NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
2,003 reports131,500 miles · Dec 7, 2020
Service Brakes
MY WIFE AND I PICKED UP OUR 3 LITTLE BOYS FROM SCHOOL ON OUR WAY HOME AS WE GOT ON THE HIGHWAY WE HEARD THIS LOUD LONG BEEP SOUND AND IMMEDIATELY AFTER THAT MY BRAKES WILL NOT WORK SO I BEGAN PUSH DOWN ON THE BRAKE PEDAL MANY TIMES AND FINALLY BY THE GRACE OF GOD I WAS ABLE TO STOP. WE HAD THE CAR TOWED TO HAVE IT LOOKED AT AND …
Read full complaint
MY WIFE AND I PICKED UP OUR 3 LITTLE BOYS FROM SCHOOL ON OUR WAY HOME AS WE GOT ON THE HIGHWAY WE HEARD THIS LOUD LONG BEEP SOUND AND IMMEDIATELY AFTER THAT MY BRAKES WILL NOT WORK SO I BEGAN PUSH DOWN ON THE BRAKE PEDAL MANY TIMES AND FINALLY BY THE GRACE OF GOD I WAS ABLE TO STOP. WE HAD THE CAR TOWED TO HAVE IT LOOKED AT AND THE MECHANIC CONCLUDED IT IS AN ABS/ACTUATOR PROBLEM WHICH TOYOTA IS VERY MUCH AWARE OF. THE MECHANIC ADVISED ME TO CONTACT TOYOTA TO FIX IT FREE BECAUSE IT IS COSTLY. I CONTACTED TOYOTA ABOUT THE SITUATION AND THEY JUST DIDN'T CARE. NOW I HAVE NO CAR BECAUSE ITS UNSAFE TO DRIVE AND I DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO FIX IT. THIS WAS A LIFE THREATENING SITUATION FOR ME AND MY FAMILY HAD IT NOT BEEN GOD WE WOULD HAVE LOST OUR PRECIOUS LIVES.
NHTSA ODI #11378336
200,300 miles · Dec 6, 2020
Electrical SystemService Brakes
DASH WENT OUT NO VISUAL, TWICE, 1ST TIME I UNHOOKED FRONT CABLE TO BATTERY, IT COME BACK ON, 2ND TIME, I STARTED CAR, CONSOL WENT OUT AGAIN, HAD TO TAKE IT TO TOYOTA PLACE, TO ORDER NEW CONSOL, BRAKE LIGHT ON, ASB LIGHT ON, AFTER REPLACING BOTH FRONT & BACK BRAKE SHOES, ENJECTOR PUMP WENT OUT
NHTSA ODI #11378068
5 miles · Dec 2, 2020
Service Brakes
I OWN A TOYOTA PRIUS 2007 AND I EXPERIENCING BRAKES NOT ENGAGING AS THEY SHOULD WHEN APPLIED. I NOTICE MY ABS VSC BRAKE LIGHTS ARE ON MY DASHBOARD. I TOOK IT IN TO A SHOP AND WAS TOLD I HAVE A BAD ABS ACTUATOR. I RESEARCHED IT ON THE RECALL LIST AND IT WAS LISTED BUT EXPIRED IN DEC 2017. TOYOTA SHOULD FIX THIS PROBLEM. THIS WAS …
Read full complaint
I OWN A TOYOTA PRIUS 2007 AND I EXPERIENCING BRAKES NOT ENGAGING AS THEY SHOULD WHEN APPLIED. I NOTICE MY ABS VSC BRAKE LIGHTS ARE ON MY DASHBOARD. I TOOK IT IN TO A SHOP AND WAS TOLD I HAVE A BAD ABS ACTUATOR. I RESEARCHED IT ON THE RECALL LIST AND IT WAS LISTED BUT EXPIRED IN DEC 2017. TOYOTA SHOULD FIX THIS PROBLEM. THIS WAS A KNOWN PROBLEM.
NHTSA ODI #11377408
193,000 miles · Oct 10, 2020
Electrical SystemEngineExterior Lighting
2007 PRIUS 144K MILES WHEN PROBLEM 1ST OCCURRED. CAR SERVICED REGULARLY - OIL CHANGED EVERY 3500 MILES. MASTER WARNING LIGHT WOULD COME ON RANDOMLY WHEN TURNING OR GOING UP/DOWN HILL AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS. COMPUTER DIAGNOSTICS RUN REPEATEDLY (AT TOYOTA AND AT LOCAL MECHANIC) NOTHING EVER FOUND. 12/2016 BROUGHT CAR TO TOYOTA…
Read full complaint
2007 PRIUS 144K MILES WHEN PROBLEM 1ST OCCURRED. CAR SERVICED REGULARLY - OIL CHANGED EVERY 3500 MILES. MASTER WARNING LIGHT WOULD COME ON RANDOMLY WHEN TURNING OR GOING UP/DOWN HILL AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS. COMPUTER DIAGNOSTICS RUN REPEATEDLY (AT TOYOTA AND AT LOCAL MECHANIC) NOTHING EVER FOUND. 12/2016 BROUGHT CAR TO TOYOTA SERVICE COULDN'T FIND ANYTHING INITIALLY. 2+ HOURS LATER TOLD OIL IS VERY LOW WHICH MADE NO SENSE; NO OIL SPOT IN GARAGE, CAR PASSED INSPECTION AND WASN'T DUE FOR AN OIL CHANGE . WAS TOLD THE 'OIL WARNING INDICATOR' WAS LIT DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE OIL WARNING LIGHT NEVER CAME ON. EVER. (OIL INDICATOR SHOULD COME ON WHEN CAR IS STARTED AND REMAIN ON -BRIEFLY IF THE OIL IS LOW. IT DOES NOT.) TOLD TECH THAT ONLY THE MASTER LIGHT COMES ON AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES. NEVER GIVEN AN EXPLANATION. PROBLEM HAS GOTTEN PROGRESSIVELY WORSE. MASTER INDICATOR ONLY COMES ON WHEN THERE IS ALMOST NO OIL. LAST TIME THIS HAPPENED I ADDED 4 QTS. OF OIL, DROVE 687 MILES AND HAD TO ADD ANOTHER 4 QTS. AT THIS POINT I HAVE TO CHECK THE OIL EVERY TIME I GET INTO THE CAR.
NHTSA ODI #11363736
145,000 miles · Oct 2, 2020
Service Brakes
STARTED GETTING BRAKE ACTUATOR FAILURE NOISES IN MY 2007 PRIUS BACK IN MARCH 2020 AND TOOK IT TO THE WEST COAST TOYOTA DEALERSHIP IN LONG BEACH, CA. THEY DIDN'T FIND ANYTHING WRONG WITH THE ABS SYSTEM EVEN THOUGH THE GRINDING NOISE I NOW KNOW IS COMMONLY ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROBLEM WAS GOING OFF. THE OTHER DAY THE ABS LIGHT WARN…
Read full complaint
STARTED GETTING BRAKE ACTUATOR FAILURE NOISES IN MY 2007 PRIUS BACK IN MARCH 2020 AND TOOK IT TO THE WEST COAST TOYOTA DEALERSHIP IN LONG BEACH, CA. THEY DIDN'T FIND ANYTHING WRONG WITH THE ABS SYSTEM EVEN THOUGH THE GRINDING NOISE I NOW KNOW IS COMMONLY ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROBLEM WAS GOING OFF. THE OTHER DAY THE ABS LIGHT WARNING CAME ON AS WELL AS THE EMERGENCY BRAKE LIGHT. I PULLED OVER ON WASHINGTON BLVD AND ARLINGTON IN LOS ANGELES AND WHEN I STARTED THE CAR AGAIN AND STARTED TO MOVE FORWARD I HAD NO CONTROL OF THE BRAKES AND TURNED THE CAR OFF IMMEDIATELY. FROM WHAT I'VE READ THIS IS EXTREMELY COMMON! TOYOTA EXTENDED THE WARRANTY'S ON MANY OF THEIR VEHICLES TO 10 YEARS BUT THERE WERE NO RECALLS SO IF THIS PART MALFUNCTIONS A DAY AFTER THE WARRANTY THEN YOU ARE OUT OF LUCK. THE BRAKE SYSTEM IS JUST ABOUT THE MOST DANGEROUS PART TO FAIL. I CAN'T IMAGINE WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED IF THE SAME THING HAPPENED AT A HIGHER SPEED.
NHTSA ODI #11362463
290,000 miles · Aug 29, 2020
Service Brakes
I WAS DRIVING DOWN THE HIGHWAY AT ABOUT 70 MPH WHEN THE BREAK LIGHT, ABS LIGHT, AND TIRE LIGHT ALL CAME ON ACCOMPANIED BY A HIGH PITCH BEEPING. AS I ATTEMPTED TO PULL OVER THE BREAKS WERE ALMOST COMPLETELY UNRESPONSIVE. WHEN I CONTACTED TOYOTA ABOUT THE ISSUE THEY LET ME KNOW IT WAS A PROBLEM THEY WERE AWARE OF THE ISSUE BUT DID…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING DOWN THE HIGHWAY AT ABOUT 70 MPH WHEN THE BREAK LIGHT, ABS LIGHT, AND TIRE LIGHT ALL CAME ON ACCOMPANIED BY A HIGH PITCH BEEPING. AS I ATTEMPTED TO PULL OVER THE BREAKS WERE ALMOST COMPLETELY UNRESPONSIVE. WHEN I CONTACTED TOYOTA ABOUT THE ISSUE THEY LET ME KNOW IT WAS A PROBLEM THEY WERE AWARE OF THE ISSUE BUT DIDN'T BELIEVE THAT HAVING YOUR BREAKS GO OUT WAS GROUNDS FOR A RECALL. I WAS ALMOST INVOLVED IN A HIGH SPEED CRASH WITHOUT THE ABILITY TO STOP BECAUSE OF THIS.
NHTSA ODI #11351990
150,000 miles · Aug 28, 2020
Engine
I WAS DRIVING MY CAR ON THE HIGHWAY IN HOUSTON (INTERSTATE-10) AND MY CAR SUDDENLY STOPPED. I WAS ALMOST REAR-ENDED DUE TO THE CAR STOPPING SUDDENLY WITHOUT THE ABILITY TO ACCELERATE. THERE WAS ONLY A NARROW SHOULDER AND I HAD TO WAIT FOR THE TOW TRUCK. THE ISSUE IS THE INVERTER PUMP WHICH WAS A RECALL IN 2011 (12V536000) AND…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING MY CAR ON THE HIGHWAY IN HOUSTON (INTERSTATE-10) AND MY CAR SUDDENLY STOPPED. I WAS ALMOST REAR-ENDED DUE TO THE CAR STOPPING SUDDENLY WITHOUT THE ABILITY TO ACCELERATE. THERE WAS ONLY A NARROW SHOULDER AND I HAD TO WAIT FOR THE TOW TRUCK. THE ISSUE IS THE INVERTER PUMP WHICH WAS A RECALL IN 2011 (12V536000) AND THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP TOLD ME TO CALL TOYOTA US HQ. AFTER TWO WEEKS, MULTIPLE PHONE CALLS, AND ZERO FOLLOW THROUGH FROM TOYOTA, I AM STILL WITHOUT A FUNCTIONING CAR. THE TOTAL LACK OF CARE AND ACCOUNTABILITY FROM TOYOTA IS APPALLING AND FRANKLY RECKLESS. THIS IS A KNOWN ISSUE ON THE CAR AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THIS DOES NOT HAPPEN TO SOMEONE ELSE. MY WIFE AND I ARE BLESSED THAT WE WERE ABLE TO WALK AWAY FROM THE STALL ON THE HIGHWAY UNSCATHED; HOWEVER, THIS CAN HAPPEN TO SOMEONE ELSE AT NIGHT AND PERHAPS THAT PERSON(S) WILL NOT BE SO LUCKY.
NHTSA ODI #11351874
184,000 miles · Aug 22, 2020
Electronic Stability Control (esc)Service Brakes
WHILE DRIVING AROUND A CORNER ON CITY STREETS, BRAKING SUDDENLY BECAME VERY DIFFICULT, AND CAUSED THE VEHICLE TO SKID WHEN BRAKES WERE APPLIED. A HIGH-PITCHED ELECTRONIC SQUEAL CAME FROM THE DASHBOARD, AND THE BRAKE SYSTEM LIGHT, ABS LIGHT, VSC LIGHT, AND MASTER WARNING LIGHT ALL TURNED ON. THESE ARE ALL LISTED AS SYMPTOMS OF A …
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING AROUND A CORNER ON CITY STREETS, BRAKING SUDDENLY BECAME VERY DIFFICULT, AND CAUSED THE VEHICLE TO SKID WHEN BRAKES WERE APPLIED. A HIGH-PITCHED ELECTRONIC SQUEAL CAME FROM THE DASHBOARD, AND THE BRAKE SYSTEM LIGHT, ABS LIGHT, VSC LIGHT, AND MASTER WARNING LIGHT ALL TURNED ON. THESE ARE ALL LISTED AS SYMPTOMS OF A FAILED BRAKE ACTUATOR. AFTER CONTACTING A LICENSED TOYOTA DEALERSHIP, I WAS DIRECTED TO THE TOYOTA CUSTOMER CARE DEPARTMENT. AFTER BEING ESCALATED TO A SUPERVISOR, I WAS INFORMED THAT TOYOTA IS AWARE OF THIS PROBLEM, BUT THAT THE WARRANTY EXTENSION THEY USED TO COVER IT EXPIRED IN 2017, AND THEY REFUSED TO COVER THE COST OF REPLACEMENT (~$3000). I BELIEVE THIS ISSUE SHOULD BE CAUSE FOR A SAFETY RECALL, AS IT HAPPENED SUDDENLY AND WITHOUT WARNING WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS IN MOTION. IT WAS PURE LUCK THAT THIS DIDN'T RESULT IN A CRASH.
NHTSA ODI #11350794
200,000 miles · Aug 17, 2020
Electrical System
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING, A CODE ILLUMINATED INDICATING TRANSMISSION WOULD LOCK FOR SAFETY AND TO PLACE THE VEHICLE ON A FLAT SURFACE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHEN HE ARRIVED AT HIS RESIDENCE AND POWERED OFF THE ENGINE, THE VEHICLE WAS UNABLE TO RESTART. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING, A CODE ILLUMINATED INDICATING TRANSMISSION WOULD LOCK FOR SAFETY AND TO PLACE THE VEHICLE ON A FLAT SURFACE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHEN HE ARRIVED AT HIS RESIDENCE AND POWERED OFF THE ENGINE, THE VEHICLE WAS UNABLE TO RESTART. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO A DEALER NOR AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC FOR A DIAGNOSTIC TEST. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 200,000.
NHTSA ODI #11349778
143,000 miles · Aug 11, 2020
Service Brakes
I WAS DRIVING MY CAR ON THE HIGHWAY AND SUDDENLY MY BRAKE WARNING LIGHT, ABS WARNING LIGHT, AND OTHER LIGHTS CAME ON AS WELL AS A CONSTANT BEEPING NOISE. THE BRAKES ALMOST STOPPED WORKING COMPLETELY; IT ONLY WORKED ABOUT 10%. MY FOOT WAS ALL THE WAY DOWN ON THE BRAKE PEDAL, BUT THE CAR WAS STILL MOVING. I WAS ABLE TO PULL OVER, …
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING MY CAR ON THE HIGHWAY AND SUDDENLY MY BRAKE WARNING LIGHT, ABS WARNING LIGHT, AND OTHER LIGHTS CAME ON AS WELL AS A CONSTANT BEEPING NOISE. THE BRAKES ALMOST STOPPED WORKING COMPLETELY; IT ONLY WORKED ABOUT 10%. MY FOOT WAS ALL THE WAY DOWN ON THE BRAKE PEDAL, BUT THE CAR WAS STILL MOVING. I WAS ABLE TO PULL OVER, BUT THIS ISSUE LEFT ME IN A COMPROMISING POSITION FOR MY SAFETY AND COULD EASILY HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN A SERIOUS ACCIDENT FROM IT. THE WARNING LIGHTS GO AWAY AFTER TURNING OFF THE CAR, BUT THEN THEY COME BACK ON RANDOMLY. BASED ON WHAT I'VE READ ONLINE ON SIMILAR ISSUES, I BELIEVE THIS IS AN ISSUE WITH THE BRAKE ACTUATOR.
NHTSA ODI #11348523
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