← 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

Service Brakes, Electric complaints

59 reports
Clear category filter
12,500 miles · Feb 9, 2010
Service Brakes, Electric

I OWN A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS THAT EXHIBITS EXACTLY THE SAME SYMPTOMS WITH THE BRAKING SYSTEM THAT HAS CAUSED THE RECALL IN 2010 MODELS. WHEN GOING OVER A BUMP THE BRAKES APPEAR TO FAIL FOR ABOUT 1 OR 2 SECONDS WHICH GIVES THE ILLUSION THAT THE CAR IS LUNGING FORWARD. THIS HAPPENS EVERYTIME I AM APPLYING THE BRAKES WHILE DRIVING A…

Read full complaint

I OWN A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS THAT EXHIBITS EXACTLY THE SAME SYMPTOMS WITH THE BRAKING SYSTEM THAT HAS CAUSED THE RECALL IN 2010 MODELS. WHEN GOING OVER A BUMP THE BRAKES APPEAR TO FAIL FOR ABOUT 1 OR 2 SECONDS WHICH GIVES THE ILLUSION THAT THE CAR IS LUNGING FORWARD. THIS HAPPENS EVERYTIME I AM APPLYING THE BRAKES WHILE DRIVING ACROSS BUMPS OR RAILROAD TRACKS. I REPORTED THIS TO A TOYOTA DEALER TWICE SINCE PURCHASING THE CAR AND WAS TOLD THIS IS JUST HOW PRIUS'S ARE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10307750

15,000 miles · Feb 9, 2010
Service Brakes, Electric

CAR FAILED TO STOP ON HILL IN SNOWY DAY -- ANTILOCK BRAKES FROZE. BRAKES ALSO WERE WEAK IN SNOW IN GENERAL. I TOOK THE CAR INTO THE DEALER AND ASKED FOR SNOW TIRES. THEY SAID IT WOULDN'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE, AND THAT PRIUSES WERE JUST BAD IN THE SNOW. I TRADED THE CAR IN FOR A CAMRY HYBRID IN THE SPRING TO AVOID GOING THROUGH …

Read full complaint

CAR FAILED TO STOP ON HILL IN SNOWY DAY -- ANTILOCK BRAKES FROZE. BRAKES ALSO WERE WEAK IN SNOW IN GENERAL. I TOOK THE CAR INTO THE DEALER AND ASKED FOR SNOW TIRES. THEY SAID IT WOULDN'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE, AND THAT PRIUSES WERE JUST BAD IN THE SNOW. I TRADED THE CAR IN FOR A CAMRY HYBRID IN THE SPRING TO AVOID GOING THROUGH ANOTHER WINTER WITH IT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10307720

50,000 miles · Feb 8, 2010
Service Brakes, Electric

2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHEN I AM BRAKING AND DRIVE OVER A DISRUPTIVE SURFACE: POTHOLE, TRAIN TRACKS, I HAVE EXPERIENCED A BRIEF LOSS OF CONTROL WITH THE BRAKES. BEST DESCRIPTION IS IF DURING A CONTROLLED DECELERATION, YOU EXPECT A CONSISTENT DECREASE OF SPEED. HOWEVER, THE RATE OF DECELERATION WAS INTERRUPTED BY THE POT HOLE, THEN I…

Read full complaint

2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHEN I AM BRAKING AND DRIVE OVER A DISRUPTIVE SURFACE: POTHOLE, TRAIN TRACKS, I HAVE EXPERIENCED A BRIEF LOSS OF CONTROL WITH THE BRAKES. BEST DESCRIPTION IS IF DURING A CONTROLLED DECELERATION, YOU EXPECT A CONSISTENT DECREASE OF SPEED. HOWEVER, THE RATE OF DECELERATION WAS INTERRUPTED BY THE POT HOLE, THEN IT WOULD RETURN TO BRAKING. THIS IS A CONSISTENT EVENT IF I AM BRAKING WHILE RIDING OVER A DISTURBED SURFACE. *CN

NHTSA ODI #10307675

63,000 miles · Feb 8, 2010
Service Brakes, ElectricCrash

WHILE DRIVING ON A FREEWAY ENTRY RAMP OUR 2007 PRIUS' BRAKES FAILED TO ENGAGE WHEN THE BRAKE PEDAL WAS PUSHED. NO BRAKING ACTION WAS FELT AND OUR CAR RAN INTO THE REAR OF ANOTHER CAR ON THE ENTRY RAMP. ESTIMATED SPEED WAS ELEVEN MILES PER HOUR ACCORDING TO THE POLICE REPORT. THIS WAS NOT A SKID SITUATION AS THE SPEED WAS SO L…

Read full complaint

WHILE DRIVING ON A FREEWAY ENTRY RAMP OUR 2007 PRIUS' BRAKES FAILED TO ENGAGE WHEN THE BRAKE PEDAL WAS PUSHED. NO BRAKING ACTION WAS FELT AND OUR CAR RAN INTO THE REAR OF ANOTHER CAR ON THE ENTRY RAMP. ESTIMATED SPEED WAS ELEVEN MILES PER HOUR ACCORDING TO THE POLICE REPORT. THIS WAS NOT A SKID SITUATION AS THE SPEED WAS SO LOW. THE BRAKES SIMPLY FAILED TO ENGAGE. OUR CAR IS CURRENTLY BEING EVALUATED BY OUR INSURANCE COMPANY.

NHTSA ODI #10307537

100 miles · Feb 8, 2010
Service Brakes, ElectricService Brakes, Hydraulic

THE 'BRAKE CUT-OUT DRIVING OVER A POTHOLE OR MANHOLE COVER' IS >NOT< RESTRICTED TO THE 2010 PRIUS. MY 2007 HAS DONE THAT SINCE DAY ONE [65K MILES AGO]. THERE ARE HILLS NEAR MY HOUSE WHERE I HAVE TO GO OUT OF MY WAY TO AVOID MANHOLE COVERS -- PARTICULARLY THE LAST ONE NEAR A STOP SIGN. THE CAR JUST GOES INTO FREE-WHEEL MODE FO…

Read full complaint

THE 'BRAKE CUT-OUT DRIVING OVER A POTHOLE OR MANHOLE COVER' IS >NOT< RESTRICTED TO THE 2010 PRIUS. MY 2007 HAS DONE THAT SINCE DAY ONE [65K MILES AGO]. THERE ARE HILLS NEAR MY HOUSE WHERE I HAVE TO GO OUT OF MY WAY TO AVOID MANHOLE COVERS -- PARTICULARLY THE LAST ONE NEAR A STOP SIGN. THE CAR JUST GOES INTO FREE-WHEEL MODE FOR A SECOND OR SO.

NHTSA ODI #10307526

24,000 miles · Feb 8, 2010
Service Brakes, ElectricService Brakes, HydraulicVehicle Speed Control

MY 2007 PRIUS TOURING CAN/DOES EXPERIENCE BRAKING ISSUES WHEN SLOWING/BRAKING DOWNHILL AND COMING IN CONTACT WITH A MANHOLE COVER, POTHOLE, OR OTHER "EVEN" ROAD SURFACE. THOUGHT IT WAS THE TIRES, SO REPLACED THE ORIGINAL BRIDGESTONES FOR NOKIANS, BUT THE ISSUE STILL OCCURS. THE "SENSATION" IS YOU FEEL LIKE YOU'VE LOST CONTROL …

Read full complaint

MY 2007 PRIUS TOURING CAN/DOES EXPERIENCE BRAKING ISSUES WHEN SLOWING/BRAKING DOWNHILL AND COMING IN CONTACT WITH A MANHOLE COVER, POTHOLE, OR OTHER "EVEN" ROAD SURFACE. THOUGHT IT WAS THE TIRES, SO REPLACED THE ORIGINAL BRIDGESTONES FOR NOKIANS, BUT THE ISSUE STILL OCCURS. THE "SENSATION" IS YOU FEEL LIKE YOU'VE LOST CONTROL OF THE CAR MOMENTARILY. AS A RESULT, I'VE CHANGED MY COMMUTE ROUTE HOME AND DRIVE MUCH SLOWER (WAS ALREADY DRIVING SLOWER SINCE PRIUS MILEAGE IS DEPENDENT ON MPH). ON OCCASIONS, THE SPEED (ON A STRAIGHT AWAY) SET WITH CRUISE CONTROL WILL INCREASE BY ITSELF ... BY A COUPLE MPH .... W/O ME DOING ANYTHING OR TOUCHING ANYTHING. SO I'M FORCED TO TAP BRAKE ........ OCCURRED THIS WEEKEND WITH PASSENGERS - THEY SAID THEY FELT THE SURGE .....

NHTSA ODI #10307490

450 miles · Feb 8, 2010
Service Brakes, Electric

TOYOTA PRIUS 2007 - ANTILOCK BRAKE FAILURE HITTING POTHOLES, MAN HOLE COVERS, CROSSING TRAIN TRACKS, GOING THE SPEED LIMIT DOWN HILLS, RAIN & SNOW ARE THE WORST. EVERY TIME CAR IS TAKEN IN TO DEALER FOR SERVICING, WE INFORM THEM OF THE BRAKES. THEY ENSURED US THAT NOTHING WAS WRONG WITH THEM AND THERE WAS NOTHING TO WORRY…

Read full complaint

TOYOTA PRIUS 2007 - ANTILOCK BRAKE FAILURE HITTING POTHOLES, MAN HOLE COVERS, CROSSING TRAIN TRACKS, GOING THE SPEED LIMIT DOWN HILLS, RAIN & SNOW ARE THE WORST. EVERY TIME CAR IS TAKEN IN TO DEALER FOR SERVICING, WE INFORM THEM OF THE BRAKES. THEY ENSURED US THAT NOTHING WAS WRONG WITH THEM AND THERE WAS NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT. WE CONTACTED OUR PRIMARY DEALER WHO HAS DONE MOST OF THE SERVICES FOR THE CAR, THEY CONVENIENTLY NO LONGER HAVE SERVICE RECORDS FOR MY VEHICLE PRIOR TO AUGUST 2009. THE MOST RECENT INCIDENT THAT SENT US COMPLAINING TO THE DEALER WAS IN OCTOBER 2009, WHEN RETURNING HOME FROM WORK AND THE BRAKES NEEDED TO BE APPLIED IN ORDER TO AVOID HITTING A DEER, THE BRAKES DID ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. THE CAR CONTINUED TO MOVE AND NARROWLY MISSED HITTING THE DEER. THIS WAS REPORTED TO TOYOTA OF YORK IN PENNSYLVANIA. THE PRIMARY DEALERSHIP THAT HAS PROVIDED OUR SERVICES IS RIVERHEAD TOYOTA IN NEW YORK. THE RECENT SNOWFALL IN PENNSYLVANIA HAS ESSENTIALLY MADE MY CAR USELESS, IT CANNOT HANDLE THE SNOWY ROADS WITHOUT SLIDING ALL OVER THE PLACE, AND WE NO LONGER TRUST THE BRAKE SYSTEM IN THE EVENT WE NEED THEM. NO PHYSICAL INJURIES HAVE OCCURRED AS A RESULT OF THE BRAKES ON OUR PARTICULAR CAR, HOWEVER EMOTIONALLY, WE ARE WORRIED ABOUT PLACING OURSELVES IN ANY POTENTIAL SITUATIONS WHERE AN ACCIDENT COULD OCCUR. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10307430

20,000 miles · Feb 8, 2010
Service Brakes, Electric

TRANSIENT LOSS OF BRAKING ABILITY WHEN THE CAR ENCOUNTERS POTHOLES, BUMPY OR UNEVEN PAVEMENT. WHEN HITTING BRAKES OVER THESE ROAD CONDITIONS THE CAR CONTINUES TO MOVE FORWARD WITHOUT SLOWING DOWN; THE 'SLIPPERY PAVEMENT" INDICATOR ALSO LIGHTS UP ONTHE DASHBOARD TRANSIENTLY. HAS BEEN OCCURRING REGULARLY (EVERY WEEK OR SO) SINCE C…

Read full complaint

TRANSIENT LOSS OF BRAKING ABILITY WHEN THE CAR ENCOUNTERS POTHOLES, BUMPY OR UNEVEN PAVEMENT. WHEN HITTING BRAKES OVER THESE ROAD CONDITIONS THE CAR CONTINUES TO MOVE FORWARD WITHOUT SLOWING DOWN; THE 'SLIPPERY PAVEMENT" INDICATOR ALSO LIGHTS UP ONTHE DASHBOARD TRANSIENTLY. HAS BEEN OCCURRING REGULARLY (EVERY WEEK OR SO) SINCE CAR PURCHASED IN 2007 BUT DIDN'T THINK ANYTHING OF IT UNTIL RECENT DESCRIPTION I READ IN THE PAPER ABOUT BRAKING PROBLEMS IN THE 2010 PRIUS (WALL STREET JOURNAL ARTICLE 2/5/10). . WHEN I READ THAT, IT SEEMED IDENTICAL TO WHAT I HAD BEEN EXPERIENCING FOR A FEW YEARS WITH MY 2007 PRIIUS. FORTUNATELY ALL INCIDENTS HAVE BEEN AT LOW SPEED ON LOCAL ROADS, NO ACCIDENTS.

NHTSA ODI #10307390

5,000 miles · Feb 7, 2010
Service Brakes, Electric

TOYOTA PRIUS 2007 BRAKING PROBLEM. THE BRAKING PROBLEM THAT HAS BEEN REPORTED IN THE 2010 PRIUS IS ALSO OCCURRING IN MY 2007 PRIUS. *TW

NHTSA ODI #10307333

30,500 miles · Feb 7, 2010
Service Brakes, Electric

I WAS BRAKING TO SLOW DOWN AND MAKE A TURN. WHEN I APPLIED MY BRAKES OVER THE UNEVEN SURFACE, THE BRAKES WERE WORKING, THEN LET UP FOR A SECOND. THIS HAS HAPPENED ENOUGH THAT I HAVE CHANGED MY DRIVING HABITS TO ACCOUNT FOR THIS SLIPPAGE IN BRAKES. IT'S NOT A SLIDING ISSUE - I CAN FEEL THE TENSION IN THE BRAKE PEDAL EASE UP MO…

Read full complaint

I WAS BRAKING TO SLOW DOWN AND MAKE A TURN. WHEN I APPLIED MY BRAKES OVER THE UNEVEN SURFACE, THE BRAKES WERE WORKING, THEN LET UP FOR A SECOND. THIS HAS HAPPENED ENOUGH THAT I HAVE CHANGED MY DRIVING HABITS TO ACCOUNT FOR THIS SLIPPAGE IN BRAKES. IT'S NOT A SLIDING ISSUE - I CAN FEEL THE TENSION IN THE BRAKE PEDAL EASE UP MOMENTARILY EACH TIME. I'D SAY THIS HAPPENS AT LEAST ONCE PER MONTH SINCE I PURCHASED THE CAR NEW IN 2007. *TW

NHTSA ODI #10307174

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.