NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
2,003 reports27,600 miles · May 4, 2014
Exterior Lighting
I WAS DRIVING AT 5:00 AM ON 5-3-14 TO THE BEACH AND MY HEADLIGHTS WENT OUT IN COMPLETE DARKNESS. LUCKILY THERE WAS NO OTHER TRAFFIC AROUND AND I WAS SCARED TO PROCEED ON MY TRIP. I TURNED THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH AND THE HEADLIGHTS CAME BACK ON. I PROCEEDED ON MY TRIP WITH CAUTION AND WHEN IT GOT LIGHT I DROVE WITHOUT MY HEADLIGHTS …
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING AT 5:00 AM ON 5-3-14 TO THE BEACH AND MY HEADLIGHTS WENT OUT IN COMPLETE DARKNESS. LUCKILY THERE WAS NO OTHER TRAFFIC AROUND AND I WAS SCARED TO PROCEED ON MY TRIP. I TURNED THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH AND THE HEADLIGHTS CAME BACK ON. I PROCEEDED ON MY TRIP WITH CAUTION AND WHEN IT GOT LIGHT I DROVE WITHOUT MY HEADLIGHTS AND SAFELY GOT TO THE BEACH. THIS INCIDENT COULD HAVE RESULTED IN A BAD CAR ACCIDENT AND DEATH SINCE I WAS IN COMPLETE DARKNESS. WHAT SHOULD I DO ? *TR
NHTSA ODI #10586406
110,000 miles · May 2, 2014
EngineService BrakesSteering
I HAD MY CAR IN FOR 110,000 MILE SERVICE ON APRIL 25. THEY CHANGED THE OIL, ROTATED THE TIRES, INSTALLED A NEW AIR FILTER AND SAID THAT I NEEDED NEW FRONT BRAKES AND THEY CLEANED AND ADJUSTED THE BACK BRAKES. YESTERDAY AFTER BACKING OUT OF THE GARAGE THE BRAKE LIGHT WARNING LIGHT ALONG WITH THE ABS AND VSC LIGHT CAME ON BRIEFL…
Read full complaint
I HAD MY CAR IN FOR 110,000 MILE SERVICE ON APRIL 25. THEY CHANGED THE OIL, ROTATED THE TIRES, INSTALLED A NEW AIR FILTER AND SAID THAT I NEEDED NEW FRONT BRAKES AND THEY CLEANED AND ADJUSTED THE BACK BRAKES. YESTERDAY AFTER BACKING OUT OF THE GARAGE THE BRAKE LIGHT WARNING LIGHT ALONG WITH THE ABS AND VSC LIGHT CAME ON BRIEFLY. ON INTERSTATE 90 NEARING DOWNTOWN CLEVELAND ALL OF THESE LIGHTS CAME ON AGAIN ALONG WITH A NOISE. I CALLED THE TOYOTA DEALER AND TALKED TO THE SERVICE ADVISOR AND ASKED IF IT WAS SAFE TO GO TO CLEVELAND AND BACK AND HE SAID IF THE BRAKES WORK, IT PROBABLY JUST A SWITCH AND IT WOULD BE OK TO BRING IT IN TOMORROW. WHILE I STILL HAD HIM ON THE PHONE, WE LOST ALL POWER TO THE VEHICLE AND IT DECELERATED DOWN TO 30 BEFORE WE WERE ABLE TO REACH AN EXIT RAMP AND STOP THE CAR IN THE GRASS. I WAS INFORMED TODAY THAT THE PROBLEM IS A LOW VOLT BATTERY THAT NEEDS TO BE REPLACED FOR $299. AT NO TIME DID A LOW BATTERY LIGHT COME ON AND I HAVE NOT HAD TROUBLE STARTING THE CAR NOR DO I HAVE DIM LIGHTS. WE WERE FORTUNATE THAT WE WERE NOT KILLED ON INTERSTATE 90 WITHOUT POWER, STEERING OR BRAKES. I THINK THIS IS DEFINITELY A SAFETY ISSUE THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10586183
127,800 miles · May 1, 2014
Power Train
LAST WEEK MY WIFE WAS DRIVING WHEN OUR CAR LOST POWER, BEGAN MAKING UNUSUAL NOISES, AND MULTIPLE WARNING LIGHTS BECAME ILLUMINATED ON THE DASH. SHE STOPPED THE CAR, TURNED OFF THE POWER, AND RESTARTED THE ENGINE; AGAIN THE WARNING LIGHTS REMAINED LIT. WE IMMEDIATELY TOOK THE CAR TO OUR LOCAL DEALER AND LEFT IT OVERNIGHT. THE NE…
Read full complaint
LAST WEEK MY WIFE WAS DRIVING WHEN OUR CAR LOST POWER, BEGAN MAKING UNUSUAL NOISES, AND MULTIPLE WARNING LIGHTS BECAME ILLUMINATED ON THE DASH. SHE STOPPED THE CAR, TURNED OFF THE POWER, AND RESTARTED THE ENGINE; AGAIN THE WARNING LIGHTS REMAINED LIT. WE IMMEDIATELY TOOK THE CAR TO OUR LOCAL DEALER AND LEFT IT OVERNIGHT. THE NEXT DAY THEY INFORMED ME THE TRANSMISSION HAD FAILED AND CHARGED ME $5400 TO REPAIR IT. THE DAY FOLLOWING THE REPAIR THE "CHECK ENGINE" WARNING LIGHT CAME ON AGAIN WHILE DRIVING AND REMAINED LIT. WE IMMEDIATELY RETURNED TO THE DEALER. AFTER EXAMINING THE VEHICLE THE DEALER TOLD US THAT THE WATER RESERVOIR FLOAT HAD BECOME STUCK. HE ALSO STATED THAT THIS WAS A COMMON PROBLEM FOR HYBRIDS WHICH HAVE UNDERGONE MAJOR ENGINE REPAIR. TODAY THEY FURTHER ADVISED THAT WE CONTINUE TO DRIVE THE VEHICLE WITHOUT FURTHER REPAIRS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10586065
69,434 miles · Apr 28, 2014
Electrical System
WITHOUT WARNING, AFTER STOPPING AND TURNING OFF THE ENGINE, MY PRIUS ENGINE WOULDN'T START AND ALL OF THE WARNING LIGHTS WENT ON WHEN I TRIED TO TURN THE ENGINE OVER.. THANKFULLY, I WAS NOT IN AN INTERSECTION OR ON A ROAD WHEN THIS OCCURRED. THE TOYOTA DEALER I HAD THE CAR TOWED TO, TOLD ME I HAD A POAA6 CODE AND NEED TO REPLA…
Read full complaint
WITHOUT WARNING, AFTER STOPPING AND TURNING OFF THE ENGINE, MY PRIUS ENGINE WOULDN'T START AND ALL OF THE WARNING LIGHTS WENT ON WHEN I TRIED TO TURN THE ENGINE OVER.. THANKFULLY, I WAS NOT IN AN INTERSECTION OR ON A ROAD WHEN THIS OCCURRED. THE TOYOTA DEALER I HAD THE CAR TOWED TO, TOLD ME I HAD A POAA6 CODE AND NEED TO REPLACE A TRANSAXLE ASSEMBLY. (REPAIR COSTS ARE OVER $4000.00) AFTER A LITTLE BIT OF RESEARCH, IT APPEARS THAT A LOT OF 2007 PRIUS OWNERS ARE EXPERIENCING THE SAME PRODUCT FAILURE. I JUST FOUND OUT THAT TOYOTA HAS A SERVICE BULLETIN ABOUT THE PROBLEM BUT DOES NOT COVER THE FAILURE AFTER 60,000 MILES, EXCEPT IN A FEW STATES, SUCH AS CALIFORNIA, WHICH MADE TOYOTA EXTEND WARRANTY TO 150,000 MILES. . NO TOYOTA MECHANIC EVER ADVISED ME ABOUT THIS PROBLEM. HAD I KNOWN IT'S POTENTIAL, I WOULD HAVE PURCHASED AN EXTENDED WARRANTY. TSB NUMBER: SB-0306-08 REV 2NHTSA NUMBER: 10037588TSB DATE: MARCH 23, 2011DATE ADDED TO FILE: MAY 26, 2011 FAILING COMPONENT: ELECTRICAL SYSTEM:BATTERY SUMMARY: TOYOTA: MALFUNCTION LIGHT IS ON WITH TWO INTERNAL TROUBLE CODES. IT IS A PROBLEM WITH THE TRANSAXLE ASSEMBLY. 2004-2008 PRIUS. *JS
NHTSA ODI #10585240
110,000 miles · Apr 27, 2014
Electrical SystemStructure
THE BACK DOOR LATCH OF MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS HAS DEGRADED ("MELTED" ALMOST). IT NO LONGER FUNCTIONS PROPERLY, AND I AM UNABLE TO OPEN THE BACK HATCH DOOR. SOMETIMES IT REQUIRED CONSIDERABLE EFFORT AND PERSEVERANCE TO GET IT OPEN. I CANNOT OPEN IT ANYMORE AS THE LATCH BROKE. I AM CONCERNED THAT IN THE CASE OF AN EMERGENCY, I WILL …
Read full complaint
THE BACK DOOR LATCH OF MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS HAS DEGRADED ("MELTED" ALMOST). IT NO LONGER FUNCTIONS PROPERLY, AND I AM UNABLE TO OPEN THE BACK HATCH DOOR. SOMETIMES IT REQUIRED CONSIDERABLE EFFORT AND PERSEVERANCE TO GET IT OPEN. I CANNOT OPEN IT ANYMORE AS THE LATCH BROKE. I AM CONCERNED THAT IN THE CASE OF AN EMERGENCY, I WILL NOT BE ABLE TO GET THE DOOR OPEN. THIS IS A MAJOR CAUSE FOR CONCERN AND IT IS A SERIOUS SAFETY HAZARD. BLUE 2007 PRIUS IN CUPERTINO, CA. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10585114
145,000 miles · Apr 23, 2014
Electronic Stability Control (esc)Service BrakesVehicle Speed Control
WHILE DRIVING ON HIGHWAY ABOUT 60MPH, VEHICLE SUDDENLY LOST BRAKES. BRAKE, ABS AND VSC IDIOT LIGHT WENT ON. INSIDE VEHICLE BUZZER SOUNDED. VERY LITTLE HYDRAULIC BRAKING. WAS ONLY ABLE TO STOP VEHICLE BECAUSE I WAS GOING UP HILL. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10584528
81,000 miles · Apr 23, 2014
Exterior Lighting
DRIVING ALONG INTERSTATE 70 AT NIGHT, HEADLIGHT INTENSITY SUDDENLY DROPPED. STOPPED IN A SAFE PLACE ON THE NEXT EXIT RAMP AND DETERMINED THAT BOTH HIGH BEAM AND LOW BEAM OF THE LEFT HEADLIGHT HAD GONE OUT. RESUMED THE REST OF THE TRIP AT A SAFER SPEED. NEXT MORNING, TESTED THE HEADLIGHTS AND THEY ALL WORKED OK, BUT LATER IN T…
Read full complaint
DRIVING ALONG INTERSTATE 70 AT NIGHT, HEADLIGHT INTENSITY SUDDENLY DROPPED. STOPPED IN A SAFE PLACE ON THE NEXT EXIT RAMP AND DETERMINED THAT BOTH HIGH BEAM AND LOW BEAM OF THE LEFT HEADLIGHT HAD GONE OUT. RESUMED THE REST OF THE TRIP AT A SAFER SPEED. NEXT MORNING, TESTED THE HEADLIGHTS AND THEY ALL WORKED OK, BUT LATER IN THE WEEK THE SAME THING HAPPENED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10584360
62,257 miles · Apr 18, 2014
Service Brakes
I WAS DRIVING WITHIN THE SPEED LIMIT ON I-40 EAST TOWARD KNOXVILLE ON A FRIDAY EVENING. SUDDENLY ALL THE WARNING LIGHTS CAME ON AND BUZZERS WENT OFF. I PULLED OVER TO THE RIGHT LANE TO PREPARE TO PULL OVER TO THE SHOULDER OR TAKE THE NEAREST EXIT. TRAFFIC WAS VERY HEAVY WITH LOTS OF TRUCKS. I SAW AN EXIT ABOUT A MILE AHEAD AND …
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING WITHIN THE SPEED LIMIT ON I-40 EAST TOWARD KNOXVILLE ON A FRIDAY EVENING. SUDDENLY ALL THE WARNING LIGHTS CAME ON AND BUZZERS WENT OFF. I PULLED OVER TO THE RIGHT LANE TO PREPARE TO PULL OVER TO THE SHOULDER OR TAKE THE NEAREST EXIT. TRAFFIC WAS VERY HEAVY WITH LOTS OF TRUCKS. I SAW AN EXIT ABOUT A MILE AHEAD AND TOOK IT. I FOUND I HAD VERY LIMITED BRAKING ABILITY. I PRESSED ON THE BRAKES AND SLOWED DOWN JUST BARELY ENOUGH TO MAKE THE TURN OFF THE EXIT RAMP ONTO BUTTERMILK RD. WHERE THERE WERE NO SERVICES, AND NO OPEN BUSINESSES. I CALLED FOR A TOW WHICH ARRIVED WELL AFTER DARK. THE CAR WAS TOWED TO THE TOYOTA OF KNOXVILLE DEALERSHIP WHICH WAS CLOSED. ON SATURDAY MORNING I FOUND OUT I NEEDED THE BRAKE ACCUMULATOR REPLACED. THEY TOLD ME THAT THE CAR COULD BE DRIVEN BUT THEY DID NOT RECOMMEND IT BECAUSE THE INCIDENT WOULD HAPPEN AGAIN. I AM FROM MARYLAND AND WAS ABOUT A 10-HOUR DRIVE FROM HOME. I DID NOT WANT TO RISK IT. THE PART WAS NOT AVAILABLE IN THE AREA AND HAD TO BE ORDERED. IT WAS TUESDAY EVENING BEFORE THE CAR WAS FIXED. THIS WAS THE SCARIEST INCIDENT I HAVE EVER HAD WITH ANY CAR. THIS PART HAS BEEN JUST RECALLED IN OTHER MODELS OF PRIUS. WHAT WAS DESCRIBED AS THE REASON FOR THOSE RECALLS IS EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED TO ME. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10583457
41,604 miles · Apr 11, 2014
Air BagsStructureVehicle Speed ControlCrash
PARKING MY PRIUS, MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE PEDAL, I HIT A VERY SMALL PATCH OF BLACK ICE WITH THE RIGHT FRONT WHEEL. THE CAR SLANTED BRIEFLY TO THE LEFT--THEN THERE WAS A SUDDEN SURGE OF ENGINE POWER. THE CAR RUSHED OVER A MOUND OF ICE AND SNOW, JUMPED THE CURB, RUSHED FORWARD BETWEEN A WALL AND A TREE, NARROWLY MISSING IT, AND CRAS…
Read full complaint
PARKING MY PRIUS, MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE PEDAL, I HIT A VERY SMALL PATCH OF BLACK ICE WITH THE RIGHT FRONT WHEEL. THE CAR SLANTED BRIEFLY TO THE LEFT--THEN THERE WAS A SUDDEN SURGE OF ENGINE POWER. THE CAR RUSHED OVER A MOUND OF ICE AND SNOW, JUMPED THE CURB, RUSHED FORWARD BETWEEN A WALL AND A TREE, NARROWLY MISSING IT, AND CRASHED INTO A PARKED TOYOTA TRUCK FACING OUTWARD FROM THE CURB. MY PRIUS HIT THE HEAVY TRUCK WITH ENOUGH FORCE TO KNOCK IT SIX FEET FOR THEIR NORTH AND THREE FEET TO THE WEST. AFTER IMPACT, THE ENGINE CONTINUED TO MAKE A LOT OF NOISE, A SOUND I'VE NEVER HEARD BEFORE IN SEVEN YEARS OF DRIVING THE CAR. IT WAS ATTEMPTING TO SURGE PAST THE TRUCK, WHICH I BELIEVE CAUSED THE MOST DAMAGE TO THE FRONT LEFT BUMPER OF THE CAR. I WAS STUNNED AND DIDN'T THINK TO TURN OFF THE IGNITION BEFORE IT QUIT ON ITS OWN AFTER PERHAPS TEN SECONDS. THE BODY WAS SHEARED BACK, STRIPS OF BLUE PAINT HANGING IN SHREDS. I CRAWLED OUT THE PASSENGER SIDE UNHURT. (THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY.) *JS
NHTSA ODI #10579214
96,000 miles · Apr 5, 2014
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting
I WAS RETURNING HOME FROM A TRIP WITH A FRIEND AND DRIVING ON MAJOR FREEWAY LATE AT NIGHT, VERY DARK WITH LITTLE VISIBILITY IN A RURAL, UNLIT AREA. .ALL LIGHTS IN VEHICLE SHUT DOWN WHILE DRIVING 70-75 MPH. WE COULD NOT SEE ANYTHING EVEN THE ROAD, WAS LIKE DRIVING BLIND AND VERY FRIGHTENING TRYING TO NAVIGATE THE PRIUS OFF THE …
Read full complaint
I WAS RETURNING HOME FROM A TRIP WITH A FRIEND AND DRIVING ON MAJOR FREEWAY LATE AT NIGHT, VERY DARK WITH LITTLE VISIBILITY IN A RURAL, UNLIT AREA. .ALL LIGHTS IN VEHICLE SHUT DOWN WHILE DRIVING 70-75 MPH. WE COULD NOT SEE ANYTHING EVEN THE ROAD, WAS LIKE DRIVING BLIND AND VERY FRIGHTENING TRYING TO NAVIGATE THE PRIUS OFF THE ROAD SAFELY WITHOUT GETTING HIT BY OTHER VEHICLES. ONCE I STOPPED THE VEHICLE OFF THE SIDE OF THE ROAD IN THE FAR LEFT LANE WE TURNED THE VEHICLE OFF, BUT LEFT THE HAZARD LIGHTS ON AND LET THE VEHICLE SIT FOR A FEW MINUTES. WE STARTED AGAIN, LIGHTS CAME ON, AND I DROVE THE VEHICLE ANOTHER 100 MILES WITHOUT ANY INCIDENT UNTIL WE ENTERED THE CITY. I HAD A SIMILAR PROBLEM DRIVING THE 12 REMAINING MILES HOME, BUT THE FRONT YELLOW LIGHTS WORKED AND I HAD THE HAZARD AND BRAKE LIGHTS WORKING. THE CITY LIGHTS IMPROVED VISIBILITY. I TOOK THE VEHICLE IN AND THE ONLY PROBLEM THEY COULD FIND WAS WITH ONE OF THE HEADLIGHTS. I WAS TOLD I NEEDED TO REPLACE BOTH. I CAN'T EMPHASIZE HOW DANGEROUS AND FRIGHTENING THIS EXPERIENCE WAS FOR MY FRIEND AND I, STILL UNSURE HOW WE AVOIDED A TRAGEDY. I WOULD LIKE THE NHTSA TO INVESTIGATE AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO HAVE SOME TYPE OF WARNING IN THE VEHICLE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10577709
Official recalls
4Nov 14, 2012
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Hybrid Propulsion System: Inverter
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.
Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Engine And Engine Cooling
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.
Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Nov 14, 2012
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Steering:gear Box:shaft Sector
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.
Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Steering
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.
Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Feb 3, 2010
SOUTHEAST TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2005-2011 PASSENGER VEHICLES FOR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 110, "TIRE SELECTION AND RIMS." THESE VEHICLES WERE SOLD WITHOUT THE REQUISITE LOAD CARRYING CAPACITY MODIFICATION LABELS.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A DRIVER MAY OVERLOAD A VEHICLE WHICH MAY INCREASE THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL MAIL TO CONSUMERS THE CORRECTED LABEL OR THE CUSTOMER WILL HAVE THE OPTION FOR DEALERS TO INSTALL THE LABEL FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON MAY 27, 2010. OWNERS MAY CONTACT SOUTHEAST TOYOTA AT 1-800-301-6859.
Oct 5, 2009
TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2004-2010 PASSENGER VEHICLES. THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL CAN GET STUCK IN THE WIDE OPEN POSITION DUE TO ITS BEING TRAPPED BY AN UNSECURED OR INCOMPATIBLE DRIVER'S FLOOR MAT.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A STUCK OPEN ACCELERATOR PEDAL MAY RESULT IN VERY HIGH VEHICLE SPEEDS AND MAKE IT DIFFICULT TO STOP THE VEHICLE, WHICH COULD CAUSE A CRASH, SERIOUS INJURY OR DEATH.
Remedy: TOYOTA FILED AN AMENDED DEFECT REPORT ON NOVEMBER 25, 2009, STATING THAT DEALERS WILL MODIFY THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL AND, ON CERTAIN VEHICLES, ALTER THE SHAPE OF THE FLOOR SURFACE UNDER THE PEDAL. THESE CHANGES ADDRESS THE RISK OF PEDAL ENTRAPMENT DUE TO INTERFERENCE WITH THE FLOOR MAT. REDESIGNED ACCELERATOR PEDALS WILL BECOME AVAILABLE BEGINNING IN APRIL 2010 AND DEALERS WILL REPLACE ANY MODIFIED PEDAL WITH THE NEW PEDAL IF DESIRED. ALSO, DEALERS WILL REPLACE ANY GENUINE TOYOTA OR LEXUS ALL-WEATHER FLOOR MATS WITH REDESIGNED ALL-WEATHER MATS, OR REPURCHASE THE PREVIOUS MATS FROM OWNERS WHO DO NOT WANT THE NEW ONES. ADDITIONALLY, SOFTWARE MODIFICATIONS WILL BE INSTALLED ON CAMRY, AVALON AND LEXUS ES 350, IS 350 AND IS 250 MODELS THAT WILL ENSURE THAT THE BRAKE OVERRIDES THE ACCELERATOR IN THE EVENT BOTH BRAKE AND ACCELERATOR PEDALS ARE APPLIED. TOYOTA WILL BEGIN MAILING LETTERS TO OWNERS ON DECEMBER 31, 2009. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331, LEXUS AT 1-800-255-3987.
Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗
NHTSA investigations
3DP22005 · Pedestrian Alert Sounds
Opened Jan 27, 2023 · Closed Aug 7, 2023
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Electrical System:propulsion System
NHTSA received a petition on or about July 18, 2022, requesting that Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 141 be applied to all electric and hybrid vehicles operating in the United States. The petition can be reviewed at NHTSA.gov under ODI Number 11486072. FMVSS 141 establishes performance requirements for pedestrian alert sounds for motor vehicles. The standard applies to hybrid and electric vehicles that have a gross vehicle weight rating of 4,536 KG or less or are defined as low-speed vehicles. The standard became fully applicable to all such vehicles manufactured on or after March 1, 2021.On January 27, 2023, NHTSA opened Defect Petition (DP) 22-005 to evaluate the subject matter described in the petition. On June 24, 2023 and as supplemented on June 25, 2023, the petitioner notified NHTSA he was withdrawing his petition. The petitioner indicated that, based on his review of data, there is no justification for asserting potential benefits that could be derived from actions sought by my petition. Based on the petitioner's withdrawal, DP22-005 is closed. Closure of this DP does not represent a determination by NHTSA regarding the subject matter of the petition.
DP13001 · Intermediate Steering Shaft Separation
Opened Feb 21, 2013 · Closed Apr 8, 2020
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Steering; Steering:column; Steering:linkages
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606
Additional source detail variants (3)
Steering:column
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606
Steering:linkages
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606
Steering
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606
PE09019 · Headlight Failure
Opened Apr 17, 2009 · Closed Aug 27, 2009
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Exterior Lighting; Exterior Lighting:headlights
ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION AFTER RECEIVING REPORTS THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS WOULD GO OUT, OR EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH HIGH INTENSITY DISCHARGE (HID) HEADLAMPS THAT OPERATE ON INDEPENDENT LAMPS AND ECU'S (ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNITS) FOR EACH HEADLIGHT, MEANING THAT EACH HEADLIGHT RUNS INDEPENDENTLY OF THE OTHER, AND A FAILURE IN ONE LAMP OR ECU DOES NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN A FAILURE OF THE OTHER.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, A RANDOM SAMPLE OF FORTY CONSUMERS WAS CONTACTED BY ODI IN A TELEPHONE SURVEY TO VERIFY THEIR EXPERIENCES.THE CONSUMERS STATED IN COMPLAINTS TO TOYOTA THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS FAILED AT THE SAME TIME.ODI DISCOVERED THROUGH TALKING WITH THESE COMPLAINANTS THAT IN FACT ONE HEADLIGHT WOULD BEGIN TO FLICKER AND THEN CUT OFF.THE OTHER HEADLIGHT WOULD STILL BE OPERATIONAL.IN A FEW CASES WHERE NO ACTION WAS TAKEN, SOME COMPLAINANTS STATED THAT AFTER A FEW MONTHS BOTH HEADLAMPS WOULD BEGIN TO FAIL RESULTING IN NO HEADLIGHTS; HOWEVER NONE REPORTED THAT BOTH LAMPS FAILED SIMULTANEOUSLY.COMPLAINANTS ALSO STATED THAT THEY COULD TOGGLE THE HEADLAMP SWITCH ON AND OFF TO TEMPORARILY RESTORE LIGHTING WHEN THIS CONDITION OCCURRED, EVEN IN CASES WERE BOTH HEADLAMPS WERE EXTINGUISHED.THE RESULTS OF THIS SURVEY ARE LARGELY CONSISTENT WITH ODI'S ASSESSMENT OF THE REPORTS AND WARRANTY DATA.TOYOTA SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER THAT, GENERALLY SPEAKING, ONLY ONE LAMP FAILED AT A TIME, AND THAT TOGGLING THE SWITCH RESTORED THE LAMP.TOYOTA REQUESTED A MEETING WITH ODI AND ON AUGUST 6, 2009, PRESENTED THEIR ASSESSMENT OF HEADLAMP FAILURE.TOYOTA CONFIRMED THAT A HEADLAMP COULD EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING DUE TO A BULB FAILURE, AND THAT IT COULD BE TEMPORARILY RESTORED BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH ON AND OFF, AND THAT SIMULTANEOUS FAILURE OF BOTH HEADLAMPS WAS RARE AND UNLIKELY.TOYOTA ALSO BRIEFLY DISCUSSED THEIR INTENTION TO CONDUCT A CUSTOMER SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO ADDRESS CONSUMER DISSATISFACTION WITH HID BULB FAILURES.SINCE THERE IS STILL ONE HEADLIGHT OPERATING WHEN THE OTHER ONE CUTS OFF, THERE IS STILL LIGHTING AVAILABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR FACILITY.THUS, A SAFETY DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Exterior Lighting:headlights
ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION AFTER RECEIVING REPORTS THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS WOULD GO OUT, OR EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH HIGH INTENSITY DISCHARGE (HID) HEADLAMPS THAT OPERATE ON INDEPENDENT LAMPS AND ECU'S (ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNITS) FOR EACH HEADLIGHT, MEANING THAT EACH HEADLIGHT RUNS INDEPENDENTLY OF THE OTHER, AND A FAILURE IN ONE LAMP OR ECU DOES NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN A FAILURE OF THE OTHER.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, A RANDOM SAMPLE OF FORTY CONSUMERS WAS CONTACTED BY ODI IN A TELEPHONE SURVEY TO VERIFY THEIR EXPERIENCES.THE CONSUMERS STATED IN COMPLAINTS TO TOYOTA THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS FAILED AT THE SAME TIME.ODI DISCOVERED THROUGH TALKING WITH THESE COMPLAINANTS THAT IN FACT ONE HEADLIGHT WOULD BEGIN TO FLICKER AND THEN CUT OFF.THE OTHER HEADLIGHT WOULD STILL BE OPERATIONAL.IN A FEW CASES WHERE NO ACTION WAS TAKEN, SOME COMPLAINANTS STATED THAT AFTER A FEW MONTHS BOTH HEADLAMPS WOULD BEGIN TO FAIL RESULTING IN NO HEADLIGHTS; HOWEVER NONE REPORTED THAT BOTH LAMPS FAILED SIMULTANEOUSLY.COMPLAINANTS ALSO STATED THAT THEY COULD TOGGLE THE HEADLAMP SWITCH ON AND OFF TO TEMPORARILY RESTORE LIGHTING WHEN THIS CONDITION OCCURRED, EVEN IN CASES WERE BOTH HEADLAMPS WERE EXTINGUISHED.THE RESULTS OF THIS SURVEY ARE LARGELY CONSISTENT WITH ODI'S ASSESSMENT OF THE REPORTS AND WARRANTY DATA.TOYOTA SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER THAT, GENERALLY SPEAKING, ONLY ONE LAMP FAILED AT A TIME, AND THAT TOGGLING THE SWITCH RESTORED THE LAMP.TOYOTA REQUESTED A MEETING WITH ODI AND ON AUGUST 6, 2009, PRESENTED THEIR ASSESSMENT OF HEADLAMP FAILURE.TOYOTA CONFIRMED THAT A HEADLAMP COULD EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING DUE TO A BULB FAILURE, AND THAT IT COULD BE TEMPORARILY RESTORED BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH ON AND OFF, AND THAT SIMULTANEOUS FAILURE OF BOTH HEADLAMPS WAS RARE AND UNLIKELY.TOYOTA ALSO BRIEFLY DISCUSSED THEIR INTENTION TO CONDUCT A CUSTOMER SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO ADDRESS CONSUMER DISSATISFACTION WITH HID BULB FAILURES.SINCE THERE IS STILL ONE HEADLIGHT OPERATING WHEN THE OTHER ONE CUTS OFF, THERE IS STILL LIGHTING AVAILABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR FACILITY.THUS, A SAFETY DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Exterior Lighting
ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION AFTER RECEIVING REPORTS THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS WOULD GO OUT, OR EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH HIGH INTENSITY DISCHARGE (HID) HEADLAMPS THAT OPERATE ON INDEPENDENT LAMPS AND ECU'S (ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNITS) FOR EACH HEADLIGHT, MEANING THAT EACH HEADLIGHT RUNS INDEPENDENTLY OF THE OTHER, AND A FAILURE IN ONE LAMP OR ECU DOES NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN A FAILURE OF THE OTHER.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, A RANDOM SAMPLE OF FORTY CONSUMERS WAS CONTACTED BY ODI IN A TELEPHONE SURVEY TO VERIFY THEIR EXPERIENCES.THE CONSUMERS STATED IN COMPLAINTS TO TOYOTA THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS FAILED AT THE SAME TIME.ODI DISCOVERED THROUGH TALKING WITH THESE COMPLAINANTS THAT IN FACT ONE HEADLIGHT WOULD BEGIN TO FLICKER AND THEN CUT OFF.THE OTHER HEADLIGHT WOULD STILL BE OPERATIONAL.IN A FEW CASES WHERE NO ACTION WAS TAKEN, SOME COMPLAINANTS STATED THAT AFTER A FEW MONTHS BOTH HEADLAMPS WOULD BEGIN TO FAIL RESULTING IN NO HEADLIGHTS; HOWEVER NONE REPORTED THAT BOTH LAMPS FAILED SIMULTANEOUSLY.COMPLAINANTS ALSO STATED THAT THEY COULD TOGGLE THE HEADLAMP SWITCH ON AND OFF TO TEMPORARILY RESTORE LIGHTING WHEN THIS CONDITION OCCURRED, EVEN IN CASES WERE BOTH HEADLAMPS WERE EXTINGUISHED.THE RESULTS OF THIS SURVEY ARE LARGELY CONSISTENT WITH ODI'S ASSESSMENT OF THE REPORTS AND WARRANTY DATA.TOYOTA SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER THAT, GENERALLY SPEAKING, ONLY ONE LAMP FAILED AT A TIME, AND THAT TOGGLING THE SWITCH RESTORED THE LAMP.TOYOTA REQUESTED A MEETING WITH ODI AND ON AUGUST 6, 2009, PRESENTED THEIR ASSESSMENT OF HEADLAMP FAILURE.TOYOTA CONFIRMED THAT A HEADLAMP COULD EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING DUE TO A BULB FAILURE, AND THAT IT COULD BE TEMPORARILY RESTORED BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH ON AND OFF, AND THAT SIMULTANEOUS FAILURE OF BOTH HEADLAMPS WAS RARE AND UNLIKELY.TOYOTA ALSO BRIEFLY DISCUSSED THEIR INTENTION TO CONDUCT A CUSTOMER SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO ADDRESS CONSUMER DISSATISFACTION WITH HID BULB FAILURES.SINCE THERE IS STILL ONE HEADLIGHT OPERATING WHEN THE OTHER ONE CUTS OFF, THERE IS STILL LIGHTING AVAILABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR FACILITY.THUS, A SAFETY DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Illustration