Every safety complaint, recall and defect investigation the US government
holds on this vehicle.
Owners have filed 257 safety complaints
about the 2013 Toyota RAV4 with the US government. Of those, 22 describe a crash, 29 mention a fire, 15 people were injured and 1 death is recorded. 2 recall campaigns are open against it, covering the electrical system and the trailer hitch.
The most complained-about system is the electrical system,
named in 75 complaints, 29% of the total.
The typical failure was reported at 20,000 miles,
the median across the 161
complaints that gave
an odometer reading.
Compiled from NHTSA's complaint, recall and investigation files
· Covers April 2013 to August 2026 · How this is counted
What is on file
257 complaints on file
257
Complaints
22
Describe a crash
29
Mention fire
15
People injured
1
Deaths
A complaint is an unverified account by the person who filed it, not a
finding of fault. One complaint is one ODI number, which is how NHTSA counts
them.
Complaints halved year on year: 9 in the twelve months to 2026-Q2, against 26 in the twelve before.
A recall is the manufacturer conceding a defect, and the repair is free.
Whether one covers your particular car is a question only its VIN can
answer, because a campaign covers a production range rather than a
model year.
Which system owners named
Complaints naming each system
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM 75 · 29%
75 29%
UNKNOWN OR OTHER 40 · 16%
40 16%
ENGINE 29 · 11%
29 11%
POWER TRAIN 29 · 11%
29 11%
STRUCTURE 28 · 11%
28 11%
SERVICE BRAKES 21 · 8%
21 8%
VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL 17 · 7%
17 7%
AIR BAGS 13 · 5%
13 5%
EQUIPMENT 13 · 5%
13 5%
STEERING 11 · 4%
11 4%
FUEL/PROPULSION SYSTEM 8 · 3%
8 3%
VISIBILITY 7 · 3%
7 3%
03162
Red marks a system with a recall campaign against it.
One complaint can name several systems, so these add up to more than 257.
When the complaints arrived
By the year NHTSA received them
By the year NHTSA received them, which is not the year the failures
happened. They peaked in 2013 at 39.
This is the year the complaint was filed, not the year the failure
happened. The range runs from 2013 to 2026, the last of them a part year, which is why its column is drawn faint.
Crash test ratings
NHTSA New Car Assessment Program
NHTSA crashes a car into a barrier and a pole and measures what
happens to the dummies inside. This is what it awarded the 2013 Toyota RAV4, and it is a separate
question from what owners report going wrong later.
Test
SUV AWD Early Release
SUV AWD Later Release
SUV FWD Early Release
SUV FWD Later Release
Overall
Frontal crash
Frontal, driver
Frontal, passenger
Side crash
Side barrier
Side pole
Rollover
Chance of rollover
16.9%
16.9%
17.4%
17.4%
Stability control standard Forward collision warning standard Lane departure warning standard
A rating belongs to a tested body style and drivetrain, not to the model as a whole, which is why more than one is listed.
A dash means NHTSA did not rate that test for this vehicle.
Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing (Toyota) is recalling certain 2013-2018 RAV4 vehicles. Certain replacement 12-volt batteries may not fit properly in the battery tray, allowing the battery to move and contact the hold-down bracket, possibly causing a short circuit.
The risk
A battery short circuit increases the risk of a fire.
The remedy
Dealers will replace the battery clamp sub-assembly, battery tray, and positive terminal cover, free of charge. Owner letters were mailed December 27, 2024, to 2013-2014 RAV4 owners. Additional owner notification letters will be mailed in phases, phase 2 will begin on May 14, 2025, and phase 3 in late July 2025. Owners may contact Toyota's customer service at 1-800-331-4331. Toyota's numbers for this recall are 23TB13 and 23TA13.
Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing · up to 1,853,568 vehicles across all model years covered
TRAILER HITCHES
15V011000 · January 16, 2015
The defect
Southeast Toyota Distributors, LLC (SET) is recalling certain model year 2013-2015 Toyota Rav4 vehicles manufactured June 1, 2013, to December 29, 2014, and equipped with an accessory trailer light module. The software within the module may incorrectly detect an electrical short and preventively turn off the electrical current and the trailer lights.
The risk
If the system incorrectly detects an electrical short and turns off the trailer lights while the trailer is being towed at night, there is an increased risk of a crash.
The remedy
SET will notify owners, and dealers will replace the trailer light module with a new unit with corrected software, free of charge. The recall began on March 17, 2015. Owners may contact SET customer service at 1-866-405-4226. SET's number for this recall is SET-15A.
Southeast Toyota Distributors, LLC · up to 1,140 vehicles across all model years covered
Defect investigations
1 on file
An investigation means NHTSA has decided a pattern is worth examining. A
preliminary evaluation is often closed with no action; an engineering
analysis is the stage that usually precedes a recall.
Battery Hold Down Bracket Thermal Events
PE21005
Closed preliminary evaluation · opened February 25, 2021 · closed August 12, 2024 · led to recall 23V734
the electrical system
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a Preliminary Evaluation (PE) to understand the contributing factors and frequency of vehicle fires originating from the battery region of the engine compartment in Model Year (MY) 2013-2018 Toyota RAV4 vehicles on 25 February 2021. At the time of opening, ODI attributed eleven allegations and additional EWR events to this PE. PE21005 focused on replacement batteries installed in the subject vehicles. No reported fire event identified in PE21005 involved the originally supplied 12V battery. The reported fires took place in vehicles known to contain aftermarket batteries or whose age exceeded the expected life of the original equipment battery. ODI identified battery dimensioning as it relates to the battery retention system (hold down bracket, radiator support bolt, J-hook, and battery tray) as the main factor set in the contact between the battery hold down bracket contacting the positive terminal of the 12V battery. The subject vehicles carried over the same battery tray and retention system from the prior generation (MY2006 – MY2012) of RAV4 vehicles. However, the subject vehicles were equipped with a dimensionally smaller battery (Group 35) than the prior generation (Group 24F). The smaller- length measurement in the Group 35 battery size in a battery tray originally designed to fit a Group 24F battery contributed to increased potential for battery movement which was exacerbated by the diversity in aftermarket battery configuration and irregularities intrinsic to battery replacement procedures. Battery movement coupled with the proximity of the B+ terminal on the battery and the grounded electrically conductive hold down bracket set the stage for a short to ground leading to an engine stall (if in operation) followed by a vehicle fire. This investigation was not able to classify the installation status, battery size, or cause of every allegation due to the fire event causing damage to the area, inaccessible vehicle, modification to the battery retention system after the event, and/or inconclusive photographic evidence. Toyota's investigation of the issue identified aftermarket battery catalogs that listed an improper battery replacement size (Group 26R) that would nevertheless fit into the subject vehicles whose battery retention system is incapable of reliably restraining a Group 26R battery. On 18 November 2021, Toyota initiated a consumer advisory campaign (21TG01) to the subject vehicle owners, notifying them of the correct size battery and offering a free inspection of the battery and retention hardware, a caution label to affix to the hold down bracket, and a discounted replacement 12V battery. This investigation with Toyota established three broad categories to characterize the battery retention system state of a given vehicle: "correct", "minor mis-installation", and "major mis-installation". - The "correct" terminology references the front bolt, bracket, and J-hook installed in a position not in contact with the positive battery terminal and the front bolt torqued to 17 Nm and the J-hook engaged with the tray hole and torqued to 4.9 Nm. - A "minor mis-installation" would describe the three retention components installed in the prescribed location, however not to the correct torque values. - The "major mis-installation" condition would constitute a retention component missing or disconnected from the system. Toyota's own testing used five exemplar batteries installed on a subject vehicle in each battery categorization resulted in: - Contact between the B+ terminal and hold down bracket in "major mis-installations" - Movement of the battery in "minor mis-installations" - No observable motion in "correct" installations. ODI conducted its own evaluation of the Toyota- specified replacement battery and 5 aftermarket Group 35 batteries. The six batteries tested conformed to the Group 35 Battery Council International (BCI) standard on overall dimensional tolerance and terminal location. That standard does not define the edge shape or material of battery casing. Physical interaction between the hold down bracket and the battery case and the friction between the casing material and the battery tray resulted in a large variability in movement forces required to incite movement when the battery was installed in the "correct" condition. Resulting in movement at an induced lateral load between 0.6 G and 1.91 G equivalent force across each battery. This force is higher than a typical vehicle could exert in a steady state turn and would only experience loads through brief shock or impulses. Multiple shock or impulse loads across time would contribute to a delay between the replacement battery installation and the fire event. Likelihood of a fire event increases as the installation method degraded from the "correct", to "minor mis-installation", and then to "major mis-installation". Protruding vent caps atop some of the batteries tested aided in restricting battery movement relative to the hold down. An absence of vent caps permitted additional movement. Following several discussions and vehicle inspections with ODI during this investigation, on 01 November 2023, Toyota filed a safety recall (NHTSA 23V-734) of 1,853,568 MY 2013 through MY 2018 Toyota RAV4 vehicles to reduce the risk of a vehicle fire with redesigned battery retention components. To review the ODI reports cited in the Closing Resume ODI Report Identification Number document, go to NHTSA.gov.
In owners’ own words
Quoted from the complaint file
Quoted from NHTSA's complaint file. These are unverified accounts by the
people who filed them, not findings of fault.
UNKNOWN OR OTHER
1 death · fire · crash · 10,000 miles
DEAR SIRS, I DON'T HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE, WE HERE ON THE ISLAND OF CURACAO HAVE BEEN EXPERIENCING MANY VEHICLES WHICH ARE CHINESE AND THEIR VIN NO, ARE ALSO CLONED, I BELIEVE THIS IS A WORLD PROBLEM, AND ALSO US MANUFACTURERS HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS A WORLD PROBLEM, AND THEY CAN ALSO HELP TO EXPOSE THIS SITUATION. I HAVE POSTED MANY ON BLOGS, WHICH HAS TO DO WITH THE CLONING OF CARS. THERE WAS ALSO AN ISSUE WITH SOME ONE BOUGHT A VEHICLE AT THE TOYOTA DEALER A RAV4 2013 AND WE CAME TO FIND OUT THAT IT IS A 2010 MEXICAN CLONE CAR. AND I HAVE REPORTED THESE ALSO TO OTHER AGENCIES IN USA , ONE OF THEM IS THE SEC SECURITIES EXCHANGE COMMISSION WHISTLE BLOWER DEPARTMENT. *JS
NHTSA complaint 10592365. Filed by an owner and not verified by NHTSA or by us.
AIR BAGS
4 injured · crash · 3,000 miles
THE TOYOTA WAS TRAVELING 35 MPH NORTH BOUND AND A MERCEDES MADE A LEFT HAND TURN IN FRONT OF THE TOYOTA. THE TOYOTA T-BONE THE MERCEDES AT 35 MPH AND THE AIR BAGS ON THE TOYOTA DID NOT DEPLOY. THE DRIVER AND PASSENGER IN THE TOYOTA SUFFERED SEVERAL INJURIES TO THE NECK, BACK, HANDS, LEG AND FEET AND WAS TRANSPORTED TO THE HOSPITAL FOR TREATMENT. THE TOYOTA WAS TOTALED BY THE INSURANCE CARRIER. *TR
NHTSA complaint 10565936. Filed by an owner and not verified by NHTSA or by us.
AIR BAGS
2 injured · crash · towed · 50,200 miles
The contact owned a 2013 Toyota Rav4. The contact stated that while driving approximately 35 MPH the vehicle crashed into the rear passenger side of a second vehicle that had abruptly stopped. During the crash, the vehicle sustained severe front-end damage but the air bags did not deploy. The contact indicated that the front driver's side door had to be removed in order to be removed from the vehicle. The contact sustained multiple cervical fractures, a fractured sternum, and injuries to the rib and chest areas. An occupant of the second vehicle also sustained a minor undisclosed injury. The vehicle was destroyed and towed away. A police report was taken at the scene. The cause of the …
NHTSA complaint 11634828, quoted in part. Filed by an owner and not verified by NHTSA or by us.
UNKNOWN OR OTHER
1 injured · fire
My battery was not secure and caused a fire under hood
NHTSA complaint 11554855. Filed by an owner and not verified by NHTSA or by us.
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
fire
The system that failed is the 12-volt battery hold-down assembly and associated electrical infrastructure, exactly as described under NHTSA Safety Recall Campaign Number 23V-729 (Toyota Recalls 23TA13 / 23TB13). The vehicle is fully preserved in its post-fire state and is completely available for physical inspection upon request.Safety was severely compromised as the vehicle experienced a sudden, violent engine bay fire while actively traveling at highway speeds on Highway [XXX] in [XXX]. This forced an emergency evacuation on a high-speed corridor, directly endangering the lives of four occupants: an [XXX] driver, one adult passenger, and two minor children. A multi-fatality tragedy was …
NHTSA complaint 11759089, quoted in part. Filed by an owner and not verified by NHTSA or by us.
UNKNOWN OR OTHER
Toyota issues a Customer Support Program Notification regarding paint peeling on vehicles with factory applied Blizzard Pearl or Super White paint. The original expiration date was December 11, 2022 with secondary expiration being 10 years after first use, in my case October 14, 2023. Within the period I had 3 different parts of my car repainted due to peeling paint. On July 19, 2026, paint began peeling again on the roof which is one of the panels that was repainted. I contacted Toyota Customer Care and their response was that the program was closed and no one could reopen the issue. I feel that the 10 year time was just an arbitrary deadline and since this issue had already been repaired …
NHTSA complaint 11751458, quoted in part. Filed by an owner and not verified by NHTSA or by us.
Odometer Fraud. The contact purchased a 2013 Toyota RAV4. The contact stated that a mileage discrepancy was discovered after the purchase. The vehicle was a private sale. At the time of purchase, the vehicle mileage was 105,836; however, Carfax reported the mileage as 311,581.
NHTSA complaint 11742666. Filed by an owner and not verified by NHTSA or by us.
UNKNOWN OR OTHER
I have a Blizzard White RAV4 2013 that I just bought the paint is peeling from roof and side doors. I called a Toyota dealer and they told me that they wouldn’t be able to paint it beacause the warranty of repainting had expired. In some parts of the car the pint is starting to bubble up . .
NHTSA complaint 11740815. Filed by an owner and not verified by NHTSA or by us.
EXTERIOR LIGHTING
The other night driving home i notice that my headlights gotten dimmed. I turned on my fog lights so that i could see the road. after turning on my fog lights i had limited vision on the road. I feel that it's a safety concern that needs to be address so that i won't get into an accident. How should i proceed with the issue?
NHTSA complaint 11734167. Filed by an owner and not verified by NHTSA or by us.
STRUCTURE:BODY
The vehicle has experienced premature and widespread paint peeling and clear coat failure on multiple body panels. The paint began deteriorating without impact, collision, or environmental damage and has progressively worsened over time. This condition is consistent with a known manufacturing defect affecting certain Toyota vehicles, which Toyota acknowledged through a Customer Support Program. The defect results in exposed metal and body surfaces, increasing the risk of corrosion and long-term structural damage. The issue has been visually confirmed and documented and is reproducible across affected panels. No warning indicators were present prior to the failure. The vehicle remains …
NHTSA complaint 11714064, quoted in part. Filed by an owner and not verified by NHTSA or by us.
If this is your car and a dealer keeps failing to fix it, your state's
lemon law may require the manufacturer to replace it or buy it back. How
many repair attempts it takes, and how long you have to file, is set by
the state you bought in and by nothing on this page.
Complaints: NHTSA's ODI
complaint file, published October 2, 2026. One
complaint is one ODI number, which is how NHTSA counts them.
Recalls: NHTSA's recall
campaign API, newest campaign on this vehicle filed November 1, 2023.
Investigations: NHTSA's ODI
investigation file, published October 2, 2026.
A complaint is one owner's account and has not been verified by NHTSA or by
us. A vehicle with more complaints is not necessarily worse: models that
sold in larger numbers collect more of them. How this is counted.
G
Compiled and maintained by guarledes Independent developer and analyst