AGAIN WHILE DRIVING AND REMAINED LIT. WE IMMEDIATELY RETURNED TO THE DEALER. AFTER EXAMINING THE VEHICLE THE DEALER TOLD US THAT THE WATER RESERVOIR FLOAT HAD BECOME STUCK. HE ALSO STATED THAT THIS WAS A COMMON PROBLEM FOR HYBRIDS WHICH HAVE UNDERGONE MAJOR ENGINE REPAIR. TODAY THEY FURTHER ADVISED THAT WE CONTINUE TO DRIVE THE VEHICLE WITHOUT FURTHER REPAIRS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10586065

140,000 miles · Jun 26, 2013
Power Train

PRIUS SHIFTED ITSELF OUT OF GEAR. I PUT THE CAR INTO 'DRIVE', IT SHIFTED ITSELF INTO NEUTRAL. I PUT THE CAR IN 'REVERSE', IT SHIFTED ITSELF INTO 'NEUTRAL'. I TURNED THE CAR OFF AND ON SEVERAL TIMES AND FINALLY GOT IT TO STAY IN 'REVERSE', BUT EVERY TIME I TRIED TO GET THE CAR INTO 'DRIVE', IT SHIFTED BACK INTO 'NEUTRAL'. THI…

Read full complaint

PRIUS SHIFTED ITSELF OUT OF GEAR. I PUT THE CAR INTO 'DRIVE', IT SHIFTED ITSELF INTO NEUTRAL. I PUT THE CAR IN 'REVERSE', IT SHIFTED ITSELF INTO 'NEUTRAL'. I TURNED THE CAR OFF AND ON SEVERAL TIMES AND FINALLY GOT IT TO STAY IN 'REVERSE', BUT EVERY TIME I TRIED TO GET THE CAR INTO 'DRIVE', IT SHIFTED BACK INTO 'NEUTRAL'. THIS IS A SERIOUS SAFELY RISK. I'VE RESTARTED SEVERAL TIMES AND STILL CAN'T GET THE CAR TO STAY IN DRIVE. THERE HAVE BEEN A FEW WEIRD INCIDENTS BEFORE - I.E., START THE CAR, PUT IT INTO 'DRIVE' AND IT GOES INTO 'REVERSE', BUT I ATTRIBUTED THIS TO AN ERROR ON MY PART. AFTER TODAY, HOWEVER, THESE ISSUES ARE CLEARLY A PROBLEM WITH THE CAR, AND NOW I BELIEVE THE PRIOR INCIDENTS ARE RELATED. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10521983

87,000 miles · Mar 7, 2013
Electronic Stability Control (esc)Power TrainStructure

THE PROBLEM HAS OCCURRED WHENEVER THE DONUT TIRE IS BEING USED ON THE VEHICLE AS A TEMPORARY REPLACEMENT FOR A FLAT TIRE - THIS HAS OCCURRED ON BOTH THE TWO OCCASIONS THAT IN WHICH I HAVE HAD TO USED THEM BOTH TIMES ON THE FRONT TIRES, ONCE ON THE LEFT TIRE AND THE SECOND OCCASION, MOST RECENT ON THE LEFT. APPARENTLY, THE D…

Read full complaint

THE PROBLEM HAS OCCURRED WHENEVER THE DONUT TIRE IS BEING USED ON THE VEHICLE AS A TEMPORARY REPLACEMENT FOR A FLAT TIRE - THIS HAS OCCURRED ON BOTH THE TWO OCCASIONS THAT IN WHICH I HAVE HAD TO USED THEM BOTH TIMES ON THE FRONT TIRES, ONCE ON THE LEFT TIRE AND THE SECOND OCCASION, MOST RECENT ON THE LEFT. APPARENTLY, THE DONUT TIRE BECAUSE OF ITS SMALLER DIAMETER CAUSES THE CAR'S SLIP DIFFERENTIAL SYSTEM TO ACTIVATE (SURMISED BY THE ICON I SEE ON THE DASH WHEN THIS OCCURS), OFTEN FOR PERIODS OF HALF THE DRIVING TIME - WHAT THEN HAPPENS IS THAT THERE IS A TOTAL LOSS OF ENGINE POWER TO THE DRIVE CHAIN, THE CAR CANNOT ACCELERATE OR EVEN MAINTAIN SPEED - IT ESSENTIALLY COASTS OR SLOWS. THIS OCCURS EVEN WHEN/IF THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL IS DEPRESSED TO TRY TO FEED POWER TO THE WHEELS - THE ENGINE IS UNRESPONSIVE. INTERMITTENTLY, THE POWER IS RESTORED, AND THEN THE CYCLE BEGINS AGAIN. ALTHOUGH I HAVE NOT HAD AN ACCIDENT DUE TO THIS LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, I CONSIDER MYSELF LUCKY NOT TO HAVE. USE OF A DONUT TIRE IS THE ONLY OPTION OPEN TO TEMPORARILY REPLACING A FLAT TIRE. I THINK THAT THIS SYSTEM'S RESPONSE TO USE OF THE DONUT TIRE (WHICH IS MANUFACTURER'S SUPPLIED) IS A DEFECT THAT IS DANGEROUS. A DRIVER MUST BE ABLE TO MAINTAIN AND CONTROL VEHICLE SPEED TO PREVENT AND/OR REMEDY A DANGEROUS SITUATION. [XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

NHTSA ODI #10502002

102,200 miles · Mar 5, 2013
EnginePower Train

MASTER WARNING LIGHT CAME ON ALONG WITH VEHICLE STABILITY CONTROL, BRAKE & CHECK ENGINE LIGHTS. TOOK IT TO MY TOYOTA DEALER (RICE TOYOTA, GREENSBORO, NC). I WORK 79 MILES FROM HOME. I CALLED MY TOYOTA DEALER, A SERVICE REP SAID IT WAS OK TO DRIVE AS LONG AS THE WARNING LIGHTS WEREN'T FLASHING.DIAGNOSTIC CODES INDICATED THE HYBRI…

Read full complaint

MASTER WARNING LIGHT CAME ON ALONG WITH VEHICLE STABILITY CONTROL, BRAKE & CHECK ENGINE LIGHTS. TOOK IT TO MY TOYOTA DEALER (RICE TOYOTA, GREENSBORO, NC). I WORK 79 MILES FROM HOME. I CALLED MY TOYOTA DEALER, A SERVICE REP SAID IT WAS OK TO DRIVE AS LONG AS THE WARNING LIGHTS WEREN'T FLASHING.DIAGNOSTIC CODES INDICATED THE HYBRID CONVERTER/INVERTER WAS BAD, THEY CLEARED WARNING LIGHTS, WHICH STAYED OFF. THEY SAID IT MAY HAVE BEEN A "GLITCH", IF WARNING LIGHTS RETURNED, BRING IT BACK. THEY RETURNED ON 3/1/13 WHILE DRIVING TO WORK. I LOST POWER WHILE ON I-540, PULLED OVER ONTO SHOULDER, TURNED OFF ENGINE, RESTARTED IT, GOT BACK ONTO I-540 & EXITED AT NEAREST EXIT. LOST POWER AGAIN. PULLED OVER, WENT THRU STOP/START PROCESS, DROVE 3 MILES TO WORK. DROVE HOME WITH WARNING LIGHTS BUT NO POWER LOSSES. TOOK IT TO RICE TOYOTA NEXT MORNING. THIS OCCURRED BARELY 2 WEEKS AFTER THE 100,000 MILE POWERTRAIN WARRANTY EXPIRED, GALLING TO SAY THE LEAST, AS THIS PART "IS" THE HYBRID SYSTEM PER THE SERVICE REP. HAVE YOU RECEIVED OTHER COMPLAINTS ABOUT THIS COMPONENT? *TR

NHTSA ODI #10501380

86,000 miles · Jan 11, 2013
Air BagsPower TrainCrash

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT SHE SHIFTED INTO PARK AND EXITED THE VEHICLE. UPON RETURNING, THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE VEHICLE INDEPENDENTLY SHIFTED FROM PARK, ROLLED AWAY AND CRASHED INTO A POLE WHILE OCCUPIED WITH THE CONTACT'S CHILD. UPON IMPACT, THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. THERE WERE NO…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT SHE SHIFTED INTO PARK AND EXITED THE VEHICLE. UPON RETURNING, THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE VEHICLE INDEPENDENTLY SHIFTED FROM PARK, ROLLED AWAY AND CRASHED INTO A POLE WHILE OCCUPIED WITH THE CONTACT'S CHILD. UPON IMPACT, THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. THERE WERE NO INJURIES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE THE FAILURE COULD NOT BE REPLICATED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 86,000.

NHTSA ODI #10492303

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.