← 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
40,000 miles · Mar 3, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE APPROACHING ANY TYPE OF STOP SIGN AND DECELERATING, IF THE VEHICLE TRAVELED OVER A SERIES OF BUMPS OR ANY UNEVEN ROAD SURFACE, THE VEHICLE WOULD MOMENTARILY ACCELERATE AND IMMEDIATELY FUNCTION NORMALLY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT IT FELT SIMILAR TO HAVING DEPRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL AND…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. WHILE APPROACHING ANY TYPE OF STOP SIGN AND DECELERATING, IF THE VEHICLE TRAVELED OVER A SERIES OF BUMPS OR ANY UNEVEN ROAD SURFACE, THE VEHICLE WOULD MOMENTARILY ACCELERATE AND IMMEDIATELY FUNCTION NORMALLY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT IT FELT SIMILAR TO HAVING DEPRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL AND REMOVING HIS FOOT MIDWAY. THE DEALER WAS CONTACTED AND ADVISED THE HIM THAT THE VEHICLE WAS OPERATING AS IT WAS INTENDED. THEY ALSO ADVISED FILING A COMPLAINT WITH THE MANUFACTURER, WHICH HE DID. THE MANUFACTURER DID NOT RESPOND. THERE WERE NO REPAIRS MADE TO THE VEHICLE TO DATE AND THERE WERE NO RECALLS. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 40,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 80,000.

NHTSA ODI #10316187

48,900 miles · Mar 3, 2010
Traction Control SystemVehicle Speed Control

I DRIVE A 2007 PRIUS. RECENTLY WHEN DRIVING OVER POT HOLES, THE STABILITY CONTROL KICKS IN AND THE VEHICLE LUNGES FORWARD ( UNINTENDED ACCELERATION). THIS BEHAVIOR IS PRONOUNCED ON BIGGER POT HOLES AND LESS IN SEVERITY ON UNEVEN ROADS OR SMALLER POT HOLES. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10316132

Mileage unknown · Mar 3, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY BETWEEN 20-30 MPH ON A ROUGH ROAD SURFACE. WHILE BRAKING THE ANTI-LOCK BRAKE SYSTEM WARNING INDICATOR ILLUMINATED ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL. THE VEHICLE FAILED TO SLOW DOWN WITH A SLIGHT LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL FOR A FEW SECONDS. THE VEHICLE WAS ABLE T…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY BETWEEN 20-30 MPH ON A ROUGH ROAD SURFACE. WHILE BRAKING THE ANTI-LOCK BRAKE SYSTEM WARNING INDICATOR ILLUMINATED ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL. THE VEHICLE FAILED TO SLOW DOWN WITH A SLIGHT LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL FOR A FEW SECONDS. THE VEHICLE WAS ABLE TO RESUME NORMAL OPERATION. THE FAILURE OCCURRED WHENEVER ENCOUNTERING AN UNEVEN OR SNOW COVERED ROAD CONDITION. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THERE WAS NO RESOLUTION. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS UNKNOWN.

NHTSA ODI #10316013

30,100 miles · Mar 3, 2010
Exterior Lighting

THE PASSENGER SIDE HEADLIGHT OF MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS STOPPED WORKING. I HAD MY 30,000 MILE INSPECTION AT MY LOCAL TOYOTA DEALER ABOUT 2 WEEKS AGO, AND THEY DID NOT MENTION THIS PROBLEM. IT IS A CONTINUOUS LIGHT FAILURE. I HAVE CONTACTED MY TOYOTA DEALER TO HAVE IT REPLACED, BUT THEY WANT TO CHARGE ME >$500 FOR PARTS AND …

Read full complaint

THE PASSENGER SIDE HEADLIGHT OF MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS STOPPED WORKING. I HAD MY 30,000 MILE INSPECTION AT MY LOCAL TOYOTA DEALER ABOUT 2 WEEKS AGO, AND THEY DID NOT MENTION THIS PROBLEM. IT IS A CONTINUOUS LIGHT FAILURE. I HAVE CONTACTED MY TOYOTA DEALER TO HAVE IT REPLACED, BUT THEY WANT TO CHARGE ME >$500 FOR PARTS AND LABOR.*TR

NHTSA ODI #10315987

Mileage unknown · Mar 3, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic

2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. CONSUMER STATES DELAYED BRAKE REACTION. MUST PRESS FIRMLY FOR BRAKE TO STOP THE VEHICLE. *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED SHE NOTICED THE PROBLEM WITH THE BRAKES WHEN SHE FIRST DROVE DOWN A HILL. WHEN SHE APPLIED THE BRAKES, IT TOOK A LONG TIME FOR IT TO HOLD INSTEAD OF HOLDING AT THE FIRST PRESSING OF THE BRAKE PED…

Read full complaint

2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. CONSUMER STATES DELAYED BRAKE REACTION. MUST PRESS FIRMLY FOR BRAKE TO STOP THE VEHICLE. *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED SHE NOTICED THE PROBLEM WITH THE BRAKES WHEN SHE FIRST DROVE DOWN A HILL. WHEN SHE APPLIED THE BRAKES, IT TOOK A LONG TIME FOR IT TO HOLD INSTEAD OF HOLDING AT THE FIRST PRESSING OF THE BRAKE PEDAL. THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO ROLL DOWN THE HILL UNTIL THE PEDAL WAS APPLIED HARDER. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10314358

28,000 miles · Mar 2, 2010
Exterior Lighting

THIS COMPLAINT INVOLVES A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS ON WHICH THE HEADLIGHTS WENT OUT SUDDENLY. MY WIFE AND I BOTH EXPERIENCED SINGLE HEADLIGHTS AND TAILLIGHTS GOING OFF INTERMITTENTLY IN EARLY 2009. THEN ONE NIGHT WHEN WE WERE RETURNING HOME ALL OF THE LIGHTS IN THE VEHICLE WENT OUT INCLUDING THE HEADLIGHTS. WE WERE ON A HILLY ROAD I…

Read full complaint

THIS COMPLAINT INVOLVES A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS ON WHICH THE HEADLIGHTS WENT OUT SUDDENLY. MY WIFE AND I BOTH EXPERIENCED SINGLE HEADLIGHTS AND TAILLIGHTS GOING OFF INTERMITTENTLY IN EARLY 2009. THEN ONE NIGHT WHEN WE WERE RETURNING HOME ALL OF THE LIGHTS IN THE VEHICLE WENT OUT INCLUDING THE HEADLIGHTS. WE WERE ON A HILLY ROAD IN THE FOOTHILLS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND WERE FORTUNATE NOT TO HAVE HAD AN ACCIDENT. WE TURNED OFF THE IGNITION, AND WHEN WE TURNED IT BACK ON, THE LIGHTS CAME BACK AND WE MADE IT HOME. WE TOOK OUR PRIUS IN TO JIM BARKLEY TOYOTA IN ASHEVILLE, NC WITHIN A FEW DAYS AND REPORTED THE PROBLEM. THEY CHECKED OUT THE VEHICLE, FOUND NOTHING WRONG, AND SAID THAT WAS ALL THEY COULD DO. WHEN WE TOLD THEM THAT WE COULD HAVE BEEN KILLED AND WERE STILL WORRIED THAT THE FAILURE COULD HAPPEN AGAIN, THEY SAID THAT THERE WERE 1,000 MILES OF WIRE IN THE CAR AND THEY COULDN'T CHECK IT ALL. WE WERE NOT HAPPY, BUT THEY OFFERED NO FURTHER HELP. THEN, AT ONE OF OUR SUBSEQUENT 5,000 MILE SERVICE CHECKS AT JIM BARKLEY TOYOTA, WE WERE TOLD THAT THEY HAD REPLACED OUR HEADLAMPS AT NO CHARGE TO US. SEVERAL MONTHS AFTER THIS WE RECEIVED A NOTICE (NOT A SERVICE RECALL BULLETIN) THAT HID HEADLAMP BULBS "MAY FLICKER OR INTERMITTENTLY BE INOPERABLE." THE NOTICE DIDN'T SAY THAT HEADLIGHTS GOING OUT IN THE DARK COULD BE DANGEROUS, BUT IT WOULD SEEM OBVIOUS THAT THIS WAS TRUE. I AM WRITING THIS COMPLAINT BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT TOYOTA HAD KNOWN THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH THEIR HEADLIGHTS AND SIMPLY STONEWALLED US WHEN WE FIRST REPORTED IT. I AM NOT SEEKING COMPENSATION OR REDRESS, BUT I WANT TO REPORT WHAT SEEMS TO BE ARROGANCE AND DENIAL ON THE PART OF TOYOTA. WE ARE FORTUNATE THAT WE WERE NOT INJURED OR KILLED, AND SO IS TOYOTA. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10315764

18,000 miles · Mar 2, 2010
Electrical SystemVehicle Speed Control

I OWN A 2007 PRIUS, AND HAVE ENJOYED THE CAR ...HOWEVER, SOMETIME IN OCTOBER,2009, I WAS DRIVING TO A WEDDING SHOWER AND THE CAR SUDDENLY ACCELERATED WHEN I WAS ENTERING A MULTI-LANE EXPRESSWAY.. IT WOULD NOT DECELERATE WHEN I EASED OFF THE ACCELERATOR..AND I HAD TO VEER ACROSS LANES TO AVOID HITTING A TRUCK IN FRONT OF ME. …

Read full complaint

I OWN A 2007 PRIUS, AND HAVE ENJOYED THE CAR ...HOWEVER, SOMETIME IN OCTOBER,2009, I WAS DRIVING TO A WEDDING SHOWER AND THE CAR SUDDENLY ACCELERATED WHEN I WAS ENTERING A MULTI-LANE EXPRESSWAY.. IT WOULD NOT DECELERATE WHEN I EASED OFF THE ACCELERATOR..AND I HAD TO VEER ACROSS LANES TO AVOID HITTING A TRUCK IN FRONT OF ME. SIMPLE BRAKING DID NOT STOP THE ACCELERATION, ONLY VERY HARD AND CONTINUED AND PANICKED BRAKING. ON THE WAY BACK, ON AN AREA OF INTERSTATE THAT WAS FREE OF VEHICLES, I WAS ABLE TO RECREATE THE ACCELERATION BY 'STOMPING" ON THE ACCELERATOR. AGAIN, IT WOULD NOT STOP ACCELERATING WHEN I TOOK MY FOOT OFF THE ACCELERATOR..AND ONLY AFTER STOMPING THE BRAKE A LOT DID IT RETURN TO REGULAR RESPONSIVENESS. I HAVE NOT "TRIED" THAT AGAIN, AND MY HUSBAND DID TRY, BUT COULD NOT DUPLICATE MY EXPERIENCE. WE CONTACTED OUR LOCAL TOYOTA DEALER (GREENTREE IN CLARKSVILLE, IN) AND THEY WERE NOT RESPONSIVE. LATER IN THE FALL, AFTER THE RECALL ABOUT FLOOR MATS, WE WERE TOLD TO TAKE THE FLOOR MAT AWAY ON DRIVERS SIDE, AND A "FIX" WOULD BE DEVELOPED. I AM NOW FEARFUL OF THE CAR. I AM REPORTING NOW BECAUSE I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THE PRIUS PROBLEM IS A SIMPLE FLOOR MAT ISSUE (NEVER DID, BUT AM A WOMAN AND CERTAINLY NOT "KNOWLEDGEABLE" SO AS TO REFUTE TOYOTA'S ENGINEERS..). *TR

NHTSA ODI #10315521

Mileage unknown · Mar 2, 2010
Electrical SystemExterior LightingService Brakes, Hydraulic

2007 TOYOTA PRIUS WITH TIRE FAILURE AND BRAKES GRABBING. *KB THE BATTERY AND HEADLIGHTS FAILED. THE CONSUMER STATED TOYOTA HAS SINCE REMOVED THIS PARTICULAR TYPE OF BULB AND ASSEMBLY FROM PRODUCTION. WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS 1 YEAR OLD THE CONSUMER WAS STOPPED BY THE POLICE AND GIVEN A WARNING FOR THE HEADLIGHT BEING OUT. HOWEVER,…

Read full complaint

2007 TOYOTA PRIUS WITH TIRE FAILURE AND BRAKES GRABBING. *KB THE BATTERY AND HEADLIGHTS FAILED. THE CONSUMER STATED TOYOTA HAS SINCE REMOVED THIS PARTICULAR TYPE OF BULB AND ASSEMBLY FROM PRODUCTION. WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS 1 YEAR OLD THE CONSUMER WAS STOPPED BY THE POLICE AND GIVEN A WARNING FOR THE HEADLIGHT BEING OUT. HOWEVER, WHEN THE CONSUMER AND HER HUSBAND EXITED THE VEHICLE, THEY ALONG WITH THE POLICE OFFICER FOUND BOTH HEADLIGHTS WERE WORKING AND HE LET THEM GO WITHOUT A CITATION. THE CONSUMER HAS SINCE DISCOVERED THAT ONE HEADLIGHT OR THE OTHER WILL JUST GO OUT ON OCCASION DURING EVERY DRIVE. THE BRIGHTNESS OF THE HEADLIGHTS BEGAN TO DIM WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS ONLY A YEAR OLD. TOYOTA RECOMMENDED USING THE HEADLIGHTS LESS AND THEY FURTHER RECOMMENDED NOT USING THE HIGHLY TOUTED FEATURE THAT ALLOWS THE LIGHTS TO AUTOMATICALLY TURN OFF AFTER THE VEHICLE HAS BEEN TURNED OFF. LAST MONTH, THE CONSUMER RECEIVED A LETTER FROM TOYOTA REGARDING INFORMATION ABOUT A PROBLEM WITH THE HID HEADLIGHTS. THE LETTER STATED THE CUSTOMER SUPPORT PROGRAM WOULD REIMBURSE FOR SOME COST RELATIVE TO THE DEFECTIVE HEADLIGHTS. HOWEVER THE LOCAL DEALER DID NOT AGREE AND THE COST FAR EXCEEDED ANYTHING MENTIONED IN THE LETTER. THE DEALER INFORMED THE CONSUMER THE COST OF INSTALLATION FOR NEW BULBS WOULD BE $245 IN LABOR FOR EACH HEADLIGHT REPLACEMENT, THAT WAS IN ADDITION TO THE EXORBITANT COST OF THE BULBS THEMSELVES. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10315409

43,279 miles · Mar 1, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT EXPERIENCED A SUDDEN ACCELERATION WHILE DRIVING 18 MPH. THE FAILURE OCCURRED WHEN THE CONTACT A STOP LIGHT. AS THE CONTACTS FOOT RELEASED THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL, THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO ACCELERATING. AFTER THREE ATTEMPTS THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO APPLY ENOUGH PRESSURE TO THE BRA…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT EXPERIENCED A SUDDEN ACCELERATION WHILE DRIVING 18 MPH. THE FAILURE OCCURRED WHEN THE CONTACT A STOP LIGHT. AS THE CONTACTS FOOT RELEASED THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL, THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO ACCELERATING. AFTER THREE ATTEMPTS THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO APPLY ENOUGH PRESSURE TO THE BRAKE PEDAL TO STOP THE VEHICLE. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 43,279.

NHTSA ODI #10315239

100 miles · Feb 28, 2010
Power TrainVehicle Speed Control

I HAVE A 2007 PRIUS, AND EVERY TIME I GO OVER A BUMP IN THE ROAD, MY CAR ACCELERATES,AND I GET A RUN AWAY FEELING THAT LASTS ABOUT 30-45 SECONDS. IN ADDITION, WHEN I AM AT REST, AND THE MOTOR IS ON AND MY FOOT IN ON THE BRAKE, THE CAR MAKES A NOISE AS IF THE HORN IS LOWLY HONKING. I HAVE DESCRIBED BOTH OF THESE THINGS TO MY DEAL…

Read full complaint

I HAVE A 2007 PRIUS, AND EVERY TIME I GO OVER A BUMP IN THE ROAD, MY CAR ACCELERATES,AND I GET A RUN AWAY FEELING THAT LASTS ABOUT 30-45 SECONDS. IN ADDITION, WHEN I AM AT REST, AND THE MOTOR IS ON AND MY FOOT IN ON THE BRAKE, THE CAR MAKES A NOISE AS IF THE HORN IS LOWLY HONKING. I HAVE DESCRIBED BOTH OF THESE THINGS TO MY DEALERSHIP, AND THEY TOLD ME THAT THEY NEVER HEARD OF THIS PROBLEM BEFORE. THEY SAID THAT THEY CHECKED IT OUT. IT STILL REMAINS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10314982

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.