IllustrationCOMBINATION METER FAILURE WHILE DRIVING. UNABLE TO VIEW SPEEDOMETER OR DASH LIGHTS. CAR SOMETIMES LOCKS UP, UNABLE TO VIEW ABS SIGNAL BECAUSE DASHLIGHTS BECOME INOPERABLE. UNABLE TO TURN CAR OFF DURING DASHBOARD/COMBINATION METER FAILURE. *TR
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 →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Prius years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
All reported categories
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
2310–25K
57625–50K
39350–75K
20475–100K
210100–150K
107150K+
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
Vehicle Speed Control complaints
124 reportsTHE ELECTRONIC DASH (HEADS UP INSTRUMENT DISPLAY) ON OUR 2007 PRIUS HAS INTERMITTENTLY FAILED TO LIGHT OVER THE LAST YEAR. YESTERDAY, IT FAILED AND ALSO WOULDN'T TURN OFF. WE ALWAYS USE THE REMOTE (KEYLESS) IGNITION SYSTEM. BUT, AFTER THE FAILURES YESTERDAY I PUT THE ELECTRONIC KEY FOB INTO THE HOLE IN THE DASH THINKING THAT MIG…
Read full complaint
THE ELECTRONIC DASH (HEADS UP INSTRUMENT DISPLAY) ON OUR 2007 PRIUS HAS INTERMITTENTLY FAILED TO LIGHT OVER THE LAST YEAR. YESTERDAY, IT FAILED AND ALSO WOULDN'T TURN OFF. WE ALWAYS USE THE REMOTE (KEYLESS) IGNITION SYSTEM. BUT, AFTER THE FAILURES YESTERDAY I PUT THE ELECTRONIC KEY FOB INTO THE HOLE IN THE DASH THINKING THAT MIGHT HELP. INSTEAD, I COULDN'T REMOVE IT. I TRIED EVERY COMBINATION OF PRESSING BUTTONS (THE PARK AND POWER BUTTONS) AND OTHER CONTROLS, BRAKES PEDAL, SHIFTER AND IT STILL WOULDN'T SHUT OFF OR LIGHT UP THE DISPLAY. AFTER HOLDING THE POWER BUTTON IN FOR AN EXTENDED AMOUNT OF TIME, IT TURNED OFF AND EJECTED THE KEY FOB. BUT THEN THE CAR WOULDN'T LIGHT UP THE INSTRUMENT DISPLAY OR START. THIS MORNING, AGAIN, IT WOULD NOT START. I WAS TOLD BY AN EXPERIENCED PRIUS MECHANIC (ALSO AN OWNER) THAT THESE WERE CLASSIC SYMPTOMS OF A FAILING POWER AMPLIFIER FOR THE DISPLAY AND THAT IT WAS A "SECRET WARRANTY," A VOLUNTARY REPAIR TO AVOID A GOVERNMENT RECALL, BUT THAT TOYOTA WOULD ONLY DO IT FOR 10 YEARS. THE DEALER REFUSED TO DO IT UNDER WARRANTY EVEN THOUGH THE SYMPTOMS BEGAN BEFORE THE CAR WAS 10 YEARS OLD. THEY TOLD ME THE RECALL WAS ONLY GOOD FOR NINE YEARS. THEY WANT $765 FOR THE REPAIR. IT STRIKES ME THAT THIS IS A SAFETY FAILURE AND SHOULD BE COVERED, PERIOD. WITH NO INDICATION OF SPEED OR OTHER FUNCTIONS (ABS FUNCTION, TRACTION CONTROL, ETC.), OR TO TURN THE VEHICLE OFF, IT IS UNSAFE TO OPERATE THE VEHICLE. THE VARIOUS FAILURES, INCLUDING LOSS OF CRUISE CONTROL WHILE IN MOTION, TOOK PLACE WHEN THE CAR WAS COLD AND WHEN IT WAS WARMED UP. AT REST AND IN MOTION.
AFTER SPEEDING UP TO PASS ANOTHER CAR ON A SLIGHT UPGRADE (2 LANE COUNTRY ROAD), MY PRIUS CONTINUED TO ACCELERATE. I COULD NOT SLOW THE CAR DOWN TO THE SPEED LIMIT USING THE BRAKE PEDAL. FOR ABOUT FIFTEEN MINUTES, I KEPT TRYING TO SLOW THE CAR DOWN, LOOKING FOR A PLACE TO PULL OVER WHERE I WOULDN'T HIT ANYTHING. THE ACCELERATOR…
Read full complaint
AFTER SPEEDING UP TO PASS ANOTHER CAR ON A SLIGHT UPGRADE (2 LANE COUNTRY ROAD), MY PRIUS CONTINUED TO ACCELERATE. I COULD NOT SLOW THE CAR DOWN TO THE SPEED LIMIT USING THE BRAKE PEDAL. FOR ABOUT FIFTEEN MINUTES, I KEPT TRYING TO SLOW THE CAR DOWN, LOOKING FOR A PLACE TO PULL OVER WHERE I WOULDN'T HIT ANYTHING. THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WAS NOT STUCK & NO FLOOR MAT WAS TOUCHING EITHER PEDAL. THE ONLY WAY I COULD STOP WAS WITH THE EMERGENCY BRAKE. I THOUGHT THE CAR MIGHT EXPLODE, BUT LATER REALIZED THE SMOKE WAS POURING OUT FROM MY BRAKES. I MANEUVERED TO THE BERM OF A BRIDGE OVER A LAKE, JUST BEFORE THE ROAD WENT DOWN TO ONE LANE FOR CONSTRUCTION. THEN I TURNED THE CAR OFF. TEN MINUTES AFTER THIS ORDEAL (VEHICLE WAS STATIONARY), I RESTARTED THE CAR, BUT THE ENGINE BEGAN RACING AGAIN WITHOUT ANY TOUCH ON THE GAS PEDAL, SO I QUICKLY TURNED IT OFF. LUCKILY, I HADN'T COLLIDED WITH ANYTHING.
THE TRACTION-CONTROL SYSTEM IN THE PRIUS IS, I BELIEVE, DANGEROUS. WHEN THE SLIGHTEST DEGREE OF WHEEL SLIP IS DETECTED, IT ESSENTIALLY SHUTS OFF POWER TO THE WHEELS FOR A MOMENT. ON A NUMBER OF OCCASIONS, WHEN ACCELERATING TO MERGE IN WITH TRAFFIC ON A WET ROAD, THE SYSTEM'S REACTION HAS SLOWED ME DOWN TO WHAT I BELIEVE IS A …
Read full complaint
THE TRACTION-CONTROL SYSTEM IN THE PRIUS IS, I BELIEVE, DANGEROUS. WHEN THE SLIGHTEST DEGREE OF WHEEL SLIP IS DETECTED, IT ESSENTIALLY SHUTS OFF POWER TO THE WHEELS FOR A MOMENT. ON A NUMBER OF OCCASIONS, WHEN ACCELERATING TO MERGE IN WITH TRAFFIC ON A WET ROAD, THE SYSTEM'S REACTION HAS SLOWED ME DOWN TO WHAT I BELIEVE IS A DANGEROUS EXTENT. ON A COUPLE OF OCCASIONS, I HAVE ENDED UP STUCK IN SNOW BECAUSE THE SYSTEM IS SO EAGER TO KEEP ME FROM SPINNING WHEELS AT ALL. I CONTACTED TOYOTA, AND THEIR REPLY WAS TO THE EFFECT THAT THIS SYSTEM IS DESIGNED TO PROTECT THE DRIVE TRAIN, AND THAT THEY ARE NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING TO REMEDY WHAT I SEE AS A DANGEROUS FLAW. THE ONLY CONCEIVABLE WAY SUCH A SYSTEM COULD BE PROTECTING THE DRIVE TRAIN WOULD BE BY LIMITING ENGINE RPM TO A SAFE POINT; HOWEVER, THE SYSTEM GOES FAR BEYOND JUST KEEPING RPM DOWN. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE RESPONSE TO "WHEN DID THIS HAPPEN" IS NOT REALLY ACCURATE. IT HAS HAPPENED ON A NUMBER OF OCCASIONS, AND THE DATE LISTED IS MERELY THE MOST RECENT OCCURRENCE. ALSO, THE SPEED IS JUST FROM THE MOST RECENT OCCURRENCE.
I GOT UNINTENDED HIGH SPEED AND I COULD NOT STOP THE CAR. IT STOPPED BECAUSE THE WHEEL WAS HIT BY THE CURBE
WHILE BACKING SLOWLY INTO A PARKING SPOT OF AN INNER CITY SUPERMARKET IN A BUSY RESIDENTIAL AREA THE CAR SUDDENLY ACCELERATED. IT WENT OVER A 1 FT CONCRETE CURB LIMITER INTO THE STREET AND AFTER A 180 DEGREE LOOP IN REVERSE I FINALLY HIT THE E-BRAKE HARD WHILE AT THE SAME TIME I RAN OVER A PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC LIGHT AND HIT A TREE…
Read full complaint
WHILE BACKING SLOWLY INTO A PARKING SPOT OF AN INNER CITY SUPERMARKET IN A BUSY RESIDENTIAL AREA THE CAR SUDDENLY ACCELERATED. IT WENT OVER A 1 FT CONCRETE CURB LIMITER INTO THE STREET AND AFTER A 180 DEGREE LOOP IN REVERSE I FINALLY HIT THE E-BRAKE HARD WHILE AT THE SAME TIME I RAN OVER A PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC LIGHT AND HIT A TREE WITH THE REAR PASSENGER SIDE TO A FULL STOP. AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. DURING ALL THIS PERIOD OF PROBABLY LESS THAN 10 SECONDS THE FOOT BRAKE WAS NOT RESPONDING ANY MORE. AFTER IMPACT THE ENGINE DID NOT START ANYMORE AND THE CAR WAS TOWED FROM THE SCENE.
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING AT LOW SPEEDS, THE VEHICLE EXPERIENCED UNINTENDED ACCELERATION WHICH RESULTED IN A CRASH IN THE GARAGE. THE FAILURE OCCURRED ON TWO OCCASIONS. THERE WERE NO INJURIES. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FA…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING AT LOW SPEEDS, THE VEHICLE EXPERIENCED UNINTENDED ACCELERATION WHICH RESULTED IN A CRASH IN THE GARAGE. THE FAILURE OCCURRED ON TWO OCCASIONS. THERE WERE NO INJURIES. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 79,626. UPDATED 01/21/16*LJ *AS
WHEN APPLYING THE BRAKES IN TRAFFIC ON A CITY ROAD WITH A POSTED 35 MPH SPEED LIMIT, THE CAR FELT AS THOUGH IT SURGED FORWARD BRIEFLY AND ACCELERATED FOLLOWED BY THE ANTI-LOCK BRAKE DASHBOARD LIGHT COMING ON AND OFF AND THEN THE BRAKES FINALLY STARTED WORKING TO SLOW THE CAR DOWN. THIS HAS HAPPENED ABOUT 10 TIMES THE LAST FEW WE…
Read full complaint
WHEN APPLYING THE BRAKES IN TRAFFIC ON A CITY ROAD WITH A POSTED 35 MPH SPEED LIMIT, THE CAR FELT AS THOUGH IT SURGED FORWARD BRIEFLY AND ACCELERATED FOLLOWED BY THE ANTI-LOCK BRAKE DASHBOARD LIGHT COMING ON AND OFF AND THEN THE BRAKES FINALLY STARTED WORKING TO SLOW THE CAR DOWN. THIS HAS HAPPENED ABOUT 10 TIMES THE LAST FEW WEEKS AND HAS NEARLY CAUSED ME TO REAR-END OTHER VEHICLES ON THE ROAD.
ON TUESDAY, MAY 26, 2015 AT 5:04 PM WHILE TRAVELING AT ABOUT 57 MPH SOUTH ON HI WAY 101 AT ABOUT THE MILE POST 255.5, MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS SUDDENLY AND WITHOUT ANY CHANGE IN STEERING BY ME, VEERED TO THE RIGHT OFF THE ROAD AND INTO THE GUARDRAIL. THERE SEEMED TO BE NO REACTION TO MY FRANTIC STEERING AND BRAKING IN THE ATTEMPT TO…
Read full complaint
ON TUESDAY, MAY 26, 2015 AT 5:04 PM WHILE TRAVELING AT ABOUT 57 MPH SOUTH ON HI WAY 101 AT ABOUT THE MILE POST 255.5, MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS SUDDENLY AND WITHOUT ANY CHANGE IN STEERING BY ME, VEERED TO THE RIGHT OFF THE ROAD AND INTO THE GUARDRAIL. THERE SEEMED TO BE NO REACTION TO MY FRANTIC STEERING AND BRAKING IN THE ATTEMPT TO RETURN THE CAR TO THE ROAD. AFTER THE CAR HIT THE GUARDRAIL IT TRAVELED ABOUT 15 FEET SPUN BACK OUT INTO THE SOUTHBOUND LANE AND WAS HIT ON THE REAR RIGHT SIDE BY A CAR TRAVELING IN THE SOUTHBOUND LANE. THIS CAUSED THE CAR TO BE PROPELLED ACROSS 2 NORTHBOUND LANES OF TRAFFIC AND COME TO REST WITH REAR OF MY CAR EMBEDDED INTO THE FAR SIDE GUARDRAIL. MIRACULOUSLY NO ONE WAS HURT. THE POLICE WERE CALLED AND MY 61 YEAR PERFECT DRIVING RECORD WAS RUINED. MY CAR WAS TOTALED BY THE INSURANCE COMPANY...UPDATED 08/27/15 *BF UPDATE 9/15/15*CW*DT *CN UPDATED 4/21/20*JB
ON MAY 16, 2015, WHILE DRIVING MY SECOND-GENERATION 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS ON THE FREEWAY, I EXPERIENCED A SUDDEN LOSS OF POWER, ALONG WITH THE ILLUMINATION ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL OF THE MALFUNCTION INDICATOR LIGHT, MASTER WARNING LIGHT AND HYBRID WARNING LIGHT. I WAS ABLE TO MANEUVER THE CAR TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND SUMMON EMERG…
Read full complaint
ON MAY 16, 2015, WHILE DRIVING MY SECOND-GENERATION 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS ON THE FREEWAY, I EXPERIENCED A SUDDEN LOSS OF POWER, ALONG WITH THE ILLUMINATION ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL OF THE MALFUNCTION INDICATOR LIGHT, MASTER WARNING LIGHT AND HYBRID WARNING LIGHT. I WAS ABLE TO MANEUVER THE CAR TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND SUMMON EMERGENCY HELP. A NEARBY TOYOTA DEALERSHIP REPLACED THE HYBRID INVERTER WATER PUMP, WHICH FIXED THE PROBLEM. HOWEVER, THE DEALERSHIP DID NOT ADVISE ME OF A SAFETY RECALL. TOYOTA CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE CENTER TODAY STATED THAT THE ORIGINAL HYBRID INVERTER WATER PUMP WAS REPLACED ON APRIL 7, 2011, UNDER TOYOTA LIMITED SERVICE NOTICE A0N; HENCE, TOYOTA REFUSED MY PHONE REQUEST FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF MY MAY, 2015, REPAIR EXPENSE. THE 2011 "A0N" REPLACEMENT PUMP APPEARS TO HAVE FAILED BY THE SAME FAILURE MECHANISM LEADING TO RECALL CAMPAIGN "C0U", WHICH IS DIFFERENT FROM THE A0N FAILURE MECHANISM.
Official recalls
412V536000 · 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
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.