NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
2,003 reports45,000 miles · Feb 22, 2010
Service Brakes, Electric
WHEN I DRIVE MY 2007 PRIUS TO WORK, I PASS BY 101 SOUTH TO 110 SOUTH FREEWAY. AT THAT CURVE, THERE IS A LITTLE BUMP, WHEN I DRIVE ABOUT 30 MPH AT THAT BUMPY SPOT, I EXPERIENCED FOUR TIMES LOST MY BREAKING SYSTEM FOR A SECOND OR TWO. (WHENEVER I LOOSE BRAKING SYSTEM BRAKE LIGHT COME ON FOR A SECOND OR TWO) ONE TINE I HAD NEARLY M…
Read full complaint
WHEN I DRIVE MY 2007 PRIUS TO WORK, I PASS BY 101 SOUTH TO 110 SOUTH FREEWAY. AT THAT CURVE, THERE IS A LITTLE BUMP, WHEN I DRIVE ABOUT 30 MPH AT THAT BUMPY SPOT, I EXPERIENCED FOUR TIMES LOST MY BREAKING SYSTEM FOR A SECOND OR TWO. (WHENEVER I LOOSE BRAKING SYSTEM BRAKE LIGHT COME ON FOR A SECOND OR TWO) ONE TINE I HAD NEARLY MISS THE CAR IN FRONT. WHENEVER I DRIVE THAT SPOT I AM SLOWING DOWN TO 20 MPH. 2007 PRIUS DEFINITELY HAS BRAKING PROBLEMS. I AM AFRAID TO DRIVE MY PRIUS. I NEED HELP. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10312811
60,000 miles · Feb 22, 2010
Exterior Lighting
WHILE DRIVING MY 2007 PRIUS TO SONOMA FOR THE WEEKEND BOTH OF MY HEADLIGHTS FAILED TO WORK SIMULTANEOUSLY!! THIS LEFT ME DRIVING IN COMPLETE DARKNESS AT 60MPH AND MY 5 YEAR OLD IN THE BACK SEAT! IT WAS TERRIFYING FOR THAT SECOND IN WHICH I HAD NO LIGHT SOURCE WHATSOEVER. NO STREETLIGHTS, NO HEADLIGHTS, NOT EVEN ANY MOONLIGHT!…
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING MY 2007 PRIUS TO SONOMA FOR THE WEEKEND BOTH OF MY HEADLIGHTS FAILED TO WORK SIMULTANEOUSLY!! THIS LEFT ME DRIVING IN COMPLETE DARKNESS AT 60MPH AND MY 5 YEAR OLD IN THE BACK SEAT! IT WAS TERRIFYING FOR THAT SECOND IN WHICH I HAD NO LIGHT SOURCE WHATSOEVER. NO STREETLIGHTS, NO HEADLIGHTS, NOT EVEN ANY MOONLIGHT! THIS COULD HAVE CAUSED A SERIOUS CRASH AS I WAS ON UNFAMILIAR ROADS AND I HAD TO TURN MY LIGHTS ALL THE WAY OFF AND THEN ON AGAIN TO GET ANY SOURCE OF LIGHT! I HOPE SOMEONE AT THIS AGENCY IS PLANNING ON DOING SOMETHING ABOUT THIS BEFORE SOMEONE GETS KILLED! I KNOW I'M NOT THE ONLY ONE WITH THIS PROBLEM OUT THERE! *TR
NHTSA ODI #10312798
52,000 miles · Feb 22, 2010
Exterior Lighting
I HAVE A 2007 PRIUS. THE LAST 3 MONTHS MY HEADLIGHTS HAVE INTERMITTENTLY FLICKERED, AND GONE OUT. I REC'D A LETTER FROM TOYOTA STATING THAT THIS WAS A COMMON PROBLEM WITH 2006-2009 PRIUS'. REPLACING THEM WILL COST $300 +, I HAVE RESEARCHED THIS PROBLEM ON THIS WEBSITE, AND THE PROBLEM IS CONSISTENT! IF THIS IS A TOYOTA DEFECT, W…
Read full complaint
I HAVE A 2007 PRIUS. THE LAST 3 MONTHS MY HEADLIGHTS HAVE INTERMITTENTLY FLICKERED, AND GONE OUT. I REC'D A LETTER FROM TOYOTA STATING THAT THIS WAS A COMMON PROBLEM WITH 2006-2009 PRIUS'. REPLACING THEM WILL COST $300 +, I HAVE RESEARCHED THIS PROBLEM ON THIS WEBSITE, AND THE PROBLEM IS CONSISTENT! IF THIS IS A TOYOTA DEFECT, WHY ARE WE PAYING FOR THESE BULBS? THIS IS A SAFETY ISSUE! *TR
NHTSA ODI #10312793
59,685 miles · Feb 22, 2010
Exterior Lighting
I OWN A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS SPORT EDITION. ONE EVENING ON MY WAY HOME I GOT PULLED OVER FOR HAVING A HEADLIGHT OUT. THAT EVENING AFTER GOING HOME, I GOT IN MY CAR TO HEAD BACK OUT AND MY WIFE FOLLOWED ME INTO THE GARAGE AND NOTICED AS I WAS PULLING OUT THAT MY HEADLIGHTS WERE BOTH ON. THAT IS WHAT ALERTED ME TO THE PROBLEM WHICH I…
Read full complaint
I OWN A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS SPORT EDITION. ONE EVENING ON MY WAY HOME I GOT PULLED OVER FOR HAVING A HEADLIGHT OUT. THAT EVENING AFTER GOING HOME, I GOT IN MY CAR TO HEAD BACK OUT AND MY WIFE FOLLOWED ME INTO THE GARAGE AND NOTICED AS I WAS PULLING OUT THAT MY HEADLIGHTS WERE BOTH ON. THAT IS WHAT ALERTED ME TO THE PROBLEM WHICH IS THAT MY HEADLIGHTS GO OFF RANDOMLY. SOMETIMES IT IS THE PASSENGER SIDE HEADLIGHT, SOMETIMES THE DRIVER'S SIDE. WHEN ONE GOES OUT I CAN USUALLY GET IT TO COME BACK ON BY TURNING MY LIGHTS OFF AND THEN BACK ON. THE WORST CASE OF THIS IS THAT ONE EVENING AFTER LEAVING MY IN-LAWS HOUSE I HAD TO TURN ON MY BRIGHT LIGHTS BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE STREETLIGHTS IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD. AS SOON AS I TURNED ON MY BRIGHTS, BOTH LIGHTS WENT OUT COMPLETELY. IT WAS INSTANTLY DARK AND I HAD TO SLAM ON BREAKS. IT TOOK ME A SECOND TO REALIZE WHAT WAS GOING ON. I TURNED MY LIGHTS OFF AND BACK ON AND THEY WORKED LONG ENOUGH FOR ME TO GET HOME. IT IS NOT UNUSUAL FOR ONE OF MY LIGHTS TO GO OUT ON A DAILY BASIS. I BEGAN RESEARCHING THIS AND FOUND NUMEROUS OTHER COMPLAINTS JUST LIKE MINE FROM OTHER PRIUS OWNERS (HTTP://TINYURL.COM/YECDLAE) I TOOK MY CAR TO THE TOYOTA DEALER AND THE GUY THERE BASICALLY TOLD ME ASIDE THAT I COULD GET THE BULB REPLACED BUT JUST BETWEEN US THAT WASN'T GOING TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM. HE SAID MY BEST BET WAS TO FILE A COMPLAINT AND HOPE FOR A RECALL. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10312748
36,000 miles · Feb 22, 2010
Service Brakes, ElectricTraction Control SystemVehicle Speed Control
THIS HAS HAPPENED DOZENS OF TIMES, TO MYSELF AND MY WIFE. WE ARE BRAKING, AND WHILST BRAKING DRIVE OVER A POTHOLE OR DRAIN. THE TRACTION CONTROL COMES ON, AND THE CAR DISENGAGES THE BRAKES AND THE CAR LURCHES FORWARD. AFTER CLEARING THE POTHOLE, THE TRACTION CONTROL THEN DISENGAGES, AND THE BRAKES RE-ENGAGE. SEVERAL TIMES, I …
Read full complaint
THIS HAS HAPPENED DOZENS OF TIMES, TO MYSELF AND MY WIFE. WE ARE BRAKING, AND WHILST BRAKING DRIVE OVER A POTHOLE OR DRAIN. THE TRACTION CONTROL COMES ON, AND THE CAR DISENGAGES THE BRAKES AND THE CAR LURCHES FORWARD. AFTER CLEARING THE POTHOLE, THE TRACTION CONTROL THEN DISENGAGES, AND THE BRAKES RE-ENGAGE. SEVERAL TIMES, I HAVE COME CLOSE TO HITTING THE CAR IN FRONT. CONDITIONS: CLEAR, SUNNY, DRY ROADS. CAR: TOYOTA PRIUS, YEAR 2007. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10312607
88,636 miles · Feb 21, 2010
Service Brakes, HydraulicVehicle Speed Control
ABS, VSC, BRAKE FAILURE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10312448
30,000 miles · Feb 20, 2010
Exterior Lighting
MY 2007 PRIUS HID HEADLIGHT GOES OUT RANDOMLY. THIS PROBLEM WAS FIRST OBSERVED ON PASSENGER SIDE HEADLIGHT AT APPROXIMATELY 30,000 MILES AND NOW FAILING ON DRIVER SIDE AS WELL. THE VEHICLE IS NOW AT 54,000 MILES. I TURN THE SWITCH OFF THEN ON AGAIN; IT WOULD WORK FOR AWHILE BUT WOULD GO OUT AGAIN. THIS OCCURS EVERY TIME I US…
Read full complaint
MY 2007 PRIUS HID HEADLIGHT GOES OUT RANDOMLY. THIS PROBLEM WAS FIRST OBSERVED ON PASSENGER SIDE HEADLIGHT AT APPROXIMATELY 30,000 MILES AND NOW FAILING ON DRIVER SIDE AS WELL. THE VEHICLE IS NOW AT 54,000 MILES. I TURN THE SWITCH OFF THEN ON AGAIN; IT WOULD WORK FOR AWHILE BUT WOULD GO OUT AGAIN. THIS OCCURS EVERY TIME I USE THE HEADLIGHTS AND THE FAILURE FREQUENCY IS INCREASING. THESE EXPANSIVE HID HEADLIGHTS ARE NOT RELIABLE AND PUT OCCUPANTS AT EXTREME RISK WHILE DRIVING ON DARK ROADWAYS. THIS IS A SERIOUS SAFETY PROBLEM. I CANNOT AFFORD TO SPEND OVER $600 TO REPLACE THE HEADLIGHTS THAT WILL FAIL AGAIN SHORTLY. STANDARD, INEXPENSIVE HALOGEN HEADLIGHTS ARE MORE RELIABLE AND HAVE LONGER LIFE. THESE HID HEADLIGHTS ARE DEFECTIVE AND NEED TO BE RECALLED BY TOYOTA AND REPLACED WITH DEPENDABLE HID HEADLIGHTS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10312338
14,000 miles · Feb 18, 2010
Service Brakes, HydraulicVehicle Speed ControlCrash
1. SAFETY ' WHILE DRIVING ON A BUMPY ROAD IN DARIEN (WEST AVENUE NEAR THE TRAIN STATION) LAST YEAR THE PRIUS BRAKES DID NOT STOP THE CAR. ALTHOUGH THE SPEED WAS LOW (ABOUT 5MPH), THE RESULTANT ACCIDENT DAMAGED ITS FRONT END AND THE CAR IN FRONT OF US. 2. DRIVABILITY AND SAFETY ' THE CRUISE CONTROL HOLDS THE MINIMUM SPEED BUT AL…
Read full complaint
1. SAFETY ' WHILE DRIVING ON A BUMPY ROAD IN DARIEN (WEST AVENUE NEAR THE TRAIN STATION) LAST YEAR THE PRIUS BRAKES DID NOT STOP THE CAR. ALTHOUGH THE SPEED WAS LOW (ABOUT 5MPH), THE RESULTANT ACCIDENT DAMAGED ITS FRONT END AND THE CAR IN FRONT OF US. 2. DRIVABILITY AND SAFETY ' THE CRUISE CONTROL HOLDS THE MINIMUM SPEED BUT ALLOWS OVER SPEED CONDITIONS. WHILE RETURNING FROM DANBURY ON ROUTE 7 THE CRUISE CONTROL HOLDS 40MPH UNTIL GOING DOWNHILL. ON DOWNHILL SLOPES THE SPEED INCREASES AND INTERVENTION IS REQUIRED TO TURN OFF THE CRUISE CONTROL AND APPLY THE BRAKES. 3. DRIVABILITY ' DURING COLD WEATHER THE MAIN BATTERY ACCEPTS A CHARGE BUT DOES NOT RETURN MUCH ENERGY TO THE DRIVE SYSTEM. THE MILEAGE DECREASES BY 10-15MPG. TOYOTA OF STAMFORD REFUSED TO DO A FREE SAFETY INSPECTION. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10311704
60,000 miles · Feb 18, 2010
Exterior Lighting
2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE HID LIGHTS JUST TURN OFF FOR NO REASON. IT IS RANDOM. IT IS A GREAT DANGER WHEN IT IS DARK AND THE LIGHTS JUST GO OFF. WE ARE IN A RURAL AREA SO THERE ARE NO LIGHTS NEAR THE ROAD WHEN IT HAPPENS. AT THIS POINT IF I TURN THE LIGHTS OFF AND BACK ON THEY COME BACK. THIS HAS BEEN AN INTERMITTENT PROBLEM FOR A …
Read full complaint
2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE HID LIGHTS JUST TURN OFF FOR NO REASON. IT IS RANDOM. IT IS A GREAT DANGER WHEN IT IS DARK AND THE LIGHTS JUST GO OFF. WE ARE IN A RURAL AREA SO THERE ARE NO LIGHTS NEAR THE ROAD WHEN IT HAPPENS. AT THIS POINT IF I TURN THE LIGHTS OFF AND BACK ON THEY COME BACK. THIS HAS BEEN AN INTERMITTENT PROBLEM FOR A FEW MONTHS. THE BIGGER ISSUE IS THAT THE DEALER DOES NOT KNOW WHAT CAUSES THIS AND WANTS TO SPEND OVER $1000.00 IN TRIAL FIXES.*TR
NHTSA ODI #10311681
40,000 miles · Feb 17, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
ACCELERATING FROM A STOP LIGHT, AT ABOUT 30 MPH THE PRIUS ENGINE FELT AND SOUNDED LIKE IT BEGAN TO ACCELERATE AT MAXIMUM RATE. BRAKING HAD NO EFFECT ON SLOWING THE VEHICLE RESULTING IN RUNNING THROUGH A MAJOR INTERSECTION AT A RED LIGHT. THE CAR WAS STOPPED BY SHIFTING INTO NEUTRAL, COASTING TO A STOP, AND PUSHING THE POWER BU…
Read full complaint
ACCELERATING FROM A STOP LIGHT, AT ABOUT 30 MPH THE PRIUS ENGINE FELT AND SOUNDED LIKE IT BEGAN TO ACCELERATE AT MAXIMUM RATE. BRAKING HAD NO EFFECT ON SLOWING THE VEHICLE RESULTING IN RUNNING THROUGH A MAJOR INTERSECTION AT A RED LIGHT. THE CAR WAS STOPPED BY SHIFTING INTO NEUTRAL, COASTING TO A STOP, AND PUSHING THE POWER BUTTON. AFTER WAITING 2 MINUTES, THE CAR WAS RESTARTED AND RAN WITH A PROBLEM. THIS OCCURRED ONCE IN SEPTEMBER 2009. TOYOTA'S REMEDY IS TO REPLACE THE FLOOR MATS, HOWEVER, THE FLOOR MAT WAS SECURED TO THE CARPET AND WAS VERIFIED AT THE TIME OF THE INCIDENT THAT IT WAS FAR FROM INTERFERING WITH THE GAS PEDAL. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10311574
Official recalls
4Nov 14, 2012
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Hybrid Propulsion System: Inverter
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.
Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Engine And Engine Cooling
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.
Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Nov 14, 2012
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Steering:gear Box:shaft Sector
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.
Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Steering
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.
Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Feb 3, 2010
SOUTHEAST TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2005-2011 PASSENGER VEHICLES FOR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 110, "TIRE SELECTION AND RIMS." THESE VEHICLES WERE SOLD WITHOUT THE REQUISITE LOAD CARRYING CAPACITY MODIFICATION LABELS.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A DRIVER MAY OVERLOAD A VEHICLE WHICH MAY INCREASE THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL MAIL TO CONSUMERS THE CORRECTED LABEL OR THE CUSTOMER WILL HAVE THE OPTION FOR DEALERS TO INSTALL THE LABEL FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON MAY 27, 2010. OWNERS MAY CONTACT SOUTHEAST TOYOTA AT 1-800-301-6859.
Oct 5, 2009
TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2004-2010 PASSENGER VEHICLES. THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL CAN GET STUCK IN THE WIDE OPEN POSITION DUE TO ITS BEING TRAPPED BY AN UNSECURED OR INCOMPATIBLE DRIVER'S FLOOR MAT.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A STUCK OPEN ACCELERATOR PEDAL MAY RESULT IN VERY HIGH VEHICLE SPEEDS AND MAKE IT DIFFICULT TO STOP THE VEHICLE, WHICH COULD CAUSE A CRASH, SERIOUS INJURY OR DEATH.
Remedy: TOYOTA FILED AN AMENDED DEFECT REPORT ON NOVEMBER 25, 2009, STATING THAT DEALERS WILL MODIFY THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL AND, ON CERTAIN VEHICLES, ALTER THE SHAPE OF THE FLOOR SURFACE UNDER THE PEDAL. THESE CHANGES ADDRESS THE RISK OF PEDAL ENTRAPMENT DUE TO INTERFERENCE WITH THE FLOOR MAT. REDESIGNED ACCELERATOR PEDALS WILL BECOME AVAILABLE BEGINNING IN APRIL 2010 AND DEALERS WILL REPLACE ANY MODIFIED PEDAL WITH THE NEW PEDAL IF DESIRED. ALSO, DEALERS WILL REPLACE ANY GENUINE TOYOTA OR LEXUS ALL-WEATHER FLOOR MATS WITH REDESIGNED ALL-WEATHER MATS, OR REPURCHASE THE PREVIOUS MATS FROM OWNERS WHO DO NOT WANT THE NEW ONES. ADDITIONALLY, SOFTWARE MODIFICATIONS WILL BE INSTALLED ON CAMRY, AVALON AND LEXUS ES 350, IS 350 AND IS 250 MODELS THAT WILL ENSURE THAT THE BRAKE OVERRIDES THE ACCELERATOR IN THE EVENT BOTH BRAKE AND ACCELERATOR PEDALS ARE APPLIED. TOYOTA WILL BEGIN MAILING LETTERS TO OWNERS ON DECEMBER 31, 2009. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331, LEXUS AT 1-800-255-3987.
Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗
NHTSA investigations
3DP22005 · Pedestrian Alert Sounds
Opened Jan 27, 2023 · Closed Aug 7, 2023
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Electrical System:propulsion System
NHTSA received a petition on or about July 18, 2022, requesting that Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 141 be applied to all electric and hybrid vehicles operating in the United States. The petition can be reviewed at NHTSA.gov under ODI Number 11486072. FMVSS 141 establishes performance requirements for pedestrian alert sounds for motor vehicles. The standard applies to hybrid and electric vehicles that have a gross vehicle weight rating of 4,536 KG or less or are defined as low-speed vehicles. The standard became fully applicable to all such vehicles manufactured on or after March 1, 2021.On January 27, 2023, NHTSA opened Defect Petition (DP) 22-005 to evaluate the subject matter described in the petition. On June 24, 2023 and as supplemented on June 25, 2023, the petitioner notified NHTSA he was withdrawing his petition. The petitioner indicated that, based on his review of data, there is no justification for asserting potential benefits that could be derived from actions sought by my petition. Based on the petitioner's withdrawal, DP22-005 is closed. Closure of this DP does not represent a determination by NHTSA regarding the subject matter of the petition.
DP13001 · Intermediate Steering Shaft Separation
Opened Feb 21, 2013 · Closed Apr 8, 2020
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Steering; Steering:column; Steering:linkages
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606
Additional source detail variants (3)
Steering:column
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606
Steering:linkages
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606
Steering
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606
PE09019 · Headlight Failure
Opened Apr 17, 2009 · Closed Aug 27, 2009
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Exterior Lighting; Exterior Lighting:headlights
ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION AFTER RECEIVING REPORTS THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS WOULD GO OUT, OR EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH HIGH INTENSITY DISCHARGE (HID) HEADLAMPS THAT OPERATE ON INDEPENDENT LAMPS AND ECU'S (ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNITS) FOR EACH HEADLIGHT, MEANING THAT EACH HEADLIGHT RUNS INDEPENDENTLY OF THE OTHER, AND A FAILURE IN ONE LAMP OR ECU DOES NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN A FAILURE OF THE OTHER.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, A RANDOM SAMPLE OF FORTY CONSUMERS WAS CONTACTED BY ODI IN A TELEPHONE SURVEY TO VERIFY THEIR EXPERIENCES.THE CONSUMERS STATED IN COMPLAINTS TO TOYOTA THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS FAILED AT THE SAME TIME.ODI DISCOVERED THROUGH TALKING WITH THESE COMPLAINANTS THAT IN FACT ONE HEADLIGHT WOULD BEGIN TO FLICKER AND THEN CUT OFF.THE OTHER HEADLIGHT WOULD STILL BE OPERATIONAL.IN A FEW CASES WHERE NO ACTION WAS TAKEN, SOME COMPLAINANTS STATED THAT AFTER A FEW MONTHS BOTH HEADLAMPS WOULD BEGIN TO FAIL RESULTING IN NO HEADLIGHTS; HOWEVER NONE REPORTED THAT BOTH LAMPS FAILED SIMULTANEOUSLY.COMPLAINANTS ALSO STATED THAT THEY COULD TOGGLE THE HEADLAMP SWITCH ON AND OFF TO TEMPORARILY RESTORE LIGHTING WHEN THIS CONDITION OCCURRED, EVEN IN CASES WERE BOTH HEADLAMPS WERE EXTINGUISHED.THE RESULTS OF THIS SURVEY ARE LARGELY CONSISTENT WITH ODI'S ASSESSMENT OF THE REPORTS AND WARRANTY DATA.TOYOTA SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER THAT, GENERALLY SPEAKING, ONLY ONE LAMP FAILED AT A TIME, AND THAT TOGGLING THE SWITCH RESTORED THE LAMP.TOYOTA REQUESTED A MEETING WITH ODI AND ON AUGUST 6, 2009, PRESENTED THEIR ASSESSMENT OF HEADLAMP FAILURE.TOYOTA CONFIRMED THAT A HEADLAMP COULD EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING DUE TO A BULB FAILURE, AND THAT IT COULD BE TEMPORARILY RESTORED BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH ON AND OFF, AND THAT SIMULTANEOUS FAILURE OF BOTH HEADLAMPS WAS RARE AND UNLIKELY.TOYOTA ALSO BRIEFLY DISCUSSED THEIR INTENTION TO CONDUCT A CUSTOMER SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO ADDRESS CONSUMER DISSATISFACTION WITH HID BULB FAILURES.SINCE THERE IS STILL ONE HEADLIGHT OPERATING WHEN THE OTHER ONE CUTS OFF, THERE IS STILL LIGHTING AVAILABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR FACILITY.THUS, A SAFETY DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Exterior Lighting:headlights
ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION AFTER RECEIVING REPORTS THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS WOULD GO OUT, OR EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH HIGH INTENSITY DISCHARGE (HID) HEADLAMPS THAT OPERATE ON INDEPENDENT LAMPS AND ECU'S (ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNITS) FOR EACH HEADLIGHT, MEANING THAT EACH HEADLIGHT RUNS INDEPENDENTLY OF THE OTHER, AND A FAILURE IN ONE LAMP OR ECU DOES NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN A FAILURE OF THE OTHER.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, A RANDOM SAMPLE OF FORTY CONSUMERS WAS CONTACTED BY ODI IN A TELEPHONE SURVEY TO VERIFY THEIR EXPERIENCES.THE CONSUMERS STATED IN COMPLAINTS TO TOYOTA THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS FAILED AT THE SAME TIME.ODI DISCOVERED THROUGH TALKING WITH THESE COMPLAINANTS THAT IN FACT ONE HEADLIGHT WOULD BEGIN TO FLICKER AND THEN CUT OFF.THE OTHER HEADLIGHT WOULD STILL BE OPERATIONAL.IN A FEW CASES WHERE NO ACTION WAS TAKEN, SOME COMPLAINANTS STATED THAT AFTER A FEW MONTHS BOTH HEADLAMPS WOULD BEGIN TO FAIL RESULTING IN NO HEADLIGHTS; HOWEVER NONE REPORTED THAT BOTH LAMPS FAILED SIMULTANEOUSLY.COMPLAINANTS ALSO STATED THAT THEY COULD TOGGLE THE HEADLAMP SWITCH ON AND OFF TO TEMPORARILY RESTORE LIGHTING WHEN THIS CONDITION OCCURRED, EVEN IN CASES WERE BOTH HEADLAMPS WERE EXTINGUISHED.THE RESULTS OF THIS SURVEY ARE LARGELY CONSISTENT WITH ODI'S ASSESSMENT OF THE REPORTS AND WARRANTY DATA.TOYOTA SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER THAT, GENERALLY SPEAKING, ONLY ONE LAMP FAILED AT A TIME, AND THAT TOGGLING THE SWITCH RESTORED THE LAMP.TOYOTA REQUESTED A MEETING WITH ODI AND ON AUGUST 6, 2009, PRESENTED THEIR ASSESSMENT OF HEADLAMP FAILURE.TOYOTA CONFIRMED THAT A HEADLAMP COULD EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING DUE TO A BULB FAILURE, AND THAT IT COULD BE TEMPORARILY RESTORED BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH ON AND OFF, AND THAT SIMULTANEOUS FAILURE OF BOTH HEADLAMPS WAS RARE AND UNLIKELY.TOYOTA ALSO BRIEFLY DISCUSSED THEIR INTENTION TO CONDUCT A CUSTOMER SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO ADDRESS CONSUMER DISSATISFACTION WITH HID BULB FAILURES.SINCE THERE IS STILL ONE HEADLIGHT OPERATING WHEN THE OTHER ONE CUTS OFF, THERE IS STILL LIGHTING AVAILABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR FACILITY.THUS, A SAFETY DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Exterior Lighting
ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION AFTER RECEIVING REPORTS THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS WOULD GO OUT, OR EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH HIGH INTENSITY DISCHARGE (HID) HEADLAMPS THAT OPERATE ON INDEPENDENT LAMPS AND ECU'S (ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNITS) FOR EACH HEADLIGHT, MEANING THAT EACH HEADLIGHT RUNS INDEPENDENTLY OF THE OTHER, AND A FAILURE IN ONE LAMP OR ECU DOES NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN A FAILURE OF THE OTHER.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, A RANDOM SAMPLE OF FORTY CONSUMERS WAS CONTACTED BY ODI IN A TELEPHONE SURVEY TO VERIFY THEIR EXPERIENCES.THE CONSUMERS STATED IN COMPLAINTS TO TOYOTA THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS FAILED AT THE SAME TIME.ODI DISCOVERED THROUGH TALKING WITH THESE COMPLAINANTS THAT IN FACT ONE HEADLIGHT WOULD BEGIN TO FLICKER AND THEN CUT OFF.THE OTHER HEADLIGHT WOULD STILL BE OPERATIONAL.IN A FEW CASES WHERE NO ACTION WAS TAKEN, SOME COMPLAINANTS STATED THAT AFTER A FEW MONTHS BOTH HEADLAMPS WOULD BEGIN TO FAIL RESULTING IN NO HEADLIGHTS; HOWEVER NONE REPORTED THAT BOTH LAMPS FAILED SIMULTANEOUSLY.COMPLAINANTS ALSO STATED THAT THEY COULD TOGGLE THE HEADLAMP SWITCH ON AND OFF TO TEMPORARILY RESTORE LIGHTING WHEN THIS CONDITION OCCURRED, EVEN IN CASES WERE BOTH HEADLAMPS WERE EXTINGUISHED.THE RESULTS OF THIS SURVEY ARE LARGELY CONSISTENT WITH ODI'S ASSESSMENT OF THE REPORTS AND WARRANTY DATA.TOYOTA SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER THAT, GENERALLY SPEAKING, ONLY ONE LAMP FAILED AT A TIME, AND THAT TOGGLING THE SWITCH RESTORED THE LAMP.TOYOTA REQUESTED A MEETING WITH ODI AND ON AUGUST 6, 2009, PRESENTED THEIR ASSESSMENT OF HEADLAMP FAILURE.TOYOTA CONFIRMED THAT A HEADLAMP COULD EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING DUE TO A BULB FAILURE, AND THAT IT COULD BE TEMPORARILY RESTORED BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH ON AND OFF, AND THAT SIMULTANEOUS FAILURE OF BOTH HEADLAMPS WAS RARE AND UNLIKELY.TOYOTA ALSO BRIEFLY DISCUSSED THEIR INTENTION TO CONDUCT A CUSTOMER SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO ADDRESS CONSUMER DISSATISFACTION WITH HID BULB FAILURES.SINCE THERE IS STILL ONE HEADLIGHT OPERATING WHEN THE OTHER ONE CUTS OFF, THERE IS STILL LIGHTING AVAILABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR FACILITY.THUS, A SAFETY DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.