2007 Toyota Prius

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.

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

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.

2007 Toyota Prius touring edition WILL NOT TAKE ANY FUEL PROPERLY AND WILL OVERFILL AND "BURP" CAUSING GAS TO FLOW EXPLOSIVELY OUT OF THE FILLER NECK AND HOLE. Tank will not fill, at all, causing risk of running out of gas while on highway. FUEL GAUGE DOES NOT WORK AT ALL. FUEL TANK will not fill properly, if at all, overfills and burps causing fuel to blow out of the filler hole with force. THIS IS A FIRE HAZARD as gas can spill all over near the filler area and possibly catch fire. Stopping the filler hose will not help, as the tank refuses to take any gas, even when close to empty. People need to put gas in, not guess. The car will ONLY TAKE BARELY 2 gallons in winter without overflowing. THIS IS A LIFE SAFETY AND FIRE HAZARD AS THIS OVERFLOWING GAS AND REVERSE FUEL FLOW CAN IGNITE, or catch fire. THE BLADDER IN THE TANK STOPS WORKING AND WILL NOT ALLOW FUELING ANS SPITS FUEL BACK OUT OF THE FILLER NECK AND HOLE.

NHTSA ID

11711145

Incident

Jan 15, 2026

The brake actuator failed. When the car was diagnosed by the Toyota dealership, they identified the problem as an internal leak within the brake actuator. Luckily, nobody has been hurt attempting to drive the car, but it is still being driven to get it from home to the repair shop so anything is possible. The first symptom I could link to this was in 2023, when the car would not accelerate via the gas pedal after the brakes were pressed during cruise control. Turning off the car and turning it back on fixed the problem. Afterwards, the red brake symbol was turned on. From that point on, the brake light would only shine sometimes. leading me to believe there must not have been something wrong with the car, since nothing else happened after that. 2024 is when the red brake light and ABS symbol both lit up. The only information that I could find in the manual was to take the Prius to the Toyota dealership. I could not find details on the problem. I continued to drive the car regardless because there seemed to be no problem. After letting the car sit for a few months in 2025, I began driving it again, and it was fine. A month later, I turned on my car and was met with a loud beep that did not end. This was my final sign to take it to get repaired. The car has exceeded 200,000 miles. This fix is $3,205.40 at the dealership. My 2007 Toyota Prius is valued between $2k to $4k. The repair would cost more than simply buying another Prius.

NHTSA ID

11664994

Incident

Apr 17, 2025

Check engine light came on with codes C 1256 & C 1300. Primary issue is Brake actuator failure. Toyota is ignoring this known and repeated issue and it may lead to a dangerous/ deadly situation if brakes go out while driving.

NHTSA ID

11650664

Incident

Mar 25, 2025

Failing Brake Actuator Assembly. This is known issue by Toyota and they issued a brief warranty repair program, but have since stopped and refuse to fix the issue or provide assistance.

NHTSA ID

11623731

Incident

Aug 3, 2024

After an Interstate highway drive and when then discovering my tire had been punctured by a screw or other object, but with still enough air in the tire to drive to a tire repair facility, I drove to have the puncture repaired. On repairing the puncture of the 185/65R15 tire, the repairman observed a portion of the tire’s steel belt to be visible on the inside of the tire. An immediate replacement of the tire was recommended, but this facility did not have an identical tire to provide. The facility emailed me a picture of the protruding steel belt. This writer has twice reported the matter to the tire’s manufacturer, but still no response since the first report on 09/24/2024. No party other than the tire repair facility has inspected the tire. This writer has recognized no noticeable effect of the defect, but the repair facility stated it could cause a blowout at any time.

NHTSA ID

11617019

Incident

Sep 23, 2024

The drivers seat belt receptacle spit out a spring and plastic part and it cannot buckle anymore.

NHTSA ID

11615569

Incident

Sep 18, 2024

2007 Toyota Prius Brake Actuator needs replaced. ABS, Parking Brake, VSC light came on 2 weeks ago when driving down a highway.

NHTSA ID

11610960

Incident

Aug 5, 2024

There is a known, (by Toyota), issue with the ABS brake actuator in many Prius generations including the 2nd generation Prius that I own. My mechanic said it would cost @$3000 to fix. This as I said is and has been a known issue with these cars that affects the ABS braking and puts myself, my family and any one on the road near me in danger. Toyota was quietly replacing these under an unadvertised, extended warranty program. Mine is out of this so called warranty period but if this was a known issue and was corrected at no cost due to the fact Toyota knew there was an issue why was there never a recall on the affected models all with this same problem? I feel that this dangerous problem should be corrected by Toyota at no cost to the owners of their dangerous affected vehicles.

NHTSA ID

11609836

Incident

Aug 1, 2024

OBSOLETE NOTICE February 13, 2026: This bulletin is now obsolete. Please see T-SB-0009-26.

This bulletin includes basic procedures for performing a rescue charge on Ni-MH high voltage (HV) batteries. This bulletin should be used in conjunction with the applicable model and model year Repair Manual while performing a rescue charge. The GRX-5100 should be used wherever the Repair Manual references the Toyota Hybrid System (THS) charger.

Some 2005 – 2026 Toyota vehicles that have undergone water intrusion may exhibit a condition in which a musty odor is present. Follow the procedures in this bulletin to remediate the odor and address this condition. The purpose of this Service Bulletin is to provide general guidelines and procedures for odor remediation. This Service Bulletin provides a guide on how to prepare and treat the interior of the vehicle for odor remediation. Refer to the applicable model and model year Repair Manual and the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) website for the most up-to-date safety and precautionary guidelines.

Acid rain results from rainwater or other airborne moisture that become acidic due to industrial chemical impurities in the atmosphere. If these acidic compounds settle on an exposed vehicle, especially the horizontal areas such as the hood, roof, and decklid, significant damage to the painted surfaces can occur. Acid rain damage can typically be identified on vehicles by the presence of stains on the paint surface that resemble hard water spots. Unlike water spots however, acid rain damage cannot be removed by regular washing procedures. Also, because acid rain can etch and soften the paint, normal buffing or polishing repair procedures should not be attempted. This can cause further damage and result in visible depressions in the paint surface. The following are the three major categories of acid rain damage: •Minor damage: requires only buffing to repair. •Moderate damage: usually requires neutralizing, color sanding, and buffing. •Severe damage: extending beyond 1/2 mil of clearcoat on a pearl, metallic, or solid color, requires neutralization, sanding, and repainting. In cases where acid rain damage is minor, neutralization and buffing with a liquid-type paint finessing product may provide an adequate repair. Only specially formulated products outlined in this bulletin should be used for that purpose. Unfortunately, other than minor damage, there is no simple method of determining the actual extent (depth) of acid penetration other than color sanding a representative affected area until there is no visible etching or depressions, followed by measuring the amount of paint removed with either a magnetic or digital-type film thickness gauge. The procedures in this bulletin are intended for use by qualified body/paint technicians and should not be attempted by inexperienced personnel. It is the dealer’s responsibility to protect and maintain the quality of the vehicle’s paint finish after receipt at the dealership prior to the first sale. Perform frequent vehicle washing, as often as daily, during high heat and humidity periods to minimize the potential for paint damage due to acid rain exposure. This is especially important in geographical areas known for high frequency and concentration of acid rain and industrial fallout.

To prevent brake rotor rust from forming during transportation and storage, wheel film will be used instead of a cardboard type of anti-rust cover. The purpose of the wheel film is to shield the disc brake rotor from weather elements and initial rust before the vehicle is delivered to the customer. Consequently, the film should remain on the wheel for as long as possible.

The condition known as acid rain is caused by airborne chemicals or particles in the atmosphere, which mix with rainwater, nighttime dew, or high humidity to form acidic compounds. If these contaminants settle and remain on a painted vehicle surface, especially the horizonal areas of the hood, roof, and decklid, significant damage can occur. This damage is the result of actual etching of the paint and appears as pitting or water spots. As acid rain droplets on the vehicle surface evaporate, the concentration strength of the acid increases, causing deeper and more rapid damage. This evaporation and corrosive action also occur more rapidly on dark colored cars as direct sun heat increases. It is the dealer’s responsibility to protect and maintain the quality of the vehicle’s paint finish after receipt at the dealership prior to the first sale. In areas known for high frequency and/or concentration of acid rain, frequent vehicle washing during high heat or humidity periods will minimize the potential for paint damage caused by acid rain. It is further recommended that either reverse osmosis or deionized water be used to prevent water spotting.