← New search

2007 Toyota Prius

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most Prius years

Owner complaints for the 2007 Toyota Prius are substantially higher than the model-year median of 164.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

1,721 reports with mileage · 282 unknown

NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.

What to inspect

Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.

  • Exterior Lighting. Review the 1,060 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Electrical System. Review the 248 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Structure. Review the 184 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

124 crash reports9 fire reports53 injury reports

What owners actually said

2,003 reports
170,000 miles · Oct 2, 2013
Exterior Lighting

WHILE DRIVING HOME LATE AT NIGHT, THE HID HEADLIGHTS STARTED FAILING. FIRST, THE DRIVER'S SIDE WENT OFF, THEN THE PASSENGER SIDE WENT OFF. AFTER DRIVING TO THE SHOULDER IN THE DARK, I TURNED OFF THE LIGHTS AND SWITCHED THEM BACK ON. I WAS ABLE TO MAKE IT HOME WITH THE PASSENGER SIDE LIGHT WORKING FOR THE REST OF THE WAY. DRIVER'…

Read full complaint

WHILE DRIVING HOME LATE AT NIGHT, THE HID HEADLIGHTS STARTED FAILING. FIRST, THE DRIVER'S SIDE WENT OFF, THEN THE PASSENGER SIDE WENT OFF. AFTER DRIVING TO THE SHOULDER IN THE DARK, I TURNED OFF THE LIGHTS AND SWITCHED THEM BACK ON. I WAS ABLE TO MAKE IT HOME WITH THE PASSENGER SIDE LIGHT WORKING FOR THE REST OF THE WAY. DRIVER'S SIDE FAILED AGAIN AFTER 10 MINUTES. I ORDERED REPLACEMENT BULBS ONLINE AND REPLACED BOTH LIGHTBULBS. PASSENGER SIDE SEEMS TO WORK FINE. DRIVER'S SIDE HOWEVER TURNS ITSELF OF ANYWHERE FROM 5 MINUTES TO 1 HOUR. I AM TOLD BY TOYOTA DEALER THAT THE BALLAST MAY BE DEFECTIVE. BALLAST REPLACEMENT IS ABOUT $250 PARTS AND $100 LABOR. MY HEADLIGHTS WERE ALREADY CHANGED UNDER "WARRANTY" AT AROUND 35,000 MILES FOR THE SAME PROBLEM. GOING BY THE COUNTLESS COMPLAINTS ABOUT THE PRIUS HID HEADLIGHTS ON THE INTERNET, WHY IS THERE NO RECALL? TOYOTA IS CLEARLY CREATING A SECURITY RISK THAT MAY COST LIVES. IS THE NHTSA GOING TO WAIT UNTIL SOMEONE ACTUALLY GETS KILLED BECAUSE OF FAILING HEADLIGHTS BEFORE MANDATING A RECALL FOR TOYOTA? *TR

NHTSA ODI #10546554

Mileage unknown · Sep 29, 2013
EquipmentLatches/locks/linkagesStructure

HATCH LATCHES SHOULD NOT MELT DOWN IN 2-3 YEARS, AND ACCESS TO THE HATCH IS A LIFE SAFETY ISSUE. AS WITH MANY OTHER 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS VEHICLES THE RUBBER MATERIAL ON THE HANDLE OF THE REAR HATCH HAS BEEN DETERIORATING ON MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS AND IS GETTING MORE DIFFICULT TO USE. WITHOUT AN EXPENSIVE REPLACEMENT BY TOYOTA THE…

Read full complaint

HATCH LATCHES SHOULD NOT MELT DOWN IN 2-3 YEARS, AND ACCESS TO THE HATCH IS A LIFE SAFETY ISSUE. AS WITH MANY OTHER 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS VEHICLES THE RUBBER MATERIAL ON THE HANDLE OF THE REAR HATCH HAS BEEN DETERIORATING ON MY 2007 TOYOTA PRIUS AND IS GETTING MORE DIFFICULT TO USE. WITHOUT AN EXPENSIVE REPLACEMENT BY TOYOTA THE PART WILL FAIL BEYOND THE ABILITY TO OPEN THE REAR HATCH. TOYOTA REFUSES TO RECALL THE PART AND REPLACE IT AS A DEFECTIVE PART. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10546107

88,000 miles · Sep 26, 2013
Exterior Lighting

I BOUGHT THIS CAR NEW. IN 6 YEARS, 88K MILES WITH REGULAR ROUTINE MAINTENANCE, I AM ON RIGHT HEADLAMP NUMBER THREE. IT TURNS OFF OF IT'S OWN ACCORD, WITH NO WARNING LIGHT OR DIMMING. IT JUST GOES COMPLETELY DARK. AT FIRST, YOU COULD TURN THE LIGHTS OFF AND BACK ON AND IT WOULD WORK AGAIN FOR A LITTLE WHILE, BUT THAT ULTIMATE…

Read full complaint

I BOUGHT THIS CAR NEW. IN 6 YEARS, 88K MILES WITH REGULAR ROUTINE MAINTENANCE, I AM ON RIGHT HEADLAMP NUMBER THREE. IT TURNS OFF OF IT'S OWN ACCORD, WITH NO WARNING LIGHT OR DIMMING. IT JUST GOES COMPLETELY DARK. AT FIRST, YOU COULD TURN THE LIGHTS OFF AND BACK ON AND IT WOULD WORK AGAIN FOR A LITTLE WHILE, BUT THAT ULTIMATELY FAILED. BECAUSE THESE ARE MONODIRECTIONAL HDL LAMPS, THEY RETAIL AROUND $125 --- TO REPLACE ONE AT THE DEALER HAS BEEN ESTIMATED AT AROUND $550. I REPLACED THE FIRST ONE MYSELF, AND HAD THE SECOND ONE REPLACED AT A LOCAL GARAGE. NOW ON THE THIRD BULB WHICH IS FAILING. IT IS A SAFETY HAZARD, NOT TO MENTION IT MAKES MY VEHICLE ILLEGAL AND UNSAFE TO DRIVE AT NIGHT. I NEVER KNOW WHEN IT'S GOING TO GO OUT; I HAVE BEEN PULLED OVER BUT NOT CITED BY LOCAL POLICE FOR HAVING THE LIGHT OUT. I KNOW THAT THIS IS A COMMON ISSUE FOR PRIUS VEHICLES IN '05 THROUGH '07 - THE DEALER ACKNOWLEDGED AS MUCH. HOWEVER, BECAUSE I AM OUT OF THE WARRANTY PERIOD, THE ONUS TO PAY FOR THIS DEFECT FALLS TO ME. IRONICALLY I PURCHASED THE CAR TO SAVE MONEY AND GAS AND NOW AM HAVING TO SHELL OUT $500 EVERY 18 MONTHS OR SO BECAUSE OF THIS CONTINUALLY FAILING RIGHT HEAD LAMP. I HAVE READ IT MAY BE A HOUSING IN THE LAMP ASSEMBLY; THAT WAS ESTIMATED TO COST AROUND $2000 TO REPLACE. SERIOUSLY. TOYOTA DOES NOTHING - NO RECALL, NO WARNING, NOTHING. IT'S WRONG AND IT'S NEGLIGENT NOT TO ADDRESS THIS. *JS

NHTSA ODI #10545583

70,000 miles · Sep 25, 2013
Exterior Lighting

IN ORDER TO START, THE BRAKES MUST BE DEPRESSED. THE ELECTRICAL SWITCH THAT DETECTS THE BRAKE PEDAL BEING DEPRESSED ALSO CONTROLS THE BRAKE LIGHT INDICATORS. THIS SWITCH HAS STARTED TO FAIL, OPERATING INTERMITTENTLY. THE SYMPTOMS ARE INABILITY TO START THE VEHICLE TO "READY" MODE FOR DRIVING AND THE BRAKE LIGHTS NOT OPERATING WH…

Read full complaint

IN ORDER TO START, THE BRAKES MUST BE DEPRESSED. THE ELECTRICAL SWITCH THAT DETECTS THE BRAKE PEDAL BEING DEPRESSED ALSO CONTROLS THE BRAKE LIGHT INDICATORS. THIS SWITCH HAS STARTED TO FAIL, OPERATING INTERMITTENTLY. THE SYMPTOMS ARE INABILITY TO START THE VEHICLE TO "READY" MODE FOR DRIVING AND THE BRAKE LIGHTS NOT OPERATING WHICH IS EXTREMELY UNSAFE. ONCE THE CAR HAS STARTED TO "READY" AND CAN DRIVE, THE BRAKE LIGHTS MAY OR MAY NOT OPERATE DURING DRIVING. *JS

NHTSA ODI #10545407

Mileage unknown · Sep 24, 2013
Structure

DEAR GENTLEPERSONS: TOYOTA MUST HAVE PURCHASED A BATCH OF DEFECTIVE RUBBER FROM A VENDOR BACK IN 2007 AND 2008 BECAUSE THE RUBBER THAT YOU PUSH AGAINST TO RELEASE THE LOCKING MECHANISM FOR THE TRUNK/HATCHBACK HAS TURNED TO PLAY DOUGH OR SLUDGE ON MY CAR. I CONTACTED TOYOTA IN MAY OF THIS YEAR AND THEY DISCLAIMED ANY AWARENES…

Read full complaint

DEAR GENTLEPERSONS: TOYOTA MUST HAVE PURCHASED A BATCH OF DEFECTIVE RUBBER FROM A VENDOR BACK IN 2007 AND 2008 BECAUSE THE RUBBER THAT YOU PUSH AGAINST TO RELEASE THE LOCKING MECHANISM FOR THE TRUNK/HATCHBACK HAS TURNED TO PLAY DOUGH OR SLUDGE ON MY CAR. I CONTACTED TOYOTA IN MAY OF THIS YEAR AND THEY DISCLAIMED ANY AWARENESS OF THE PROBLEM. RECENTLY I WENT ONLINE AND FOUND IT IS WIDELY KNOWN ON SITES INCLUDING PRIUS CHAT, AND WHEN I SPOKE WITH MY SERVICE ADVISOR AT MY LOCAL DEALERSHIP, HE SAID HE WAS WELL AWARE OF IT, THAT THE SAME THING HAPPENED ON HIS 2008 TOYOTA SIENNA, AND THE ONLY RECOURSE IS TO REPLACE THE ENTIRE MECHANISM WHICH COSTS AN ARM AND A LEG. I CONSIDER THIS A SAFETY ISSUE BECAUSE IF THE RUBBER DETERIORATES ENOUGH, MY FINGERS WILL PROTRUDE INTO THE LOCK MECHANISM WHICH I SURMISE WOULD NOT WORK AND PLAY WELL WITH FINGERS, OR MAY HAVE AN ELECTRICAL CURRENT IF I MAKE CONTACT. I FOLLOWED UP LAST WEEK WITH TOYOTA AGAIN, AND THE REP WITH WHOM I FIRST SPOKE, INITIALLY SAID TOYOTA HAD NO COMPLAINTS ABOUT IT, THEN SAID THAT SHE KNEW OF THE ISSUE, AND TOLD ME TO CONTACT MY LOCAL DEALERSHIP TO SEE IF THEY WERE AWARE OF A FIX THAT DID NOT INVOLVE A TOTAL SWITCH REPLACEMENT. AFTER I CALLED MY DEALERSHIP AS SUGGESTED, AND MY OWN SERVICE ADVISOR SHARED HIS PERSONAL EXPERIENCE WITH THE ISSUE, I WAS NOT ABLE TO SPEAK WITH THE ORIGINAL REP AT TOYOTA, AND THE NEXT REP WITH WHOM I SPOKE TOLD ME THEY'D LOOK INTO IT AND I'D HEAR BACK FROM TOYOTA WITHIN TWO BUSINESS DAYS ... THAT HAS COME AND GONE. MY WIFE HAS A 2004 PRIUS AND THE RUBBER ON THE LATCH LOOKS AND FEELS TOTALLY NEW. I DON'T THINK THIS IS A WARRANTY ISSUE (WHICH TOYOTA IS NOW TRYING TO TOSS OUT TO GET RID OF ME), BUT INSTEAD, A MANUFACTURING DEFECT THAT HAS SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS. I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO KNOW IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT CAN BE DONE. THANK YOU. SINCERELY, [XXXX] *JS INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

NHTSA ODI #10545255

90,000 miles · Sep 23, 2013
Visibility/wiper

WHEN DRIVING THE DRIVER SIDE HEADLIGHT WILL GO OUT. WHEN YOU TURN THEM BACK ON THE HEADLIGHT COMES ON JUST FOR A MINUTE OR TWO. THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL PEOPLE COMPLAINING ABOUT THE ISSUE AND IS VERY UNSAFE. TOYOTA NEEDS TO FIX THE PROBLEM BEFORE SOMEONE GETS HURT ESPECIALLY AT NIGHT.

NHTSA ODI #10544919

91,000 miles · Sep 20, 2013
Electrical System

WHEN THE CAR WAS TURNED ON IN THE MORNING AFTER SITTING OVERNIGHT, THE DASHBOARD WAS COMPLETELY BLACK. THE CAR POWERED ON, BUT THERE WAS NO SPEEDOMETER, NO FUEL DISPLAY, NO ODOMETER, AND NO BACK-UP CAMERA WHEN PUT INTO REVERSE. WHEN I GOT TO MY DESTINATION, APPROXIMATELY 15 MINUTES DRIVE TIME, I WAS UNABLE TO POWER OFF THE CAR A…

Read full complaint

WHEN THE CAR WAS TURNED ON IN THE MORNING AFTER SITTING OVERNIGHT, THE DASHBOARD WAS COMPLETELY BLACK. THE CAR POWERED ON, BUT THERE WAS NO SPEEDOMETER, NO FUEL DISPLAY, NO ODOMETER, AND NO BACK-UP CAMERA WHEN PUT INTO REVERSE. WHEN I GOT TO MY DESTINATION, APPROXIMATELY 15 MINUTES DRIVE TIME, I WAS UNABLE TO POWER OFF THE CAR AFTER REPEATED ATTEMPTS. THE CAR FINALLY POWERED DOWN AFTER I HELD THE POWER BUTTON FOR SEVERAL SECONDS. WHEN THE CAR WAS TURNED BACK ON AFTER ABOUT 11 HOURS, THE DASHBOARD WAS WORKING AGAIN, ALSO POWERING DOWN WORKED AS NORMAL. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10544698

93,000 miles · Sep 20, 2013
Exterior Lighting

MY HEADLIGHT ON DRIVERS SIDE KEEPS GOING OUT. I TURN THE LIGHTS OFF THEN ON AGAIN BUT NOW THE LIGHT IS ALMOST BURNED OUT. I WAS TOLD I NEED ABOUT 350 FOR THE WHOLE ASSEMBLY. THAT'S TO MUCH! NO NORMAL PERSON HAS THAT JUST LAYING AROUND AND I'VE BEEN PULLED OVER FOR IT TWICE NOW. IF I WOULD OF KNOW THE MAINTENANCE ON THIS CAR WAS …

Read full complaint

MY HEADLIGHT ON DRIVERS SIDE KEEPS GOING OUT. I TURN THE LIGHTS OFF THEN ON AGAIN BUT NOW THE LIGHT IS ALMOST BURNED OUT. I WAS TOLD I NEED ABOUT 350 FOR THE WHOLE ASSEMBLY. THAT'S TO MUCH! NO NORMAL PERSON HAS THAT JUST LAYING AROUND AND I'VE BEEN PULLED OVER FOR IT TWICE NOW. IF I WOULD OF KNOW THE MAINTENANCE ON THIS CAR WAS SO EXPENSIVE I WOULDN'T OF BOUGHT IT! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10544530

80,150 miles · Sep 15, 2013
Exterior Lighting

DRIVER SIDE HEADLAMP WENT OUT AND PASSENGER SIDE HEADLAMP FLICKERED. THIS MADE IT VERY DIFFICULT TO SEE. AFTER TURNING THE LIGHTS OFF AND ON AGAIN THE LIGHTS CAME BACK ON...BUT CONTINUED TO ACT UP. I SENT AN EMAIL TO TOYOTA BELOW IS THE EMAIL THREAD OF THEIR RESPONSE. I AM SHOCKED BY THE RESPONSE!! THEY TOLD ME THE HID HEAD…

Read full complaint

DRIVER SIDE HEADLAMP WENT OUT AND PASSENGER SIDE HEADLAMP FLICKERED. THIS MADE IT VERY DIFFICULT TO SEE. AFTER TURNING THE LIGHTS OFF AND ON AGAIN THE LIGHTS CAME BACK ON...BUT CONTINUED TO ACT UP. I SENT AN EMAIL TO TOYOTA BELOW IS THE EMAIL THREAD OF THEIR RESPONSE. I AM SHOCKED BY THE RESPONSE!! THEY TOLD ME THE HID HEADLAMPS ARE DESIGNED TO TURN OFF TO PREVENT OVERHEATING! SEE BELOW. FROM: "ASK TOYOTA" <TOYOTA_CARES@TOYOTA.COM> TO:[XXX] SENT: SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 2013 6:09:08 PM SUBJECT: HEADLAMP/BALLAST PROBLEM [INCIDENT: 130913-000071] THANK YOU FOR CONTACTING TOYOTA MOTOR SALES, U.S.A., INC. WE APOLOGIZE FOR THE ISSUES YOU ARE EXPERIENCING WITH THE HID HEADLIGHTS ON YOUR 2007 PRIUS. BY DESIGN, HID BULBS WILL TURN OFF IF THE BULB IS STARTING TO OVERHEAT IN ORDER TO PROTECT THE ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNIT. THERE ARE TIMES BY SIMPLY TURNING OFF THE HEADLIGHTS AND THEN BACK ON; THE HID BULBS WILL TURN BACK ON. WE ARE NOT AWARE OF ANY PART UPDATES REGARDING THE HID HEADLIGHT SYSTEM FOR THE PRIUS. WE CAN'T GUARANTEE THAT A DESIGN CHANGE WOULD BE MADE, BUT YOUR HONEST FEEDBACK MAY HELP US TO EVALUATE DIFFERENT ALTERNATIVES. YOUR EMAIL HAS BEEN DOCUMENTED AT OUR NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS UNDER FILE #1309140862. IF WE CAN BE OF FURTHER ASSISTANCE, PLEASE UTILIZE THE FOLLOWING LINK TO FIND A VARIETY OF AVENUES TO CONTACT OUR OFFICES, HTTP://WWW.TOYOTA.COM/SUPPORT/CONTACT.HTML. [XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

NHTSA ODI #10543653

75,000 miles · Sep 13, 2013
Equipment Adaptive/mobilityStructure

THE HATCHBACK RELEASE 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 EASILY. SOMETIMES IT REQUIRES CONSIDERABLE EFFORT TO GET IT OPEN. I AM CONCERNED THAT IN THE CASE OF AN EMERGENCY, I WILL NOT BE ABLE TO GET THE DOOR OPEN. THIS IS A MAJ…

Read full complaint

THE HATCHBACK RELEASE 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 EASILY. SOMETIMES IT REQUIRES CONSIDERABLE EFFORT TO GET IT OPEN. 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. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10543541

Official recalls

4

12V536000 · Engine And Engine Cooling; Hybrid Propulsion System: Inverter

Nov 14, 2012

Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.

Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Hybrid Propulsion System: Inverter

Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.

Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.

Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.

Engine And Engine Cooling

Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.

Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.

Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.

12V537000 · Steering; Steering:gear Box:shaft Sector

Nov 14, 2012

Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.

Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Steering:gear Box:shaft Sector

Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.

Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.

Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.

Steering

Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.

Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.

Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.

10V036000 · Equipment:other:labels

Feb 3, 2010

SOUTHEAST TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2005-2011 PASSENGER VEHICLES FOR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 110, "TIRE SELECTION AND RIMS." THESE VEHICLES WERE SOLD WITHOUT THE REQUISITE LOAD CARRYING CAPACITY MODIFICATION LABELS.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: A DRIVER MAY OVERLOAD A VEHICLE WHICH MAY INCREASE THE RISK OF A CRASH.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL MAIL TO CONSUMERS THE CORRECTED LABEL OR THE CUSTOMER WILL HAVE THE OPTION FOR DEALERS TO INSTALL THE LABEL FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON MAY 27, 2010. OWNERS MAY CONTACT SOUTHEAST TOYOTA AT 1-800-301-6859.

09V388000 · Vehicle Speed Control:accelerator Pedal

Oct 5, 2009

TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2004-2010 PASSENGER VEHICLES. THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL CAN GET STUCK IN THE WIDE OPEN POSITION DUE TO ITS BEING TRAPPED BY AN UNSECURED OR INCOMPATIBLE DRIVER'S FLOOR MAT.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: A STUCK OPEN ACCELERATOR PEDAL MAY RESULT IN VERY HIGH VEHICLE SPEEDS AND MAKE IT DIFFICULT TO STOP THE VEHICLE, WHICH COULD CAUSE A CRASH, SERIOUS INJURY OR DEATH.

Remedy: TOYOTA FILED AN AMENDED DEFECT REPORT ON NOVEMBER 25, 2009, STATING THAT DEALERS WILL MODIFY THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL AND, ON CERTAIN VEHICLES, ALTER THE SHAPE OF THE FLOOR SURFACE UNDER THE PEDAL. THESE CHANGES ADDRESS THE RISK OF PEDAL ENTRAPMENT DUE TO INTERFERENCE WITH THE FLOOR MAT. REDESIGNED ACCELERATOR PEDALS WILL BECOME AVAILABLE BEGINNING IN APRIL 2010 AND DEALERS WILL REPLACE ANY MODIFIED PEDAL WITH THE NEW PEDAL IF DESIRED. ALSO, DEALERS WILL REPLACE ANY GENUINE TOYOTA OR LEXUS ALL-WEATHER FLOOR MATS WITH REDESIGNED ALL-WEATHER MATS, OR REPURCHASE THE PREVIOUS MATS FROM OWNERS WHO DO NOT WANT THE NEW ONES. ADDITIONALLY, SOFTWARE MODIFICATIONS WILL BE INSTALLED ON CAMRY, AVALON AND LEXUS ES 350, IS 350 AND IS 250 MODELS THAT WILL ENSURE THAT THE BRAKE OVERRIDES THE ACCELERATOR IN THE EVENT BOTH BRAKE AND ACCELERATOR PEDALS ARE APPLIED. TOYOTA WILL BEGIN MAILING LETTERS TO OWNERS ON DECEMBER 31, 2009. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331, LEXUS AT 1-800-255-3987.

Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗

NHTSA investigations

3

DP22005 · Pedestrian Alert Sounds

Opened Jan 27, 2023 · Closed Aug 7, 2023

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Electrical System:propulsion System

NHTSA received a petition on or about July 18, 2022, requesting that Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 141 be applied to all electric and hybrid vehicles operating in the United States. The petition can be reviewed at NHTSA.gov under ODI Number 11486072. FMVSS 141 establishes performance requirements for pedestrian alert sounds for motor vehicles. The standard applies to hybrid and electric vehicles that have a gross vehicle weight rating of 4,536 KG or less or are defined as low-speed vehicles. The standard became fully applicable to all such vehicles manufactured on or after March 1, 2021.On January 27, 2023, NHTSA opened Defect Petition (DP) 22-005 to evaluate the subject matter described in the petition. On June 24, 2023 and as supplemented on June 25, 2023, the petitioner notified NHTSA he was withdrawing his petition. The petitioner indicated that, based on his review of data, there is no justification for asserting potential benefits that could be derived from actions sought by my petition. Based on the petitioner's withdrawal, DP22-005 is closed. Closure of this DP does not represent a determination by NHTSA regarding the subject matter of the petition.

DP13001 · Intermediate Steering Shaft Separation

Opened Feb 21, 2013 · Closed Apr 8, 2020

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Steering; Steering:column; Steering:linkages

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606

Additional source detail variants (3)

Steering:column

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606

Steering:linkages

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606

Steering

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606

PE09019 · Headlight Failure

Opened Apr 17, 2009 · Closed Aug 27, 2009

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Exterior Lighting; Exterior Lighting:headlights

ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION AFTER RECEIVING REPORTS THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS WOULD GO OUT, OR EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH HIGH INTENSITY DISCHARGE (HID) HEADLAMPS THAT OPERATE ON INDEPENDENT LAMPS AND ECU'S (ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNITS) FOR EACH HEADLIGHT, MEANING THAT EACH HEADLIGHT RUNS INDEPENDENTLY OF THE OTHER, AND A FAILURE IN ONE LAMP OR ECU DOES NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN A FAILURE OF THE OTHER.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, A RANDOM SAMPLE OF FORTY CONSUMERS WAS CONTACTED BY ODI IN A TELEPHONE SURVEY TO VERIFY THEIR EXPERIENCES.THE CONSUMERS STATED IN COMPLAINTS TO TOYOTA THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS FAILED AT THE SAME TIME.ODI DISCOVERED THROUGH TALKING WITH THESE COMPLAINANTS THAT IN FACT ONE HEADLIGHT WOULD BEGIN TO FLICKER AND THEN CUT OFF.THE OTHER HEADLIGHT WOULD STILL BE OPERATIONAL.IN A FEW CASES WHERE NO ACTION WAS TAKEN, SOME COMPLAINANTS STATED THAT AFTER A FEW MONTHS BOTH HEADLAMPS WOULD BEGIN TO FAIL RESULTING IN NO HEADLIGHTS; HOWEVER NONE REPORTED THAT BOTH LAMPS FAILED SIMULTANEOUSLY.COMPLAINANTS ALSO STATED THAT THEY COULD TOGGLE THE HEADLAMP SWITCH ON AND OFF TO TEMPORARILY RESTORE LIGHTING WHEN THIS CONDITION OCCURRED, EVEN IN CASES WERE BOTH HEADLAMPS WERE EXTINGUISHED.THE RESULTS OF THIS SURVEY ARE LARGELY CONSISTENT WITH ODI'S ASSESSMENT OF THE REPORTS AND WARRANTY DATA.TOYOTA SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER THAT, GENERALLY SPEAKING, ONLY ONE LAMP FAILED AT A TIME, AND THAT TOGGLING THE SWITCH RESTORED THE LAMP.TOYOTA REQUESTED A MEETING WITH ODI AND ON AUGUST 6, 2009, PRESENTED THEIR ASSESSMENT OF HEADLAMP FAILURE.TOYOTA CONFIRMED THAT A HEADLAMP COULD EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING DUE TO A BULB FAILURE, AND THAT IT COULD BE TEMPORARILY RESTORED BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH ON AND OFF, AND THAT SIMULTANEOUS FAILURE OF BOTH HEADLAMPS WAS RARE AND UNLIKELY.TOYOTA ALSO BRIEFLY DISCUSSED THEIR INTENTION TO CONDUCT A CUSTOMER SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO ADDRESS CONSUMER DISSATISFACTION WITH HID BULB FAILURES.SINCE THERE IS STILL ONE HEADLIGHT OPERATING WHEN THE OTHER ONE CUTS OFF, THERE IS STILL LIGHTING AVAILABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR FACILITY.THUS, A SAFETY DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Exterior Lighting:headlights

ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION AFTER RECEIVING REPORTS THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS WOULD GO OUT, OR EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH HIGH INTENSITY DISCHARGE (HID) HEADLAMPS THAT OPERATE ON INDEPENDENT LAMPS AND ECU'S (ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNITS) FOR EACH HEADLIGHT, MEANING THAT EACH HEADLIGHT RUNS INDEPENDENTLY OF THE OTHER, AND A FAILURE IN ONE LAMP OR ECU DOES NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN A FAILURE OF THE OTHER.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, A RANDOM SAMPLE OF FORTY CONSUMERS WAS CONTACTED BY ODI IN A TELEPHONE SURVEY TO VERIFY THEIR EXPERIENCES.THE CONSUMERS STATED IN COMPLAINTS TO TOYOTA THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS FAILED AT THE SAME TIME.ODI DISCOVERED THROUGH TALKING WITH THESE COMPLAINANTS THAT IN FACT ONE HEADLIGHT WOULD BEGIN TO FLICKER AND THEN CUT OFF.THE OTHER HEADLIGHT WOULD STILL BE OPERATIONAL.IN A FEW CASES WHERE NO ACTION WAS TAKEN, SOME COMPLAINANTS STATED THAT AFTER A FEW MONTHS BOTH HEADLAMPS WOULD BEGIN TO FAIL RESULTING IN NO HEADLIGHTS; HOWEVER NONE REPORTED THAT BOTH LAMPS FAILED SIMULTANEOUSLY.COMPLAINANTS ALSO STATED THAT THEY COULD TOGGLE THE HEADLAMP SWITCH ON AND OFF TO TEMPORARILY RESTORE LIGHTING WHEN THIS CONDITION OCCURRED, EVEN IN CASES WERE BOTH HEADLAMPS WERE EXTINGUISHED.THE RESULTS OF THIS SURVEY ARE LARGELY CONSISTENT WITH ODI'S ASSESSMENT OF THE REPORTS AND WARRANTY DATA.TOYOTA SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER THAT, GENERALLY SPEAKING, ONLY ONE LAMP FAILED AT A TIME, AND THAT TOGGLING THE SWITCH RESTORED THE LAMP.TOYOTA REQUESTED A MEETING WITH ODI AND ON AUGUST 6, 2009, PRESENTED THEIR ASSESSMENT OF HEADLAMP FAILURE.TOYOTA CONFIRMED THAT A HEADLAMP COULD EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING DUE TO A BULB FAILURE, AND THAT IT COULD BE TEMPORARILY RESTORED BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH ON AND OFF, AND THAT SIMULTANEOUS FAILURE OF BOTH HEADLAMPS WAS RARE AND UNLIKELY.TOYOTA ALSO BRIEFLY DISCUSSED THEIR INTENTION TO CONDUCT A CUSTOMER SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO ADDRESS CONSUMER DISSATISFACTION WITH HID BULB FAILURES.SINCE THERE IS STILL ONE HEADLIGHT OPERATING WHEN THE OTHER ONE CUTS OFF, THERE IS STILL LIGHTING AVAILABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR FACILITY.THUS, A SAFETY DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.

Exterior Lighting

ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION AFTER RECEIVING REPORTS THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS WOULD GO OUT, OR EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH HIGH INTENSITY DISCHARGE (HID) HEADLAMPS THAT OPERATE ON INDEPENDENT LAMPS AND ECU'S (ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNITS) FOR EACH HEADLIGHT, MEANING THAT EACH HEADLIGHT RUNS INDEPENDENTLY OF THE OTHER, AND A FAILURE IN ONE LAMP OR ECU DOES NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN A FAILURE OF THE OTHER.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, A RANDOM SAMPLE OF FORTY CONSUMERS WAS CONTACTED BY ODI IN A TELEPHONE SURVEY TO VERIFY THEIR EXPERIENCES.THE CONSUMERS STATED IN COMPLAINTS TO TOYOTA THAT BOTH HEADLIGHTS FAILED AT THE SAME TIME.ODI DISCOVERED THROUGH TALKING WITH THESE COMPLAINANTS THAT IN FACT ONE HEADLIGHT WOULD BEGIN TO FLICKER AND THEN CUT OFF.THE OTHER HEADLIGHT WOULD STILL BE OPERATIONAL.IN A FEW CASES WHERE NO ACTION WAS TAKEN, SOME COMPLAINANTS STATED THAT AFTER A FEW MONTHS BOTH HEADLAMPS WOULD BEGIN TO FAIL RESULTING IN NO HEADLIGHTS; HOWEVER NONE REPORTED THAT BOTH LAMPS FAILED SIMULTANEOUSLY.COMPLAINANTS ALSO STATED THAT THEY COULD TOGGLE THE HEADLAMP SWITCH ON AND OFF TO TEMPORARILY RESTORE LIGHTING WHEN THIS CONDITION OCCURRED, EVEN IN CASES WERE BOTH HEADLAMPS WERE EXTINGUISHED.THE RESULTS OF THIS SURVEY ARE LARGELY CONSISTENT WITH ODI'S ASSESSMENT OF THE REPORTS AND WARRANTY DATA.TOYOTA SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER THAT, GENERALLY SPEAKING, ONLY ONE LAMP FAILED AT A TIME, AND THAT TOGGLING THE SWITCH RESTORED THE LAMP.TOYOTA REQUESTED A MEETING WITH ODI AND ON AUGUST 6, 2009, PRESENTED THEIR ASSESSMENT OF HEADLAMP FAILURE.TOYOTA CONFIRMED THAT A HEADLAMP COULD EXTINGUISH WHILE DRIVING DUE TO A BULB FAILURE, AND THAT IT COULD BE TEMPORARILY RESTORED BY TURNING THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH ON AND OFF, AND THAT SIMULTANEOUS FAILURE OF BOTH HEADLAMPS WAS RARE AND UNLIKELY.TOYOTA ALSO BRIEFLY DISCUSSED THEIR INTENTION TO CONDUCT A CUSTOMER SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO ADDRESS CONSUMER DISSATISFACTION WITH HID BULB FAILURES.SINCE THERE IS STILL ONE HEADLIGHT OPERATING WHEN THE OTHER ONE CUTS OFF, THERE IS STILL LIGHTING AVAILABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR FACILITY.THUS, A SAFETY DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.