← 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

What owners actually said

2,003 reports
20,000 miles · Mar 15, 2010
Service Brakes, Electric

FOR THE LAST 10 MONTHS STARTING AFTER OWNERSHIP OF THE CAR FOR APPROX 15 MONTHS, AFTER BRAKING AND WHILE AT A STOP WITH FOOT ON BRAKE PEDAL, MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS MAKES A LOUD SOUND LIKE A LARGE METAL COIL BEING TIGHTENED. TOYOTA HAS ATTEMPTED REPAIR THREE TIMES OVER THE LAST 10 MONTHS TO NO AVAIL. TOYOTA HAS REPEATEDLY STATED …

Read full complaint

FOR THE LAST 10 MONTHS STARTING AFTER OWNERSHIP OF THE CAR FOR APPROX 15 MONTHS, AFTER BRAKING AND WHILE AT A STOP WITH FOOT ON BRAKE PEDAL, MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS MAKES A LOUD SOUND LIKE A LARGE METAL COIL BEING TIGHTENED. TOYOTA HAS ATTEMPTED REPAIR THREE TIMES OVER THE LAST 10 MONTHS TO NO AVAIL. TOYOTA HAS REPEATEDLY STATED THAT HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE OF THE CAUSE BUT ARE ATTEMPTING TO DETERMINE A "FIX". AFTER THE THIRD REPAIR ATTEMPT, THE DEALER DECLARED MY CAR A "LEMON" AND SUGGESTED I CONTACT THEIR THIRD PART ARBITRATION CENTER WHO HAS NOW TURNED DOWN MY CASE BECAUSE ALTHOUGH THE DEFECT WAS REPORTED WHILE THE CAR WAS UNDER WARRANTY, THE CAR NO LONGER IS UNDER WARRANTY. MY STATE'S LEMON LAWS DO NOT SUPPORT CARS NO LONGER UNDER WARRANTY EITHER. I HAVE A CAR THAT COULD NOT BE SOLD TO ANYONE DUE TO THE LOUD AND FRIGHTENING NOISE. IN ADDITION, THE SITUATION WORSENED CONSIDERABLY AFTER THE LAST ATTEMPT AT REPAIR. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10319961

48,000 miles · Mar 14, 2010
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

WHEN THE CAR IS FIRST STARTED, THE DRIVER SIDE HEADLIGHT USUALLY GOES OUT WITHIN THE FIRST FEW MINUTES OF DRIVING. IT IS ALMOST ALWAYS THE DRIVER SIDE BUT IT HAS HAPPENED A FEW TIMES WITH THE PASSENGER SIDE. WHEN I TURN THE HEADLIGHTS OFF AND THEN BACK ON BOTH HEADLIGHTS FUNCTION, ALTHOUGH THE LIGHT THAT HAD BEEN OUT INITIALLY…

Read full complaint

WHEN THE CAR IS FIRST STARTED, THE DRIVER SIDE HEADLIGHT USUALLY GOES OUT WITHIN THE FIRST FEW MINUTES OF DRIVING. IT IS ALMOST ALWAYS THE DRIVER SIDE BUT IT HAS HAPPENED A FEW TIMES WITH THE PASSENGER SIDE. WHEN I TURN THE HEADLIGHTS OFF AND THEN BACK ON BOTH HEADLIGHTS FUNCTION, ALTHOUGH THE LIGHT THAT HAD BEEN OUT INITIALLY IS NOT AS BRIGHT AS THE OTHER. THIS HAPPENS INTERMITTENTLY FOR THE FIRST 10-20 MINUTES OF DRIVING AND THEN BOTH HEADLIGHTS SEEM TO FUNCTION PROPERLY. I RECENTLY DROVE AT NIGHT FOR NEARLY 5 HOURS AND ONLY HAD THIS PROBLEM DURING THE FIRST 20 MINUTES OF DRIVING. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10319536

21,000 miles · Mar 13, 2010
Exterior LightingVehicle Speed Control

I HAVE BEEN DRIVING A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS SINCE JULY 2007. THE HID HEADLIGHTS SWITCH OFF AUTOMATICALLY WHILE DRIVING. SOMETIMES THE LEFT HID SWITCHES OFF BUT THE RIGHT HEADLIGHTS STAYS ON. THE HEADLIGHTS TURN OFF BUT THE DISPLAY FROM THE INSIDE SAYS THAT HEADLIGHTS ARE TURNED ON. THE HEADLIGHTS COME ON IF I TURN THE HEADLIGHTS OF…

Read full complaint

I HAVE BEEN DRIVING A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS SINCE JULY 2007. THE HID HEADLIGHTS SWITCH OFF AUTOMATICALLY WHILE DRIVING. SOMETIMES THE LEFT HID SWITCHES OFF BUT THE RIGHT HEADLIGHTS STAYS ON. THE HEADLIGHTS TURN OFF BUT THE DISPLAY FROM THE INSIDE SAYS THAT HEADLIGHTS ARE TURNED ON. THE HEADLIGHTS COME ON IF I TURN THE HEADLIGHTS OFF AND TURN THEM BACK ON THEN BOTH OF THEM ARE WORKING TILL THEY SWITCH OFF AGAIN DURING DRIVING. ALMOST GOT IN A T-BONE ACCIDENT WHEN THE OTHER DRIVER DID NOT SEE ME. IF I AM DRIVING USING CRUISE-CONTROL, THE CAR SEEM TO SPEED UP A BIT JUST FOR A SEC A OR TWO WHEN YOU INITIALLY APPLY BRAKES. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10319421

650 miles · Mar 12, 2010
Traction Control SystemUnknown Or Other

THIS EVENT HAS OCCURED ON A NUMBER OF OCCASIONS WITH MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHEN I AM APPLYING THE BRAKES AND GO OVER A BUMP OR POTHOLE, THE TRACTION CONTROL LIGHT APPEARS AND THE BRAKES WEAKEN FOR A MOMENT. THE LIGHT WILL GO OFF AND THE BREAKS FEEL LIKE THEY GO BACK TO FULL STRENGTH. I AM AWARE OF THIS ISSUE AND HAVE MODIFIED…

Read full complaint

THIS EVENT HAS OCCURED ON A NUMBER OF OCCASIONS WITH MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHEN I AM APPLYING THE BRAKES AND GO OVER A BUMP OR POTHOLE, THE TRACTION CONTROL LIGHT APPEARS AND THE BRAKES WEAKEN FOR A MOMENT. THE LIGHT WILL GO OFF AND THE BREAKS FEEL LIKE THEY GO BACK TO FULL STRENGTH. I AM AWARE OF THIS ISSUE AND HAVE MODIFIED MY DRIVING BECASUE OF IT. RECENTLY WHILE APPROACHING AN INTERSECTION I HAD TO SLOW VERY QUICKLY AND HIT A POTHOLE WHILE THE BRAKES WERE APPLIED. I TRAVELED SEVERAL FEET FURTHER BECAUSE THE BRAKES WERE NOT REACTING AT FULL STRENGTH WHEN THE LIGHT WAS ON. I HAVE HEARD OF OTHER 2007 OWNERS COMPLAINING BUT WHEN I CONTACTED MY TOYOTA DEALER THEY SAID THERE WAS NOTHING THEY COULD DO UNTIL THERE IS A RECALL. THAT WAS THE ONLY TIME I CONTACTED MY DEALER BECAUSE IT MADE ME SO UPSET. IT IS SAFE TO SAY THAT FROM THE MOMENT I HAVE PURCHASED THE CAR (WITHIN THE FIRST WEEK) TO CURRENT, IF I AM BREAKING AND HITTING A BUMP OR POTHOLE OF SIGNIFICANT DISRUPTANCE AT THE SAME TIME - THIS SITUATION REPLAYS ITSELF. THE DATE OF INCIDENT IS AROUND THE FIRST DATE OF THE FIRST OCCURANCE. IT HAS HAPPENED NEARLY 100+ TIMES SINCE THEN.

NHTSA ODI #10319239

31,000 miles · Mar 12, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control

2007 TOYOTA PRIUS ACCELERATED ON ITS OWN. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10319160

45,000 miles · Mar 11, 2010
Exterior Lighting

MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS HAS A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT WITH THE HID LIGHTS. THESE LIGHTS WILL GO OUT SPORADICALLY WHILE DRIVING. OFTEN TIMES IT TAKES LESS THAN 10 SECONDS FOR BOTH LIGHTS TO BE OFF WHILE DRIVING AT NIGHT. I HAVE REPLACED BOTH LIGHTS, TWICE WITH AFTERMARKET BULBS AND THE PROBLEM REMAINS. TOYOTA IS CHARGING $45…

Read full complaint

MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS HAS A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT WITH THE HID LIGHTS. THESE LIGHTS WILL GO OUT SPORADICALLY WHILE DRIVING. OFTEN TIMES IT TAKES LESS THAN 10 SECONDS FOR BOTH LIGHTS TO BE OFF WHILE DRIVING AT NIGHT. I HAVE REPLACED BOTH LIGHTS, TWICE WITH AFTERMARKET BULBS AND THE PROBLEM REMAINS. TOYOTA IS CHARGING $450 TO REPLACE THE BULBS A THIRD TIME, WITH NO WARRANTY IF THEY FAIL. THIS SAME REPAIR CAN BE DONE ONLINE WITH IDENTICAL BULBS FOR $50. ADDING TO THE DIFFICULTY IS THAT THE BULB HOUSING IS LARGELY INACCESSIBLE FOR A NORMAL USER. MANY OWNERS, BASED ON HUNDREDS OF DESCRIPTIONS ON THE INTERNET, HAVE TAKEN TO REMOVING THE ENTIRE BUMPER JUST TO REPLACE THE HEADLIGHT BULB (WHICH IS WHAT I HAVE TO DO SINCE MY HANDS AREN'T TINY). THIS DESIGN FLAW EXACERBATES THE REPAIR OF A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT. THE HID LIGHTBULBS IN QUESTION ARE DENSO D4R'S, WHICH ACCORDING TO JD POWER SHOULD HAVE AN AVERAGE LIFESPAN OF 90,000 MILES FOR AN AVERAGE USER. MOST USERS ARE EXPERIENCING HALF OF THIS VALUE. INDICATING THE ECU OR BALLAST IS AT FAULT DESPITE THE INITIAL RESEARCH DONE ON THIS PARTICULAR TOPIC BY NHTSA, MY HEADLIGHTS DO BOTH FAIL WITHIN A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME OF ONE ANOTHER - CONSTITUTING A LEGITIMATE SAFETY CONCERN. ONE WILL FAIL UPON TURNING THE CAR ON WITHIN A FEW SECONDS, LEAVING THE 2ND TO EITHER FAIL SHORTLY AFTER, OR AT ANY PERIOD OF TIME AFTER THIS POINT. THIS IS WITH NEW BULBS THAT ARE AT SPEC FOR THE CAR ACCORDING TO THE MANUAL. I HAVE NO COURSE OF RESOLUTION FOR THIS MATTER, AND TOYOTA IS UNWILLING TO HELP. I AM CONCERNED ABOUT MY SAFETY WHILE DRIVING THIS CAR, ESPECIALLY IN THE RAIN, OR AT NIGHT. I WOULD HOPE THAT THE NHTSA TAKES LIGHT FAILURES AS SERIOUSLY AS THEY DO BRAKE AND ACCELERATOR FAILURES, AS THEY'RE ALSO LIKELY TO LEAD TO ACCIDENTS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10319084

42,000 miles · Mar 11, 2010
Traction Control SystemVehicle Speed Control

I AM WRITING TO EXPLAIN TWO PROBLEMS I HAVE HAD WITH MY TOYOTA PRIUS. I WANT TO HAVE A DOCUMENTED OF REPORT OF THESE PROBLEMS IN THE EVENT THAT THEY RESULT IN A SERIOUS ACCIDENT, AS I FEAR THEY MIGHT. I HAVE EXPERIENCED THESE PROBLEMS ON A NUMBER OF OCCASIONS. THE FIRST PROBLEM OCCURS WHENEVER I DRIVE OVER ROUGH OR UNEVEN PAY…

Read full complaint

I AM WRITING TO EXPLAIN TWO PROBLEMS I HAVE HAD WITH MY TOYOTA PRIUS. I WANT TO HAVE A DOCUMENTED OF REPORT OF THESE PROBLEMS IN THE EVENT THAT THEY RESULT IN A SERIOUS ACCIDENT, AS I FEAR THEY MIGHT. I HAVE EXPERIENCED THESE PROBLEMS ON A NUMBER OF OCCASIONS. THE FIRST PROBLEM OCCURS WHENEVER I DRIVE OVER ROUGH OR UNEVEN PAYMENT. WHEN THE TRACTION CONTROL KICKS IN, IT FEELS AS IF THE CAR IS SURGING AND IT IS NECESSARY TO STEP ON THE BRAKE, SOMETIMES WITH BOTH FEET, VERY HARD IN ORDER TO GET THE CAR TO SLOW DOWN OR STOP. I HAVE TAKEN THE CAR IN FOR THIS PROBLEM A COUPLE OF TIMES. I HAVE DRIVEN CARS WITH TRACTION CONTROL IN THE PAST AND NEVER FELT THE SURGING THAT OCCURS WITH THE PRIUS, WHEN DRIVING OTHER CARS USING OTHER TRACTION CONTROL SYSTEMS. THE OTHER ISSUE WITH THE CAR IS THAT OCCASIONALLY, WHEN ACCELERATING, MY NORMALLY SILENT PRIUS MAKES A LOUD REVVING NOISE. WHENEVER I HEAR THIS NOISE, I IMMEDIATELY TAKE MY FOOT OFF THE GAS. THANKFULLY, SO FAR, THE NOISE STOPS AND THE CAR SLOWS DOWN. THE NOISE DOES NOT OCCUR EVERY TIME I ACCELERATE, BUT IT SEEMS TO BE HAPPENING WITH INCREASING FREQUENCY. I AM NOT SURE IF OTHER PRIUS OWNERS, ESPECIALLY THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN ACCIDENTS, HAVE REPORTED THIS ISSUE OR NOTICED THE REVVING NOISE PRIOR TO THEIR ACCIDENTS. BUT, I THOUGHT IT MIGHT BE AN IMPORTANT PIECE OF THE PUZZLE THAT SHOULD BE REPORTED. I HOPE THIS INFORMATION IS USEFUL. QUITE HONESTLY, I AM A CONCERNED EACH AND EVERY TIME I GET INTO MY CAR. BUT, WITH A YEAR REMAINING ON MY LEASE I HAVE LITTLE CHOICE BUT TO ENGAGE IN WHAT I FEEL IS INCREASINGLY A GAME OF TOYOTA OWNER RUSSIAN ROULETTE TO GET TO SCHOOL AND DO ALL THE THINGS I NEED TO DO. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10319080

15,000 miles · Mar 11, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic

CONSTANT PECULIAR NOISES FROM BRAKE SYSTEM, PREMATURE BRAKE WEAR COMPUTER SYSTEM HAD TO BE RE-INITIALIZED AT 15,000 MILES. BRAKES PADS HAD TO BE REPLACED AND ROTORS RESURFACED AT SAME MILEAGE. BRAKE PEDAL DEPRESSED TO THE FLOOR BEFORE VEHICLE STOPPED, IT WAS AN EMERGENCY STOP. THESE PROBLEMS HAVE PERSISTED FOR ALMOST 3 YEARS AND…

Read full complaint

CONSTANT PECULIAR NOISES FROM BRAKE SYSTEM, PREMATURE BRAKE WEAR COMPUTER SYSTEM HAD TO BE RE-INITIALIZED AT 15,000 MILES. BRAKES PADS HAD TO BE REPLACED AND ROTORS RESURFACED AT SAME MILEAGE. BRAKE PEDAL DEPRESSED TO THE FLOOR BEFORE VEHICLE STOPPED, IT WAS AN EMERGENCY STOP. THESE PROBLEMS HAVE PERSISTED FOR ALMOST 3 YEARS AND THE DEALER AND FACTORY REP. SAYS IT IS NORMAL. ARBITRATION IN FAVOR OF TOYOTA. I HAVE NEVER HEARD THESE NOISES IN ANY OTHER VEHICLE I HAVE DRIVEN IN 62 YEARS. THESE NOISES COULD BE A PROBLEM WAITING TO HAPPEN. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10319003

23,406 miles · Mar 11, 2010
Electrical SystemService Brakes, Hydraulic

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 40 MPH, APPROACHING A TRAFFIC LIGHT. WHEN THE BRAKE PEDAL WAS ENGAGED, THE BRAKES FAILED TO RESPOND IN A TIMELY MANNER. ADDITIONALLY, THE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM FAILED WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC. THE VEHICLE WAS IN TH…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 40 MPH, APPROACHING A TRAFFIC LIGHT. WHEN THE BRAKE PEDAL WAS ENGAGED, THE BRAKES FAILED TO RESPOND IN A TIMELY MANNER. ADDITIONALLY, THE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM FAILED WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC. THE VEHICLE WAS IN THE PROCESS OF BEING REPAIRED WHEN THE COMPLAINT WAS FILED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 23,406. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 30,000.

NHTSA ODI #10318991

20,000 miles · Mar 11, 2010
Exterior Lighting

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH AT NIGHT, AND OBSERVED THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS FUNCTIONED ONE AT A TIME INTERMITTENTLY. THE FAILURE RESULTED TO LIMITED VISIBILITY. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER ON SEVERAL SEPARATE OCCASIONS FOR THE IDENTICAL FAILURE. THE TECHNIC…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH AT NIGHT, AND OBSERVED THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS FUNCTIONED ONE AT A TIME INTERMITTENTLY. THE FAILURE RESULTED TO LIMITED VISIBILITY. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER ON SEVERAL SEPARATE OCCASIONS FOR THE IDENTICAL FAILURE. THE TECHNICIAN STATED THAT THE BULBS REQUIRED REPLACEMENT WHICH INVOLVED THE REMOVAL OF THE FRONT BUMPER TO INSTALL THE BULBS. THE VEHICLE HAS NOT BEEN REPAIRED AT THIS TIME. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 20,000. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 59,000.

NHTSA ODI #10318979

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.