2000 Toyota Tacoma Complaint Log

DO TO AN ERROR BY TOYOTA, THE FRAME ON MY VERY WELL MANTAINED TACOMA IS ALMOST UNSAFE TO DRIVE DO TO THE THE CORROSION ON THE FRAME, MAYBE ONE MORE YEAR.MY TRUCK HAS ONLY 80,000 MILES,NO SUFACE RUST,ENGINE RUNS GREAT.I KNOW I'M NOT ALONE WHY IS TOYOTA ALOWED TO GET AWAY WITH THIS? THERE ARE OWNERS ALL OVER WHO TOYOTA REFUSES TO HELP,AND MAKE THINGS RIGHT.TRUCKS ARE BREAKING IN HALF HELP!!!

Vehicle will not pass safety inspection due to severe deterioration of the frame. The rest of the vehicle is still intact and operable.

THE FRAME IS RUSTING OUT. TOYOTA KNEW THEY HAD A MANUFACTURING DEFECT AND OFFERED AN EXTENDED WARRANTY. THEIR NOTIFICATION CAMPAIGN DID NOT REACH US IN TIME. TOYOTA WILL NOT HONOR THEIR EXTENDED WARRANTY. THE VEHICLE IS UNSAFE TO DRIVE.

2000 TOYOTA TACOMA. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO VEHICLE RUST PROBLEMS. *SMD *CN

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS UNDERGOING AN OIL CHANGE, THE MECHANIC NOTICED THAT THE UNDERCARRIAGE OF THE VEHICLE WAS RUSTED. AS A RESULT, THE MECHANISM THAT HELD THE SPARE TIRE UNDER THE VEHICLE COULD NO LONGER HOLD THE SPARE TIRE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE AND STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS OUT OF WARRANTY. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 104,000. THE VIN WAS NOT PROVIDED.

THE TRUCK HAS FRAME CORROSION THAT MAKES THE CAR ILLEGAL TO DRIVE. IN 2010, IT WAS RECALLED FOR THIS ISSUE. I BROUGHT IT IN TO A TOYOTA DEALERSHIP IN 2010 AND 2013 FOR THE WARRANTY. BASED ON A LETTER I RECEIVED FROM TOYOTA, TOYOTA WAS SUPPOSED TO BUY BACK THE VEHICLE IF CORROSION WAS PRESENT OR SPRAY CORROSIVE RESISTANT COMPOUNDS (CRCS) AT NO COST TO ME. THE DEALERSHIP DID NEITHER. I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THEY SPRAYED CRCS BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT WE DISCUSSED AT THE DEALERSHIP. TURNS OUT THEY DID NOT SPRAY AND SIX MONTHS AFTER THE WARRANTY ENDED THE FRAME WAS DEEMED SO CORRODED BY AN OIL CHANGE MECHANIC AT AN INDEPENDENT BUSINESS, I CAN NO LONGER DRIVE THE VEHICLE. TOYOTA AND THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP WILL NOT ADDRESS THE LETTER THEY SENT ME AND THE FACT THEY DID NOT SPRAY CRCS AS DISCUSSED. THE VEHICLE IS VERY UNSAFE, I DID WAS I WAS TOLD, AND THE DEALERSHIP IS NEGLIGENT IF FOLLOWING BINARY RULES OF THE WARRANTY--REPLACE THE VEHICLE OR SPRAY CRCS. THE DEALERSHIP CLAIMS "THEY HAD NO RESPONSIBILITY TO DO ANYTHING" BUT A LETTER I RECEIVED FROM TOYOTA SAYS DIFFERENTLY. THE VEHICLE WAS SERVICED REGULARLY AND RAN WELL AND HAS NO ISSUES BUT THE FRAME MAKES THE VEHICLE UNSAFE AND INOPERABLE. THE FRAME OF THE VEHICLE IS NO COLLAPSING AS WELL. THE FRAME IS ROTTED THROUGH.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME OF THE VEHICLE WAS CORRODED AND FRACTURED. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE CORROSION WAS ON THE REAR LEAF SPRINGS OF THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE VEHICLE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 250,000.

WHILE HAVING A TIRE REPAIRED, MECHANIC NOTICED A BROKEN SHOCK ABSORBER MOUNT. UPON HIS ATTEMPT TO REPAIR, HE FOUND SEVERE FRAME RUST, WITH INSUFFICIENT METAL REMAINING TO REATTACH THE MOUNT. AFTER AN APPOINTMENT WITH THE LOCAL TOYOTA DEALER, I WAS INFORMED THAT THE FRAME WAS UNREPAIRABLE, AND THAT SINCE THE "PUT IN SERVICE" DATE WAS FEB 2000, I WAS TOO LATE FOR THE EXTENDED WARRANTY PROGRAM. APPARENTLY, IF I HAD FOUND THE PROBLEM 5 MONTHS EARLIER, I WOULD HAVE BEEN ELIGIBLE FOR A BUY-BACK. AS THIS IS A SERIOUS SAFETY ISSUE, I CAN NOT UNDERSTAND THE MANUFACTURER'S TIME LIMITATIONS. I AM THE SECOND OWNER, AND OTHER THAN THE FRAME RUST, THE TRUCK SHOWS NO CORROSION. I HAVE NEVER RECEIVED ANY NOTICE OF FRAME RUST PROBLEMS, OR THE INSPECTION AND EXTENDED FRAME WARRANTY OFFER FROM TOYOTA. SINCE GETTING THE BAD NEWS, I HAVE FOUND NUMEROUS SIMILAR STORIES ONLINE. THIS WAS AN ADMITTED MANUFACTURING DEFECT, AND DEFINITELY IS A SAFETY ISSUE, AS THE FRAME CAN COLLAPSE OR SUSPENSION COMPONENTS CAN BREAK LOOSE. THERE ARE THOUSNDS OF THESE VEHICLES IN DAILY USE, AND THE MANUFACTURER SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REPAIR, REPLACEMENT, OR BUY-BACK. PLEASE HELP!!!

SEVERE FRAME RUST, MAKING THE VEHICLE UNSAFE TO DRIVE. HAD IT INSPECTED BY TOYOTA, AND THEY SAID IT WAS GOOD. A FEW YEARS LATER, JUNK....

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC FOR ROUTINE MAINTENANCE WHERE IT WAS INFORMED THAT THE REAR FRAME WAS CORRODED AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 199,340. MA 08/14/15 UPDATED 10/26/2017*CN

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 60 MPH, THERE WAS AN ABNORMAL SHAKE FROM THE REAR END OF THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACTED DISCOVERED THAT THE DRIVE LINE FAILED FROM THE REAR END. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER, WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE FRONT LINE, SPRINGS, AND SHOCKS NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 160,000.

DURING AN ANNUAL VEHICLE INSPECTION, PERFORATIONS WERE FOUND ON THE FRAME OF MY TOYOTA TACOMA. I WAS ONLY MODERATELY WORRIED SINCE THIS ISSUE WAS COVERED BY AN EXTENDED WARRANTY ISSUED BY TOYOTA. WHEN I CONTACTED TOYOTA TO DISCUSS THE ISSUE, THEY INFORMED ME THAT THE VEHICLE MISSED THE 15 YEAR WARRANTY BY 11 DAYS AND THAT THEY WOULD NOT, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, HONOR THE WARRANTY. THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION IS TROUBLING SINCE IT IS VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE, WITHIN AN 11 DAY TIME PERIOD, FOR A FRAME TO BECOME RUSTED TO THE POINT OF A 3 INCH BY 12 INCH PERFORATION. THE FRAME ROT CLEARLY OCCURRED DURING THE 15 YEAR WARRANTY PERIOD.

WAS AT THE BEACH ON FEB.13 TH AT AROUND 11:00 PM AND THE GAS PEDAL SEEMED STUCK AND COULDN'T GET IT STOPPED HAD TO RUN IT IN SAND BANK. *TR

TOOK TRUCK TO MECHANIC. VEHICLE HAS 240,000+ MILES. FRAME IS RUSTED OUT AND ALL ASSOCIATED PARTS, I.E. BRAKE CABLES ETC. AND UNSAFE TO DRIVE. TRUCK IS IN CALIFORNIA, SUBJECT TO OCEAN AIR/SALT. CALIFORNIA NOT ONE OF STATES UNDER FRAME RECALL/REPLACE FOR RUST. MANY TOYOTA FORUMS WITH COMPLAINTS FROM OTHER SIMILAR OWNERS IN "NON-RECALL" STATES WITH EXCESSIVE FRAME RUST. MECHANIC SHOWED ME A 1993 FORD PICK UP WITH NEARLY NO RUST ON FRAME. TOYOTA SHOULD APPLY THE RECALL CONDITIONS TO ALL STATES, NOT JUST THOSE THAT USE SALT ON ROADS. I AM 3RD OWNER AND NEVER RECEIVED ANY RECALL NOTICE. FOR SAFETY, TOYOTA SHOULD HAVE NOTIFIED ALL OWNERS, WHETHER VEHICLE SUBJECT TO RECALL OR NOT. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE HAVING MAINTENANCE PERFORMED, THE TECHNICIAN DISCOVERED THAT THE FRAME WAS COMPLETELY RUSTED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 132,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME WAS CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC FOR DIAGNOSIS. THE MECHANIC DIAGNOSED THAT THE FRAME NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 196,000. ,,UPDATED 01/06/15 *BF UPDATED 9/7/2017*CN

VEHICLE PARKED IN DRIVEWAY AND DRUNK DRIVER HIT 2 VEHICLES, TOTALED ONE & 99% ON TOYOTA. AFTER REPAIRS, REPAIRMAN MADE STATEMENT THAT WE HAD RUST ON UNDERSIDE AND WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO FIND OUT MORE ABOUT THE PROBLEM AND HOW TO FIX IT. JUST THIS MONTH A FRIEND TOLD US ABOUT THE RECALLS AND HOW TO FIND OUT MORE. WE FOUND THE RECALL AND WAS GIVEN A CASE MANAGER AND TOLD THAT IT WAS A WARRANTY AND IT EXPIRED AND THE NEXT DAY THE ARTICLE ON THE RECALL WAS NO LONGER ON THE INTERNET.

FRAME IS RUSTED THROUGH LEAF SPRING WENT INSIDE THE FRAME RAILS. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT HE TOOK THE VEHICLE IN FOR A RECALL REPAIR FOR VERIFYING IF THE FRAME WAS RUSTED. THE REPAIR WAS DONE BETWEEN 2010 AND 2013. THE UNKNOWN DEALER SPRAYED THE FRAME WITH AN UNDERCOAT AFTER INSURING THAT IT WAS NOT RUSTED. THE UNDERCOAT WAS SUPPOSED TO PROTECT FRAME FROM ANY FUTURE RUSTING. THE FRAME WAS NOT RUSTED PRIOR TO THE COATING BEING APPLIED. THE CONTACT BECAME AWARE THAT THE FRAME STARTED TO RUST WHILE WASHING THE VEHICLE AT UNDER THE REAR FENDER WELLS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE SUBFRAME. THE DEALER AND MANUFACTURER WERE NOT CONTACTED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 150,000.*DT*JB

HEARD RATTLING SOUND FROM UNDER PICKUP. CHECKED AND SAW CORROSION OF FRAME. BROUGHT TO MECHANIC WHO SAID TRUCK IS UNSAFE TO DRIVE, TOTAL FRAME CORRODED BY RUST, TOTAL FRAME ROTTED OUT. *TR

HAD A RECALL IN THE PAST FOR FRAME ROT. WAS TOLD THAT IT MAY STILL APPLY. *TR

THE FRAME HAS EXCESSIVE RUST. THE CURRENT RECALL ON TOYOTA FRAMES FOR THE 2001 MODELS NEEDS TO BE EXTENDED TO 2000. *TR

BROKEN DRIVER SIDE REAR LEAF SPRING. INSPECTING UNDERBODY TO ASSESS PARTS LIST AND FOUND THE VEHICLE FRAME RUSTED THROUGH IN A 2 -3 FOOT SPAN FROM JUST AFT OF THE DRIVER SEAT TO THE REAR LEAF SPRING BRACKET. HEAVY FLAKES AND PIECES OF RUST BREAKING OFF AND FRAME ALMOST RUSTED AWAY NEAR THE LEAF SPRING BRACKET THAT HAS CRACKED AND NEAR FALLING OFF. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC FOR SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE AND NOTICED A HOLE IN THE FRAME AT THE REAR SHOCK MOUNT AREA. THERE WERE ALSO NUMEROUS SEVERELY RUSTED SPOTS THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE FRAME. THE INDEPENDENT MECHANIC FOREWARNED THE CONTACT FOR APPROXIMATELY THREE YEARS OF A POSSIBLE FAILURE WITH THE RUST ON THE FRAME. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 115,000. UPDATED 10/07/16*LJ *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 20 MPH, THE VEHICLE DROPPED WITH A LOUD NOISE. THE CONTACT DISCOVERED THAT THE AXLE WAS FRACTURED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A DEALER FOR DIAGNOSIS AND THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE AXLE, LOWER BALL JOINT, UPPER BALL JOINT AND TIE ROD WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 198,164.

I PURCHASED MY TACOMA NEW IN 2001 AND RECENTLY I HEARD OF A RECALL CONCERNING THE FRAME OF THE VEHICLE, SO I TOOK MY TRUCK TO GLENN TOYOTA IN FRANKFORT KY. I WAS TOLD THAT THE FRAME WAS BAD AFTER THEY CHECKED THE FRAME BY HITTING IT WITH A HAMMER AND PUTTING A HOLE IN THE FRAME. I WAS TOLD THEY WOULD BUY BACK MY TRUCK FOR 1.5 TIMES THE BLUE BOOK VALUE. WE DONE SOME PAPER WORK WHEN THEY REALIZED MY TRUCK WAS A 2001 INSTEAD OF A 2000. I WAS THEN TOLD THEY WOULD NEITHER BUY BACK MY VEHICLE NOR FIX MY TRUCK THEY PUT A HOLE IN. I FILED A COMPLAINT WITH TOYOTA AND I WAS TOLD THEY DID NOT HAVE TO FIX OR BUY BACK MY TRUCK BECAUSE IT WAS A ?VOLUNTARY RECALL?. THIS ALLOWED THEM TO NO LONGER HONOR ANY PART OF THIS RECALL WHICH INCLUDES NOT FIXING NOR BUYING BACK THE TRUCKS WITH FRAME PROBLEMS THAT ARE NEWER THEN 2000. I WAS ALSO TOLD I HAD WAITED TOO LONG FROM THE TIME THE RECALL WAS FIRST ISSUED. I WAS IN THE MILITARY DURING THE ISSUING OF THIS RECALL. DURING MY MILITARY OBLIGATION I SPENT A YEAR IN AFGHANISTAN AND A YEAR IN IRAQ. CLEARLY I WAS NOT IN A POSITION TO HEAR OF THE RECALL NOR BRING MY VEHICLE INTO A DEALERSHIP. NOT ONLY IS THIS BUSINESS PRACTICE NOT FAIR (DOING ONE THING FOR ONE CUSTOMER AND NOT OFFERING THE SAME DEAL TO THE NEXT), BUT TOYOTA CLEARLY KNOWS THERE IS UNSAFE VEHICLES ON THE ROAD AND DOES NOT WANT TO FIX THEIR MISTAKE. TOYOTA HAS MADE THE DECISION THAT IF THE VEHICLES FROM THE YEARS RANGING 1996-2000 FAILED THE SAME TEST THAT MY VEHICLE FAILED IT WAS UNSAFE AND SHOULD BE BOUGHT BACK. I KNOW THAT THIS MUST BE A SAFETY CONCERN OR TOYOTA WOULD NO LONGER TEST THE VEHICLES FROM 1996-2000 STILL. I AM VERY DISAPPOINTED HOW TOYOTA HAS HANDLED THIS SITUATION, ESPECIALLY SINCE I WORK FOR TOYOTA MOTOR MANUFACTURING OF KENTUCKY (TMMK), AND I FEEL TOYOTA SHOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE VEHICLES THEY ARE SELLING. *TR

MY 2000 TOYOTA TACOMA HAS "EXTENSIVE" RUST DAMAGE TO ITS FRAME AND SUSPENSION SYSTEM. THIS TRUCK WAS PURCHASED IN KANSAS AND HAS SINCE MOVED WITH ME DOWN TO GEORGIA. I NOTICED ON THE WEB THAT THE RUST ON THE FRAME OF THE TRUCK IS A COMMON CONCERN/DEFECT FROM TOYOTA. I AM INQUIRING TO SEE IF THERE IS A RECALL ON THIS AND HOW I SHOULD GO ABOUT TRYING TO GET THIS FIXED. THE ENGINE AND ALL OF THE VITAL COMPONENTS WORK FINE, IT SEEMS A SHAME TO GET RID OF A VEHICLE THAT IS STILL IN GOOD WORKING CONDITION, OTHER THAN THE RUST PROBLEM THAT IS. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE DRIVER SWERVED TO PREVENT HITTING A DEER BUT VEERED OFF ROAD AND THE VEHICLE ROLLED OVER 5 TIMES. UPON IMPACT, THE AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY. THE DRIVER SUSTAINED INTERNAL BLEEDING AND A CRUSHED RIGHT ARM AND KNEE. THE CONTACT ALSO SUSTAINED AND A BROKEN LEFT ARM ,LEG, AND ANKLE. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 83,000.

HIT A BUMP AND VEHICLE LOST SUSPENSION CONTROL. HIT DITCH AND FLIPPED. AIRBAG DIDN'T DEPLOY. *TR

MY LEAF SPRINGS ARE BROKEN AND NOT REPLACEABLE DUE TO RUSTED CASTERS ATTACHING TO A RUSTED FRAME. CORPORATE TOYOTA TELLS ME I CAN HAVE IT FIXED BUT EVERY DEALER TELLS ME THAT MY TRUCK IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE TOYOTA RUST CAMPAIGN. I HAVE FOUND LITERATURE ONLINE THAT INCLUDES MY VIN BUT NO DEALERS WILL HELP ME. I JUST BOUGHT THIS TRUCK IN JANUARY OF THIS YEAR FOR 7500 AND AM NOW OUT 7500. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRONT DRIVER'S SEAT BELT WAS UNRAVELING ITSELF. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER FOR INSPECTION AND THEY STATED THAT THE CONTACT MUST HAVE SPILLED SOMETHING ON THE SEAT BELT. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED AND OFFERED NO ASSSITANCE. THE MANUFACTURER ALSO STATED THAT THE WARRANTY WAS EXPIRED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 206,000.

RIGHT FRONT WHEEL COLLAPSED AND VEHICLE FELL TO THE GROUND. MECHANIC INITIALLY STATED THIS COULD BE REPAIRED, BUT ONCE HE INSPECTED THE UNDERSIDE OF VEHICLE HE INDICATED THAT THE FRAME WAS TOO RUSTED AND THE VEHICLE WAS NO LONGER USABLE OR REPAIRABLE. *TR

I HAVE A 2000 TOYOTA TACOMA AND HAVE BEEN AFFECTED BY A RECALL. THE RECALL IS FOR EXCESSIVE FRAME RUST. I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT MY OPTIONS ARE. CAN I PRESS FOR A REPAIR AND REFUSE A BUY BACK? I CALLED THE DEALER FROM MY CELL PHONE APPROX A YEAR AND A HALF AGO AND THEY STATED NO RECALL EXISTED FOR THE 2000 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE ISSUE IS SIMILAR TO NHTSA REFERENCE NUMBER: 10379995 WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS AT THE DEALER TO HAVE A CORROSION RESISTANCE PRODUCT APPLIED TO THE FRAME THE TECHNICIANS NOTICE THE FRAME WAS RUSTED. *TR

FRAME RUST PERFORATION PER TOYOTA 1995 THROUGH 2000 TOYOTA FRAME RUST CORROSION PERFORATION WARRANTY ENHANCEMENT (CUSTOMER SUPPORT PROGRAM) WAS CONDUCTED ON MY TRUCK LAST YEAR (SEPTEMBER 2010). THE LOCAL TOYOTA DEALERSHIP INSPECTED AND SAID IT WAS OK. TODAY THEY CONDUCTED ANOTHER FRAME INSPECTION AND SAID THE FRAME WAS PERFORATED AND WOULD NOT PASS THE SAFETY INSPECTION. I ASKED TO SEE A DIGITAL PHOTOGRAPH OF THE FRAME DAMAGE AND WAS TOLD NONE WERE AVAILABLE. NO OFFER WAS MADE TO PUT THE TRUCK ON THE LIFT FOR ME TO SEE FOR MYSELF. I DROVE HOME VERY CAREFULLY, PULLED THE TRUCK IN THE GARAGE AND HAD A LOOK, DOES NOT LOOK SAFE TO ME. APPEARS THE LEFT FRONT REAR AXLE LEAF SPRING MOUNT / CHASSIS FRAME COULD FAIL CAUSING THE AXLE TO SEPARATE FROM THE VEHICLE. PERHAPS THIS IS MORE SERIOUS THAN A "CUSTOMER SUPPORT PROGRAM"! *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 TOYOTA TACOMA. AFTER THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO BE SERVICED FOR ROUTINE MAINTENANCE, THE TECHNICIAN STATED THAT THE FRAME OF THE VEHICLE WAS RUSTED AND DEEMED THE VEHICLE UNSAFE TO DRIVE. THE CONTACT MENTIONED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS PREVIOUSLY SERVICED UNDER A TOYOTA SAFETY CAMPAIGN FOR THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 95,000. UPDATED 07/19/16*LJ CONSUMER STATED THE FRAME PERFORATION TREATMENT WAS DONE ON 6/22/11 AT CROWN MOTORS. WHILE CONSUMER WAS GETTING AND OIL CHANGE ON 8/20/14 AT VALVOLINE OIL THE SERVICE MAN INFORMED THE CONSUMER THAT THE TRUCK HAD A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF RUST ON THE FRAME AND NOTICE RUST PEELING OFF THE TRUCK. ON 6/24/16. CONSUMER HAD THE TRUCK GREASE AND OILED AT THE LOCAL REPAIR GARAGE, THE OWNER TOLD THE CONSUMER TRUCK WAS NOT SAFE TO DRIVE. REPAIR SHOP OWNER CALLED CROWN MOTORS AND THE MAIN OFFICE OF TOYOTA AND BOTH SAID THEY WOULDN'T BE WILLING TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT. UPDATED 6/19/18*JB

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THERE WAS PREMATURE RUST AND CORROSION ON THE FRONT AND REAR FRAMES OF THE VEHICLE. THE FRAMES FRACTURED WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER FOR FURTHER INSPECTION. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE AND REFUSED TO PROVIDE A PERMANENT REMEDY. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS NOT AVAILABLE. UPDATED 03/11/16*LJ *TR

LAST SUMMER, 2009, NOTICED THAT MY BRAKES, WHICH WERE ONLY A YEAR OLD, SEEMED TO NOT BE OPERATING EFFICIENTLY. UPON INSPECTION OF THE VEHICLE I DISCOVERED GEAR OIL HAD BEEN COMING OUT OF THE REAR AXLE, SPRAYING ALL OVER THE PASSENGER SIDE BRAKES AND TIRE. I HAD TO REPLACE THE REAR AXEL SEAL AND RUINED BRAKE SHOES. BOUGHT THE VEHICLE TOYOTA CERTIFIED USED IN DECEMBER OF 2003. RECENTLY IN 2010 I NOTICED THAT MY FRAME APPEARED AS THOUGH IT HAD A LOT OF DIRT ON IT, SO I TRIED TO SPRAY IT OFF WITH A HIGH POWERED WASHER, IT TURNED OUT TO B RUST NOT DIRT. I RECENTLY MOVED TO CALIFORNIA AND I AM STILL SETTLING IN, WHEN I HEAR A LOUD BANGING SOUND COMING FROM SOMEWHERE UNDER MY TRUCK. I WONDERED IF IT HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE RUST SO I TYPED IN RUST AND TOYOTA ON GOOGLE AND DISCOVERED A CUSTOMER WARRANTY PROGRAM ISSUED BY TOYOTA ON 1995-2000 MODEL TACOMAS FOR RUST PERFORATION. I WAS NEVER NOTIFIED AND MY CAR IS STILL REGISTERED IN ONE OF THE APPLICABLE STATES, PENNSYLVANIA. I CONTACTED CUSTOMER SERVICE AND TOOK THE CAR TO BE INSPECTED, THE DEALER SAID MY CAR PASSED RUST PERFORATION TEST BUT COULD NOT LOCATE NOISE. I WAS SHOCKED AS THE NOISE IS UNMISTAKABLE. AFTER LEAVING THE DEALER I TOOK THE CAR TO A FRIEND WHO KNOWS A LITTLE MORE ABOUT VEHICLES THEN ME, WE CRAWLED UNDER THE TRUCK AND HE WAS ABLE TO POINT OUT A BROKEN LEAF SPRING THAT APPEARED TO BE RUSTED AND GRINDING HEAVILY INTO MY PASSENGER SIDE SHOCK. THE DEALER LET ME DRIVE OFF THEIR LOT WITH MY TRUCK LIKE THAT AND THE LEAF SPRING IS ATTACHED TO THE FRAME WHICH THEY CLAIMED TO HAVE INSPECTED! NOT ONLY THIS BUT THE TECH ALSO CHECKED OFF SUSPENSION AS GREEN! THIS IS EXTREMELY DANGEROUS, WHAT IF THE BROKEN LEAF SPRING HAD SWUNG IN THE OTHER DIRECTION AND JABBED INTO MY TIRE? TOYOTA IS NOT OFFERING TO FIX THE PROBLEM UNDER THE WARRANTY DESPITE THE FACT THIS BROKEN LEAF SPRING ISSUE IS WELL DOCUMENTED ACROSS THE NATION. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT AFTER THE VEHICLE SAT FOR A WEEK WITHOUT BEING DRIVEN IT BURST INTO FLAMES WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED IN THE FIRE. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT ADVISED THAT THE FIRE WAS CAUSED BY AN ELECTRICAL FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT CONTACTED IN REGARDS TO THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 200,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHILE DRIVING VARIOUS SPEEDS, THE LEAF SPRING FRACTURED IN HALF. IN ADDITION, THE FRAME WAS RUSTED OUT. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE CONTACT'S RESIDENCE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED NOR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE AND VIN WERE UNKNOWN.

YESTERDAY NIGHT I GOT INTO AN ACCIDENT WITH MY 2000 TOYOTA TACOMA.... A MAN FAILED TO YIELD AT A STOP SIGN AND CROSSED THE INTERSECTION WHERE I WAS DRIVING ON AND HAD THE RIGHT AWAY. I WAS GOING 45 AT THE TIME AND WHEN I SAW HIM PULL OUT I SLAMMED MY BRAKES AND IT WAS TOO LATE. I T BONED HIM...MY AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY CAUSING ME TO WHIP LASH FORWARD(YES, I WAS WEARING A SEAT-BELT). WHEN I WHIP LASHED FORWARD MY FACE HIT THE WHEEL AND I BIT INTO MY OWN LIP , MY PINKY FINGER ALSO HIT THE WHEEL CAUSING IT TO SWELL UP. FROM WHAT I WAS TOLD BY THE POLICE OFFICER AND INSURANCE COMPANY WAS THAT MY AIRBAG SHOULD HAVE DEPLOYED !! THIS CAR HAS NEVER BEEN IN AN ACCIDENT SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY IT NEVER WENT OFF. *TR

2000 TOYOTA TACOMA FRAME RUST - I HAVE OWNED THIS TRUCK FOR TEN YEARS ALWAYS GETTING MY SERVICE DONE AT DARCARS HERE IN FREDERICK, MD. I DECIDED TO TAKE MY TRUCK TO A NEW MECHANIC AND TO WHAT I HAVE FOUND MY FRAME IS RUSTED. NOT ONLY RUSTED BUT FALLING APART, I WAS TOLD THAT MY TRUCK WAS A SAFETY HAZARD TO DRIVE AND THAT I SHOULD NOT BE DRIVING IT BECAUSE IT COULD FALL APART AT JUST HITTING A POT HOLE. THE CORROSION WAS THAT TERRIBLE. I IMMEDIATELY CONTACTED DARCARS IN FREDERICK, MD AND WAS TOLD TO BRING IT IN TOMORROW. DID THEY NOT HEAR MY SAY THAT IT WAS A POTENTIAL LIFE THREATENING DEATH TRAP TO DRIVE. UNHAPPY WITH MY RESPONSE I WENT TO DARCARS IMMEDIATELY AFTER PICKING MY TRUCK UP FROM MY NEW MECHANIC. I LEFT MY TRUCK AT DARCARS AND HAD TO GO RENT A CAR ON MY OWN UNTIL THEY LOOK AT MY TRUCK TOMORROW HOPEFULLY SOMETIME BEFORE NOON. HERE NOW I HAVE HAD TO PAY 267.00 OUT OF MY ACCOUNT TO GET A RENTAL CAR. UNTIL TOMORROW I HAVE NO ANSWERS. WHY DO I FEEL LIKE I HAVE BEEN PUNISHED FOR SOMETHING THAT THEY ARE IN THE WRONG FOR. I LOVE MY TRUCK. HAD IT FOR YEARS AND DARCARS COULD NOT SEE AFTER SERVICING MY VEHICLE FOR 10 YEARS THAT MY FRAME WAS NEARLY NOTHING BUT RUSTED METAL WITH HOLES IN IT. THEY SURE DID FIND OTHER THINGS WRONG WITH MY TRUCK THAT NEEDED TO BE FIXED. A TRUE MECHANIC, A PERSON YOU TRUST TO MAKE YOUR CAR SAFE TO DRIVE LET ME DRIVE A VEHICLE AROUND THAT COULD HAVE POTENTIALLY KILLED ME AND THE LIFE OF MY DAUGHTER OF 11. HOW SAD ARE THESE PEOPLE? I AM VERY DISSATISFIED WITH THE SERVICE I HAVE RECEIVED FROM TOYOTA AND THE COMMUNICATION CONCERNING MY VEHICLE. THE ARE NOT CONCERNED FOR ANYONE'S SAFETY. SO I AM LEFT WITH NO VEHICLE, ONE THAT I JUST PAID OFF AND NOW I HAVE NOTHING. MAYBE THAT IS OK FOR SOME BUT FOR ME IT IS TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE. *TR

THE FRAME ON MY 2000 TOYOTA TACOMA HAS RUSTED THROUGH. I NEVER GOT ANY INFO ABOUT A RECALL BUT THERE IS ONE FOR MY MODEL. MY MECHANIC TOLD ME THE FRAME COULD BREAK AT ANY TIME. *TR

WHILE DRIVING MY 2000 TACOMA AT APPROXIMATELY 60 MPH, I NOTICED IT PICKING UP SPEED ON AN UPHILL ROAD. I REMOVED MY FOOT FROM ACCELERATOR, BUT TRUCK CONTINUED TO PICK UP SPEED TO OVER 60 MPH. I THEN BRAKED, BUT IT DID NOT HELP. I THEN SHIFTED INTO NEUTRAL AND DROVE TRUCK INTO AN EMPTY DIRT LOT, APPLYING ALSO THE PARKING BRAKE AND BROUGHT TRUCK TO A STOP. *TR

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT NOTICED EXCESSIVE RUST ON THE FRAME AND CALLED THE DEALER. THE TECHNICIAN STATED THAT THEY WOULD NOT REPURCHASE THE VEHICLE BECAUSE IT WAS CLASSIFIED AS A LEVEL THREE RUSTING HAZARD. THEY WOULD NOT REPURCHASE THE VEHICLE UNTIL IT REACHED A LEVEL FOUR, WHICH MEANT THAT THE FRAME WAS RUSTED TO THE POINT THAT THE VEHICLE WAS NON-REPAIRABLE. SYMPTOMS OF LEVEL FOUR ARE HOLES OR FRACTURES WITHIN THE FRAME. THE MANUFACTURER WOULD NOT ASSIST. THE VIN WAS UNKNOWN. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 120,000 AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 140,000.

IN THE PAST 23 MONTHS THE BALL JOINTS HAVE FAILED, CAUSING WHEELS TO FALL OFF, ON BOTH SIDES OF MY 2000 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE FIRST WAS THE PASSENGER SIDE WHICH IN SEPTEMBER 2006. AT THAT TIME THE VEHICLE WAS MOVING AT VERY LOW SPEED CAUSING MINIMAL DAMAGE BUT REQUIRING OVER $900 IN REPAIRS. SECOND WAS THE DRIVER SIDE IN AUGUST 2008. THIS TIME THE VEHICLE WAS MOVING DOWNHILL AT UNDER 40 MPH ON GRAVEL ROAD WHEN THE WHEEL FELL OFF [TAKING AXEL, BREAK LINE AND CV JOINT WITH IT]. THE TACOMA SLID OUT OF CONTROL FOR MORE THAN 100' BEFORE COMING TO REST. TOWING AND REPAIRS TO GET THE TRUCK BACK ON THE ROAD CAME TO $1,053. THERE IS SOME ADDITIONAL DAMAGE IN THE WHEEL WELL AND THE DOOR IS NOT FITTING PROPERLY BUT THAT HAS NOT BEEN EXAMINED BY A REPAIRMAN AS OF YET. *TR

2000 TOYOTA TACOMA WAS TRAVELING AT 35-40MPH. RESTRAINED DRIVER. COLLISION TO RIGHT FRONT PORTION OF THE VEHICLE. NO AIRBAG DEPLOYMENT. *TR

I'M THE OWNER OF A 2000 TOYOTA TACOMA. TOYOTA HAS MADE A RECALL ON RUSTED FRAMES ON YEARS 95-2000. MY TRUCK HAS A REPAIRED TITLE WHICH THEY SAY VOIDS THE WARRANTY. THE TRUCK HAD NO FRAME DAMAGE WHAT SO EVER AND WAS NOT ROLLED OVER, ONLY COSMETIC DAMAGE. I HAVE PICTURES AND DOCUMENTS SHOWING WHAT WAS REPAIRED. I HAVE A WIFE AND TWO CHILDREN THAT I DON'T WANT IN THE VEHICLE WHEN IT DECIDES TO BREAK IN HALF. THERE SHOULD BE SOME EXCEPTION IF EVIDENCE IS PROVIDED THAT THE DAMAGE WAS LIGHT OR HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH FRAME. *TR

RESTRAINED DRIVER OF A 2000 TOYOTA TACOMA PICKUP WAS TRAVELING AT APPROXIMATELY 40MPH ON A MOUNTAIN ROAD. THE DRIVER SWERVED TO AVOID HITTING AN ANIMAL IN THE ROADWAY, LOST CONTROL AND STRUCK A TREE. NO AIR BAG DEPLOYMENT. DRIVER HIT THE STEERING WHEEL CAUSING SERIOUS INJURIES. *TR

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT HEARD ABOUT AN ISSUE WITH THE FRAMES ON THE 1995-2000 TOYOTA TACOMAS. HE CONSULTED THE MANUFACTURER AND DEALER AND THEY CONFIRMED THE 150% BUYBACK OPTION, BUT WOULD NOT CONFIRM THE PROCESS. HE ASKED THE DEALER IF THE FRAME COULD BE REPLACED AND WAS INFORMED THAT IT COULD NOT. THE CONTACT WAS CONVINCED THAT THE FRAME COULD BE REPLACED AND WANTED TO HAVE IT DONE INSTEAD OF TRADING IN THE VEHICLE. AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC STATED THAT THE FRAME WAS "SOFT" AND NOT STRUCTURALLY SOUND. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 66,276.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHILE ATTEMPTING TO DRIVE HE NOTICED THAT THE BRAKE PEDAL HAD FALLEN TO THE FLOOR. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALERSHIP FOR INSPECTION. THE TECHNICIAN STATED THAT THE REAR BRAKE LINE NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 91000.