NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Service Brakes complaints
127 reportsClear category filter118,000 miles · Jan 31, 2020
Service Brakes
WAS DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY ON MY WAY BACK TO HILO FROM KONA DRIVING THE SPEED LIMIT ON MY 2007 PRIUS AND OUT OF NOWHERE I LOST BREAKS FOR A TIME AND IT WAS A TERRIFYING EXP AND I M HAPPY I M STILL ALIVE. BREAKS CAME BACK WITH WARNING SIGNS ON DASHBOARD THAT THERE IS A FAILURE IN THE BREAK SYSTEM, ABS AND OTHER. CALLED HILO T…
Read full complaint
WAS DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY ON MY WAY BACK TO HILO FROM KONA DRIVING THE SPEED LIMIT ON MY 2007 PRIUS AND OUT OF NOWHERE I LOST BREAKS FOR A TIME AND IT WAS A TERRIFYING EXP AND I M HAPPY I M STILL ALIVE. BREAKS CAME BACK WITH WARNING SIGNS ON DASHBOARD THAT THERE IS A FAILURE IN THE BREAK SYSTEM, ABS AND OTHER. CALLED HILO TOYOTA DEAL MORE THAN 5 TIMES AND EACH TIME I GIVE THEM THE VIN NUMBER THEY HANGUP ON ME IN A RUDE WAY WITHOUT GIVING ANY EXPLANATION WHY THEY ARE CUTTING THE CALL. FROM THERE WEBSITE I MANAGED TO START A TXT MESSAGE AND ASKED FOR APPOINTMENT TO SEE WHAT'S WRONG AND PAID 170$ AND THE RESULT WHERE THAT MY BREAK SYSTEM HAVE A RECALL ON IT AND MY CAR IS AT 118 000 MILES SO THE RECALL EXPIRED IN 2017 AND THEY ASKED ME 3500$ TO FIX THE BREAK SYSTEM INVOLVED IN THE RECALL. AFTER MANAGING TO CALL TOYOTA MAIN OFFICE THEY STARTED A CASE FOR THIS PROBLEM AND ON MONDAY THEY WILL GIVE A FINAL ANSWER IF THEY WILL CHANGE THE FAILING RECALL BREAK SYSTEM OR NOT. ALSO I MANAGED TO CONTACT TOYOTA HONOLULU AND I KNEW FROM THEM THAT TOYOTA HAWAII IS A DIFFERENT ENTITY FROM TOYOTA MAINLAND AND THAT THE SAFETY RECALLS NEVER EXPIRED AND THEY SHOULD CHANGE THE BREAK SYSTEM INVOLVED IN THE REPORT NO QUESTIONS ASKED. HERE I AM REPORTING THIS TO NHTSA AS TOYOTA IS GAMBLING WITH PEOPLE LIVES WHO STILL DRIVING PRIUS WHICH MIGHT LOSE BREAKS AT ANY TIME AND MIGHT ENDUP IN DEATH RESULT. I HOPE NHTSA WILL DO THE RIGHT THING AND ASK TOYOTA TO CHANGE ALL THOSE DEFECTED BREAK SYSTEM FROM MANUFACTURES BEFORE MORE AMERICAN FAMILIES DIES FROM BREAK FAILURE WHICH WHERE NEVER CHANGED BECAUSE THE DEALER PREFER PROFIT ON SAFETY OF THE PEOPLE.
NHTSA ODI #11306415
320,000 miles · Jan 30, 2020
Electronic Stability Control (esc)Service Brakes
WELL KNOWN ABS ACCUMULATOR FAILURE, LOUD BEEPING NOISE, CAN'T DRIVE CAR SAFELY, HIGH MILEAGE CAR AND WILL BE REPAIRING IT, MY COMPLAINT IS THAT THE PART IS SEVENTEEN HUNDRED DOLLARS $1700 WHICH IS A LOT FOR SOMETHING AS IMPORTANT AS BRAKES AND WITH SUCH A HIGH FAILURE RATE ON ALL OF TOYOTA'S HYBRIDS. THIS PART NEEDS TO BE AVAILA…
Read full complaint
WELL KNOWN ABS ACCUMULATOR FAILURE, LOUD BEEPING NOISE, CAN'T DRIVE CAR SAFELY, HIGH MILEAGE CAR AND WILL BE REPAIRING IT, MY COMPLAINT IS THAT THE PART IS SEVENTEEN HUNDRED DOLLARS $1700 WHICH IS A LOT FOR SOMETHING AS IMPORTANT AS BRAKES AND WITH SUCH A HIGH FAILURE RATE ON ALL OF TOYOTA'S HYBRIDS. THIS PART NEEDS TO BE AVAILABLE FROM 3RD PARTIES SO I AM NOT FORCED TO DEAL WITH JUNK YARD ABS THAT IS JUST AS LIKELY TO FAIL BECAUSE OF A FLAWED DESIGN.
NHTSA ODI #11302947
150,000 miles · Dec 30, 2019
Service Brakes
THE ABS BRAKE ACTUATOR ASSEMBLY IS FAILING ON MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS, CREATING UNPREDICTABLE AND DANGEROUS BRAKING. IT IS A $3,000 REPLACEMENT THAT, UP UNTIL THE END OF 2017, TOYOTA WAS REPLACING AT NO CHARGE, BUT NO LONGER, UNDER A WARRANTY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, ZG1, ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THIS PART IS DEFECTIVE. I WENT ON LINE AND …
Read full complaint
THE ABS BRAKE ACTUATOR ASSEMBLY IS FAILING ON MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS, CREATING UNPREDICTABLE AND DANGEROUS BRAKING. IT IS A $3,000 REPLACEMENT THAT, UP UNTIL THE END OF 2017, TOYOTA WAS REPLACING AT NO CHARGE, BUT NO LONGER, UNDER A WARRANTY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, ZG1, ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THIS PART IS DEFECTIVE. I WENT ON LINE AND DISCOVERED THAT THIS IS A VERY COMMON PROBLEM FOR 2007 TOYOTAS. THIS SHOULD NOT BE JUST A VOLUNTARY "WARRANTY ENHANCEMENT," BUT A MANDATORY RECALL TO FORCE TOYOTA TO FIX THIS DANGEROUS DEFECT. THIS DEVICE RUNS ALMOST CONSTANTLY WHEN IT SHOULDN'T, CREATES A DRAG ON THE CAR THAT HAS CUT MPG IN HALF, IS PROBABLY WEARING OUT THE BRAKES PREMATURELY, AND CAUSES DANGEROUSLY SLOW ACCELERATION FROM A STOP THAT HAS RESULTED IN SOME NEAR ACCIDENTS. I PRESUME THE ABS FUNCTION WOULD NOT WORK WHEN CALLED UPON. THE REPAIR COST IS ABOUT HALF THE RETAIL VALUE OF THE CAR, AND IT SEEMS UNFAIR THAT JUST BECAUSE THIS SHOWED UP AFTER THEIR PROGRAM ENDED, I HAVE TO FOOT THE ENTIRE BILL, OR JUNK A CAR THAT IS OTHERWISE IN PERFECT SHAPE. THERE ARE 150K MILES ON THE CAR, LOW FOR A TOYOTA OF THIS AGE. I HAVE ATTACHED THE TOYOTA ZG1 LETTER THAT I FOUND ON LINE. PLEASE CONSIDER AN IMMEDIATE RECALL ON THIS BRAKE ACTUATOR ASSEMBLY AND MAKE TOYOTA FIX IT FOR EVERYONE.
NHTSA ODI #11292013
201,000 miles · Dec 27, 2019
Service Brakes
MY WIFE WAS DRIVING HER CAR TO WORK, AN AUDIO WARNING AND LIGHTS ON THE DASH CAME ON INDICATING THAT THE ABS SYSTEM HAD A PROBLEM. SHE WAS ABLE TO PULL TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND TURNED OFF THE CAR. SHE STARTED THE CAR AND THE LIGHTS HAD RESET AND NO SOUND. LATER IN THE DAY SHE STARTED HER CAR AND THE SYMPTOMS HAPPENED AGAIN BU…
Read full complaint
MY WIFE WAS DRIVING HER CAR TO WORK, AN AUDIO WARNING AND LIGHTS ON THE DASH CAME ON INDICATING THAT THE ABS SYSTEM HAD A PROBLEM. SHE WAS ABLE TO PULL TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND TURNED OFF THE CAR. SHE STARTED THE CAR AND THE LIGHTS HAD RESET AND NO SOUND. LATER IN THE DAY SHE STARTED HER CAR AND THE SYMPTOMS HAPPENED AGAIN BUT THE BRAKE PEDAL WAS MUSHY. I GOT THE CAR HOME AND LOOKED AT THE FRONT AND REAR BRAKE PADS AND REPLACED THINKING THAT WAS THE PROBLEM. IT DID NOT WORK. AFTER DOING SOME RESEARCH I FOUND WHAT THE PROBLEM COULD BE, TOYOTA HAD A ITEM CALLED A BRAKE ACTUATOR THAT SEEMS TO FAIL AFTER SOME TIME.AFTER READING SOME FORUMS IT SOUNDED LIKE THERE WERE ALOT OF PEOPLE HAVING THE SAME ISSUES. TOYOTA WANTS AROUND $6,000 TO REPLACE THIS UNIT AND IT ISN'T AS EASY AS REPLACING A COUPLE OF BRAKE PADS.
NHTSA ODI #11291525
58,000 miles · Nov 7, 2019
Seat BeltsService BrakesCrashInjury
TL* THE CONTACT OWNED A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE TRAVELING AT A LOW RATE OF SPEED, THE PRECEDING VEHICLE STOPPED ABRUPTLY AND THE CONTACT'S BRAKES FAILED WITHOUT WARNING. AS A RESULT, THE CONTACT REAR ENDED THE OTHER VEHICLE. THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY AND THE SEAT BELT FAILED TO OPERATE. THE PARAMEDICS TRANSPORTED THE CONTACT …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNED A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE TRAVELING AT A LOW RATE OF SPEED, THE PRECEDING VEHICLE STOPPED ABRUPTLY AND THE CONTACT'S BRAKES FAILED WITHOUT WARNING. AS A RESULT, THE CONTACT REAR ENDED THE OTHER VEHICLE. THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY AND THE SEAT BELT FAILED TO OPERATE. THE PARAMEDICS TRANSPORTED THE CONTACT TO A LOCAL HOSPITAL WHERE SHE SUFFERED FROM INJURIES TO HER CHEST AND BACK. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE CONTACT STATED THAT PRIOR TO THE FAILURE, THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO SANSONE TOYOTA (90-100 US-1, AVENEL, NJ 07001, (732) 815-0500) WHERE THE BRAKES WERE SERVICED TWICE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A LOCAL TOW YARD AND DEEMED DESTROYED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE AND SENT AN INVESTIGATOR TO CHECK THE VEHICLE'S BLACK BOX. THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THERE WERE NO FAILURES FOUND ON THE BLACK BOX AT THE TIME OF THE CRASH. THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE WAS NOT DETERMINED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 58,000. THE VIN WAS UNKNOWN.
NHTSA ODI #11278749
87,000 miles · Nov 6, 2019
Service Brakes
I HAVE BEEN TOLD BY A TOYOTA DEALERSHIP (HEARTLAND TOYOTA) THAT MY ANTI-LOCKING BRAKE SYSTEM (ABS) PUMP ACTUATOR IS FAILING ON MY 2007 PRIUS WITH ONLY 87,000 MILES. THE COST TO REPAIR THIS PROBLEM IS $3500-$4000. APPARENTLY TOYOTA CAME OUT WITH AN EXTENDED WARRANTY TO COVER THIS PROBLEM A WHILE BACK BUT LIMITED IT TO SITUATIONS …
Read full complaint
I HAVE BEEN TOLD BY A TOYOTA DEALERSHIP (HEARTLAND TOYOTA) THAT MY ANTI-LOCKING BRAKE SYSTEM (ABS) PUMP ACTUATOR IS FAILING ON MY 2007 PRIUS WITH ONLY 87,000 MILES. THE COST TO REPAIR THIS PROBLEM IS $3500-$4000. APPARENTLY TOYOTA CAME OUT WITH AN EXTENDED WARRANTY TO COVER THIS PROBLEM A WHILE BACK BUT LIMITED IT TO SITUATIONS OCCURRING PRIOR TO 12/31/2017. I CONTACTED TOYOTA "CUSTOMER CARE" IN AN EFFORT TO FIND OUT WHAT IS MAGICAL ABOUT THE 12/31/2017 END DATE. THEY HAD NO GOOD ANSWER. I'M TOLD THE BRAKES COULD FAIL AT ANY TIME WITH NO WARNING. CURRENTLY THERE IS JUST AN UNUSUAL PRESSURE RELEASE SOUND WHEN BRAKING AND ACCELERATING. NO DASHBOARD WARNING LIGHTS ARE LIT.
NHTSA ODI #11278475
138,000 miles · Oct 1, 2019
Electrical SystemService Brakes
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE CLUSTER PANEL WENT OUT WHILE DRIVING AT ANY SPEED. ALSO, THE ABS AND CHECK ENGINE INDICATORS ILLUMINATED WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS STARTED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AUTONATION TOYOTA PINELLAS PARK (727-231-1423, LOCATED AT 8501 US HIGHWAY 19 NORTH, PINELLAS PARK, F…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE CLUSTER PANEL WENT OUT WHILE DRIVING AT ANY SPEED. ALSO, THE ABS AND CHECK ENGINE INDICATORS ILLUMINATED WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS STARTED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AUTONATION TOYOTA PINELLAS PARK (727-231-1423, LOCATED AT 8501 US HIGHWAY 19 NORTH, PINELLAS PARK, FL 33781) WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE ABS ACTUATOR NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND STATED THAT THERE WAS AN UNKNOWN RECALL IN 2017. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 138,000.
NHTSA ODI #11265399
130,000 miles · Sep 11, 2019
Service Brakes
CAR ROLLS AWAY WHEN PLACED IN PARK AND IGNITION OFF. NOTICED MULTIPLE TIMES. VIDEO AS WELL. VEHICLE WAS PARKED, IGNITION OFF AND KEY ARE OUT. I LOCKED AND CAR, CAME BACK TO LOAD IT AND LEANED AGAINST THE CAR. THE CR JUST STARTED TO ROLL DOWN THE STREET. I RECORDED VIDEO. THEN I TURNED ON THE CAR, THE PARKING BRAKE ENGAGES PROPER…
Read full complaint
CAR ROLLS AWAY WHEN PLACED IN PARK AND IGNITION OFF. NOTICED MULTIPLE TIMES. VIDEO AS WELL. VEHICLE WAS PARKED, IGNITION OFF AND KEY ARE OUT. I LOCKED AND CAR, CAME BACK TO LOAD IT AND LEANED AGAINST THE CAR. THE CR JUST STARTED TO ROLL DOWN THE STREET. I RECORDED VIDEO. THEN I TURNED ON THE CAR, THE PARKING BRAKE ENGAGES PROPERLY.
NHTSA ODI #11254853
145,000 miles · Sep 10, 2019
Service Brakes
BRAKE AND ABS WARNING LIGHTS CAME ON AFTER I REPLACED THE 12V BATTERY. I NOTICED THE RIGHT FRONT BRAKE-EFFECT WAS STRONGER AND IT RESULTED IN THE CAR PULLING SHARPLY TO THE RIGHT. I TOOK IT TO A LOCAL MECHANIC WHO TESTED THE CODES AND REPLACED THE ABS RELAY. THAT DID NOT SOLVE THE PROBLEM AND HE RECOMMENDED TOYOTA SERVICE. I TAL…
Read full complaint
BRAKE AND ABS WARNING LIGHTS CAME ON AFTER I REPLACED THE 12V BATTERY. I NOTICED THE RIGHT FRONT BRAKE-EFFECT WAS STRONGER AND IT RESULTED IN THE CAR PULLING SHARPLY TO THE RIGHT. I TOOK IT TO A LOCAL MECHANIC WHO TESTED THE CODES AND REPLACED THE ABS RELAY. THAT DID NOT SOLVE THE PROBLEM AND HE RECOMMENDED TOYOTA SERVICE. I TALKED WITH A TOYOTA SERVICE REP WHO TOLD ME THERE WAS A KNOWN PROBLEM WITH SOME PRIUS BRAKES AND ASKED THAT I GIVE HIM THE VIN. HE SAID THERE HAD BEEN AN EXTENDED WARRANTY TO REPLACE THE ABS BRAKE CONTROLLER ASSEMBLY BUT IT HAD EXPIRED SOME TIME AGO. HE SAID THE COST TO FIX THIS WOULD APPROXIMATE $3500. OTHERWISE THE CAR IS IN GOOD SHAPE AND I WOULD EXPECT THAT I SHOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO DRIVE IT ANOTHER 100,000 MILES OR PERHAPS MUCH MORE. A TYPICAL AMERICAN-MADE CAR WITH AN ABS FAILURE WILL STILL BRAKE NORMALLY - JUST NOT HAVE THE ABS FEATURE. THE PRIUS WILL NOT! THE TOYOTA SERVICE REP SAID IT SHOULDN'T BE DRIVEN AS IT IS TOO DANGEROUS AND MY EXPERIENCE CONFIRMS THE MALFUNCTION.
NHTSA ODI #11254509
220,000 miles · Sep 5, 2019
Electrical SystemElectronic Stability Control (esc)Service Brakes
IF I DRIVE ON THE EXPRESSWAY OR AROUND TOWN AND I'M DRIVING A HALF HOUR SOMETIMES LESS MY CAR MAKES A LOUD BUZZING NOISE AND MY INSTRUMENT PANEL THE HAZARD LIGHTS GO ON AND I LOSE MY BRAKES. THIS WAS VERY SCARY. THANK GOODNESS I WASN'T GOING TO FAST TOWARD THE LIGHT AND DIDN'T HIT ANYONE. I'M SCARED TO DRIVE THE CAR BECAUSE IT …
Read full complaint
IF I DRIVE ON THE EXPRESSWAY OR AROUND TOWN AND I'M DRIVING A HALF HOUR SOMETIMES LESS MY CAR MAKES A LOUD BUZZING NOISE AND MY INSTRUMENT PANEL THE HAZARD LIGHTS GO ON AND I LOSE MY BRAKES. THIS WAS VERY SCARY. THANK GOODNESS I WASN'T GOING TO FAST TOWARD THE LIGHT AND DIDN'T HIT ANYONE. I'M SCARED TO DRIVE THE CAR BECAUSE IT DOES THIS ALL THE TIME IF I'M DRIVING FOR A PERIOD OF TIME 1/2 HOUR OR MORE. MY VEHICLE WAS ON CITY STREET AND ON HIGHWAY. I WAS IN MOTION. ON THE HIGHWAY 70MPH AND ON CITY STREETS 35/40 MPH.
NHTSA ODI #11253488
Official recalls
4Nov 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.
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.
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.
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
3DP22005 · 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.
Illustration