2002 Toyota Tacoma Complaint Log

FRAME IS RUSTED AND BROKEN AND TRUCK IS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. *TR

THE WHOLE SPARE TIRE ASSEMBLY FELL OFF THE TACOMA TRUCK. THERE IS A SAFETY RECALL FOR THIS. THE PROBLEM IS THIS TACOMA TRUCK ALSO HAS TOTALLY ROTTED FRAME RAILS (AN OLDER, EXPIRED SAFETY RECALL). THE BIG ISSUE IS TOYOTA CAN ONLY OFFER A DATE WHEN THE ACTUAL RECALL NOTICE LEFT THEIR PRINT FACILITY. I DO NOT RECALL RECEIVING THIS NOTICE SINCE IT DID NOT COME REGISTERED MAIL. TOYOTA WILL NOT HONOR THE OLD, EXPIRED FRAME RAIL RECALL AND THUS CANNOT FULFILL THIS ACTIVE, SPARE TIRE RECALL. BOTH RECALLS ARE FOR THE SAME SYMPTOM (EXCESSIVE ROAD SALT CORRODING PARTS). WHY DID THE FRAME RAIL RECALL EXPIRE WHEN THE MOST-RECENT SPAR TIRE RECALL IS THE SAME SYMPTOM?? I DO NOT KNOW IF ANYONE HAS DIED BECAUSE MY SPARE TIRE FELL OFF...THAT SCARES ME VERY MUCH. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME STARTED TO DETERIORATE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER WHERE THE TECHNICIAN APPLIED AN UNDER COATING TO THE FRAME. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE COATING EVENTUALLY WORE OFF. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. UPDATED 04/21/14*LJ THE CONSUMER STATED HE MADE AN APPOINTMENT FOR THE CORROSION FRAME RECALL. BEFORE THE APPOINTMENT, HE NOTICED A LOT OF OIL DROPLETS ON THE TAIL GATE OF THE TRUCK, AS HE DROVE OFF, HE NOTICED A PUDDLE OF OIL. AN INSPECTION REVEALED, THE DIFFERENTIAL CASE WAS LEAKING AND IT NEEDED TO BE REPLACED BECAUSE IT WAS EXTREMELY RUSTY. ALSO, THE FRAME WAS RUSTED, AND IT NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. UPDATED 04/24/14

INFORMED BY DEALER THAT FRAME IS RUSTED THROUGH AND TRUCK IS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. ALSO INFORMED THAT THERE HAD BEEN A SERVICE BULLETIN FOR THIS PROBLEM. BUT MY TRUCK IS NO LONGER ELIGIBLE FOR REPAIR UNDER THE VOLUNTARY SERVICE RECALL (OF WHICH I WAS NEVER NOTIFIED), AS IT HAD EXPIRED. I THINK TOYOTA SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE. THEY RECOGNIZED THEIR DEFECTIVE PRODUCT; HOWEVER MY TRUCK IS INELIGIBLE FOR REPAIR BECAUSE THEY GET TO LIMIT THEIR RESPONSIBILITY BECAUSE THEIR REMEDY IS NOT TECHNICALLY A "RECALL". I, AND I'M SURE MANY OTHERS, ARE BY NECESSITY, DRIVING UNSAFE VEHICLES. *TR

THERE WAS A RECALL ON THIS VEHICLE FOR PREMATURE FRAME RUSTING. I TOOK IT IN FOR THE INSPECTION AND WAS TOLD IT WAS OK. WHEN I TOOK IT IN FOR THE LAST SERVICE, IT WAS POINTED OUT TO ME THAT THERE ARE TWO HOLES RUSTED THROUGH THE FRAME IN FRONT OF THE RIGHT REAR WHEEL AREA. THE FRAME IS RUSTING FROM THE INSIDE OUT. THE BODY OF THE TRUCK HAS NO RUST. WITH THE LOW MILEAGE I HAD HOPED TO DRIVE THE TRUCK FOR MANY MORE YEARS. I CONTACTED TOYOTA AND DID NOT EVEN GET A RESPONSE. WHAT RECOURSE DO I HAVE? *TR

I CONTACTED TOYOTA IN NOVEMBER OF 2013 PRIOR TO PURCHASING A USED 2002 DOUBLE CAB TACOMA. I WAS AWARE OF THE FRAME ISSUE SO I CALLED TO CHECK TO SEE IF IT HAD BEEN SERVICED. I GAVE THE VIN TO THE CUSTOMER SERVICE ASSOCIATE AND HE WAS ABLE TO PULL RECORDS ON THE VEHICLE. HE TOLD ME THAT IT HAD NOT HAD THE CORROSION TREATMENT, HOWEVER, THE CORROSION TREATMENT FAILED AND WAS IN THE PROCESS OF BEING REFORMULATED. HE SAID THAT THE PROGRAM HAD BEEN REOPENED DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE TREATMENT FAILED. HE SAID AFTER PURCHASING THE VEHICLE I SHOULD TAKE IT TO BE INSPECTED AND IF ANY RUST WAS FOUND IT WOULD BE COVERED UNDER THE FRAME PROGRAM. I PURCHASED THE VEHICLE IN NOVEMBER OF 2013 AND UPON INSPECTION WE FOUND THAT THE FRAME WAS RUSTED. IN JANUARY OF 2014 MY HUSBAND CALLED A LOCAL TOYOTA DEALER TO SET UP AN APPOINTMENT FOR THE FRAME INSPECTION AND THEY SAID THAT THEY HAD NO IDEA ABOUT THE FRAME PROGRAM BEING REOPENED. MY HUSBAND CALLED TOYOTA AND THEY PULLED UP THE VEHICLE AND SAID SINCE THE ORIGINAL TREATMENT HAD NOT BEEN APPLIED THEY WOULD NOT HONOR THE FRAME PROGRAM. WE SPOKE TO SEVERAL TOYOTA ASSOCIATES AND WE WERE TOLD THAT NOTHING COULD BE DONE. WE HAVE CONTACTED THE TOYOTA LEGAL DEPARTMENT AND THE VIRGINIA ATTORNEY GENERAL WITH NO SUCCESS. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR UNRELATED REPAIRS WHEN HE WAS ADVISED THAT THE SUB-FRAME WAS SEVERELY CORRODED. AS A RESULT, THE TECHNICIAN ADVISED THE CONTACT THAT THE VEHICLE WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 110,000.

2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO VEHICLE SEVERE FRAME RUST ISSUE AND NO WARNING OF RECALLS. *SMD TOYOTA USA INFORMED THE CONSUMER, A RECALL WAS NOT ISSUED, BUT A CUSTOMER SERVICE PROGRAM WAS OFFERED, BUT IT EXPIRED AT THE END OF 2011. THE CONSUMER WAS INFORMED SIX LETTERS WERE MAILED INFORMING HER OF THE ISSUE. HOWEVER, THE CONSUMER STATED SHE NEVER RECEIVED ANY LETTERS.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER FOR SERVICE UNDER NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 12V542000 (TIRES). THE CONTACT WAS ADVISED THAT THE VEHICLE COULD NOT BE SERVICE UNDER THE RECALL BECAUSE OF EXCESSIVE CORROSION. THE CONTACT STATED THAT HE WAS NEVER ADVISED OF CORROSION WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED IN 2010 FOR A MANUFACTURER'S WARRANTY. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE ISSUE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 95,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHILE UNDERGOING A STATE INSPECTION, THE VEHICLE COULD NOT BE PLACED ON THE LIFT BECAUSE THE FRAME WAS SEVERELY RUSTED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 110,000. UPDATED 1/12/2016 *CN *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE REAR FRAME WAS DETERIORATED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER, WHO STATED THAT THEY WOULD NOT REPAIR THE PROBLEM. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE DEALER INFORMED HIM THAT THE VEHICLE WAS INCLUDED IN A MANUFACTURER'S RECALL AND SEVERAL NOTICES HAD BEEN SENT HOWEVER, THE CONTACT FAILED TO HAVE THE VEHICLE SERVICED PER THE RECALL. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE PROBLEM. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 220,000.

DEAR [XXX], I SINCERELY APPRECIATE YOUR EMAIL BUT I AM COMPLETELY SATISFIED WITH MY 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA PICK UP TRUCK AT THE MOMENT WITH 134,000 MILES AS OF TODAY. THE PROBLEM LIES WITH THE ?DEFECTIVE AIR BAGS AND DEFECTIVE COMPUTER AIR BAG.? OVER A YEAR AGO, THIS WAS ACCESSED FROM HALEY LOCATED OFF RT 288 AND THE AIR BAG LIGHT WAS COMING ON AT THAT TIME. I PAID FOR A DIAGNOSTIC TESTING AND IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN RESOLVED THEN, NOT TO REOCCUR A YEAR LATER. IN ANY CASE, IF A TOYOTA VEHICLE HAS DEFECTIVE PARTS SUCH AS THE AIR BAG AND ITS COMPUTER THAT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE MANUFACTURER TO REPLACE THE PART AND ABSORB THE LABOR AND COSTS INVOLVED TO DO SO NOT AT THE EXPENSE OF THE CLIENT. THE CLIENT DID NOT CAUSE THE PROBLEM, IT IS A DEFECT IN THE MANUFACTURING OF THE VEHICLE. THE PROBLEM I AM NOW FACING IS THAT HALEY TOYOTA WANTS ME TO ABSORB THIS COST OF PARTS AND LABOR TO THE TUNE OF $711.00 FOR A DEFECTIVE AIR BAG. I HAVE NOT BEEN IN CONTACT WITH AN ATTORNEY SPECIALIZING IN AUTO INJURY, BUT WITH SOME RESEARCH AND TAKING WITH A FRIEND OF MINE WHO IS A LAWYER; HE HIGHLY SUGGESTS THAT UNLESS TOYOTA REPLACES THE PARTS AND LABOR AT THEIR EXPENSE THAT I SHOULD PROCEED WITH HIRING AN ATTORNEY AND EXPLAIN WHAT IS GOING ON WITH THE AIR BAG AND WHAT HALEY HAS SAID. FOR HALEY TO DISMISS THIS DEFECTIVE PART AND SAY THAT THEY CANNOT BE RESPONSIBLE IS IN ITSELF AN ?EGREGIOUS? REMARK FOR WHICH THEY CAN BE LIABLE FOR IF SOMETHING WERE TO HAPPEN WHILE THE PASSENGER IS DRIVING THE CAR/TRUCK IN QUESTIONED. INFACT, THEY SHOULD NEVER HAVE ALLOWED ME TO LEAVE THE PREMISE THIS PAST FRIDAY KNOWING ALL OF THIS, BECAUSE IF A MAJOR ACCIDENT WERE TO HAPPEN THEY WOULD BE TOTALLY RESPONSIBLE AS WELL AS TOYOTA ITSELF. THANK YOU. [XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 30 MPH, HE HEARD A KNOCKING NOISE IN THE REAR OR THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A CERTIFIED MECHANIC FOR INSPECTION WHERE THEY STATED THAT THE REAR SHOCK WAS CORRODED NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 151,000.

I PURCHASED THE TACOMA 10/9/2013, I NOTICED SOME OF THE RECALL REPAIRS HAD NOT BEEN MADE BY THE PREVIOUS OWNER, I TOOK IT TO THE DEALER, 10/29/2013 FOR THE NECESSARY REPAIRS. I WAS INFORMED BY THE SERVICE GUY, USING A HAMMER, THAT MY FRAME WAS CRUMBLING AND I WOULD BE NEEDING A NEW FRAME AS WELL. I CALLED TOYOTA CUSTOMER SERVICE NUMEROUS TIMES AND ALL I EVER GOT WAS, I'M SORRY, AND HOW THEY WERE WELL AWARE OF THE CORROSION PROBLEM WITH THE FRAME ON THE 2002. THE RUST PROBLEM ON MY TACOMA IS SO SEVERE, THE TRUCK IS STARTING TO BUCKLE, NO SPACE BETWEEN THE CAB AND THE BED AT THE TOP. IT IS IN SUCH BAD SHAPE NO ONE WILL PUT IT ON A LIFT! IT WILL BE THE COMPLETE AND SINGLE CAUSE FOR THE DEMISE OF MY TRUCK, AND QUITE POSSIBLY MYSELF. I HAD JUST BOUGHT THE TRUCK. I WILL BE DRIVING THE TACOMA WHEN THE FRAME BREAKS APART AND I WILL PROBABLY DIE. 9/11/17 I WROTE JAMES LETZ, CEO OF TOYOTA, AND MANAGER OF TOYOTA MOTOR ENGINEERING AND MANUFACTURING, I STATED, "I FOLLOWED THE CORROSION PREVENTION IN THE OWNER'S MANUAL. THE QUALITY OF THE FRAME ON THE 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA IS INFERIOR DUE TO INADEQUATE RUST PROTECTION AT THE FACTORY." 9/28/17 I RECEIVED A RESPONSE BY PHONE FROM GRAND PRAIRIE, TX. HE TOLD ME THERE WAS A RECALL LETTER SENT OUT TO THE OWNERS OF 2002 TACOMAS, INFORMING THE OWNERS TO CHECK FOR RUSTING AND CORROSION ON THE FRAME, AND THEY COULD BRING THE TRUCK IN FOR A RUST PREVENTION SPRAY; HOWEVER, IT EXPIRED 2011. THEY OBVIOUSLY KNOW HOW SEVERE THE PROBLEM IS. I TOLD HIM I WAS SCARED, AND HE ANSWERED, "I UNDERSTAND I WOULD BE TOO." HE LED ME TO THINK NOTHING WAS GOING TO BE DONE, BUT IT WAS UP TO THE ENGINEERING AND MANUFACTURING DEPARTMENT, ODDLY ENOUGH, THAT IS MR. LETZ!

AFTER HAVING MY 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA OFF THE ROAD AND GARAGED FOR THE PAST 3 YEARS, I WAS GETTING THE TRUCK READY TO BE DRIVEN ON THE ROAD AGAIN. I AM THE ORIGINAL OWNER. I TOOK THE TRUCK OFF THE ROAD BECAUSE MY JOB WAS ELIMINATED IN OCTOBER 2010. AFTER CHANGING THE OIL LAST WEEKEND IN MY GARAGE I NOTICED AN ABNORMAL AMOUNT OF RUST ON THE FRAME. IN FACT, SO MUCH RUST THAT THE RUBBER BODY MOUNT BLOCK ON TOP OF THE REAR LEAF SPRING SNAPPED OFF IN MY HAND. THE LEAF SPRINGS, BRAKE LINES, AND FRONT SUSPENSION AND FRAME ARE ALL IN QUESTION REGARDING VEHICLE SAFETY. I IMMEDIATELY DID RESEARCH ONLINE TO CHECK OUT WHAT I THOUGHT WAS ABNORMAL AMOUNTS OF RUST ON THE FRAME AND TO SEE IF ANYONE ELSE HAD EXPERIENCED THIS TOO. I WAS SHOCKED AT WHAT I FOUND. A HUGE SAFETY ISSUE WITH TOYOTA TACOMA RUSTED FRAMES. I COME TO FIND OUT ONLINE THAT TOYOTA HAS A HISTORY OF RUSTED FRAMES, BREAKING FRAMES, UNSAFE FRAMES, AND A RECALL CURRENTLY FOR A REAR SPARE TIRE MOUNT ISSUE DUE TO RUST. I ALSO FOUND OUT TOYOTA WAS REPLACING FRAMES ON MY MODEL. I CALLED MY DEALERSHIP TO SET UP AN APPOINTMENT TO HAVE THIS TRUCK INSPECTED FOR PENNSYLVANIA STATE REQUIREMENTS AND TO HAVE THE RUST CHECKED. THEY TOLD ME MY VEHICLE WAS NOT VALID FOR THE RUST INSPECTION AND THE FRAME REPLACEMENT BECAUSE THE PROGRAM EXPIRED, I WAS TOLD TO CALL TOYOTA. I WAS NEVER NOTIFIED BY TOYOTA OR MY DEALER THERE WAS AN ISSUE, NOT BY MAIL, PHONE CALLS OR CERTIFIED MAIL. I HAD THE TRUCK PARKED IN MY GARAGE FOR THREE YEARS SO IT WASN'T EVEN ON THE ROAD DURING THIS TIME. SEVERAL PHONE CALLS LATER TO TOYOTA AND THEY REFUSE TO REPLACE MY FRAME UNDER THE CUSTOMER CARE PROGRAM CITING I DID NOT HAVE THE UNDERCOATING APPLIED BY DECEMBER OF 2012. TOYOTA CUSTOMER SERVICE SAID I COULD WELD REINFORCEMENT PLATES TO MY FRAME MYSELF OR FIND A JUNKYARD FRAME. REALLY TOYOTA?

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME HAD STARTED TO DETERIORATE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER WHERE THE TECHNICIAN APPLIED AN UNDERCOATING TO THE FRAME. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE COATING EVENTUALLY WORE OFF. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE PROBLEM. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 130,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN FOR STATE INSPECTION WHEN HE WAS ADVISED THAT THE FRONT AREA OF THE FRAME WAS SEVERELY CORRODED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND ADVISED THAT THE FRAME WAS NOT SAFELY COATED THEREFORE, THEY DENIED ASSISTANCE WITH ANY REPAIRS. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 161,250.

I AM A CANADIAN CITIZEN, CURRENTLY THE SECOND OWNER OF A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA AND HAVE ACCESSED THIS SITE TO INFORM OTHER OWNERS BUT HAD TO REGISTER THIS COMPLAINT UNDER THE PREVIOUS OWNERS NAME. THIS VEHICLE WAS PURCHASED IN NEW HAMPSHIRE AND RETURNED TO CANADA. IN LATE 2011 I WAS ADVISED THAT MY VEHICLE FRAME WAS STARTING TO SHOW SEVERE RUST CORROSION. I TOOK STEPS, AS ADVISED, TO HAVE IT UNDERCOATED BUT WHEN TAKING IT IN FOR INSPECTION THIS YEAR, I WAS TOLD IT WOULD NOT PASS INSPECTION. I WAS FORTUNATE TO BE ABLE TO DO A TEMPORARY FIX BY HAVING THE FRAME WELDED BUT THAT WOULD ONLY BE IN THE SHORT TERM. IN PURSUING THIS WITH TOYOTA USA I'VE TOLD THAT THERE WAS AN EXTENDED WARRANTY PUT ON THESE VEHICLES WHICH EXPIRED IN 2011 AND SINCE THEY DIDN'T HAVE IT REGISTERED IN THE UNITED STATES THERE WAS NOTHING THEY COULD DO. IT SEEMS LIKE THEY DO EVERYTHING TO AVOID RESPONSIBILITY FOR THIS PROBLEM BUT I AM AWARE THEY HAVE REPLACED MANY FRAMES FOR SIMILAR VEHICLES AT THEIR COST OR PAID OUT THE CUSTOMERS BY BUYING BACK THE VEHICLES. SO MANY CUSTOMERS ARE FRUSTRATED WITH TOYOTA, ME INCLUDED AND THEY'VE ADVISED ME SINCE IT ISN'T REGISTERED IN THE US CURRENTLY THEY CANNOT DO ANYTHING. ON THE OTHER HAND, CHECKING WITH TOYOTA CANADA THEN THEY SAY I HAVE TO RESOLVE THE MATTER WITH TOYOTA USA. TALK ABOUT PASSING THE BUCK BACK AND FORTH. THE VEHICLE HAS BEEN REGISTERED IN NORTH AMERICA SINCE 2002 AND WAS BUILT IN CALIFORNIA. WHY SHOULD THIS MATTER? IT'S STILL A TOYOTA. POOR CUSTOMER RELATIONS FOR PEOPLE WITH SIMILAR PROBLEMS.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE SPARE TIRE BECAME DETACHED FROM THE VEHICLE WHILE TRAVELING APPROXIMATELY 5 MPH. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED PRIOR TO THE FAILURE AND INFORMED THE CONTACT THAT THE REMEDY FOR NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER 12V542000 (TIRES) HAD NOT BEEN FINALIZED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 164,000. UPDATED 09/05/13*LJ

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH, THE STEERING WHEEL SUDDENLY MALFUNCTIONED AND CAUSED THE VEHICLE TO BECOME UNCONTROLLABLE. THE CONTACT DISCOVERED THAT DURING THE INCIDENT THE STEERING RACK HAD FRACTURED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED BY THE CONTACT. IN A SECOND INCIDENT THE CONTACT INDICATED THAT WHILE DRIVING THE ENGINE SUDDENLY MALFUNCTIONED AND THE VEHICLE STALLED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHO DIAGNOSED THAT 2 PISTONS HAD COME THROUGH THE ENGINE BLOCK. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED AND NO SOLUTION WAS OFFERED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 129,000.

THREE MONTHS AGO I RECEIVED MY NOTICE ABOUT EXCESSIVE CORROSION OF THE SPARE TIRE CARRIER LIFT PLATE. I CALLED THE LOCAL TOYOTA DEALER TO SCHEDULE THE REPAIR, THE COLLISION MANAGER HAD NO KNOWLEDGE ABOUT IT. I CALLED AGAIN TO SCHEDULE A FIX BUT WAS TOLD THAT SOME ONE WILL CALL ME BUT ,NO ONE DID. TOYOTA OF YORK ,PA17402. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME OF THE VEHICLE EXHIBITED SEVERE RUST. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER FOR DIAGNOSIS AND THE CONTACT WAS REFERRED TO THE MANUFACTURER. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 140,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE ENTIRE FRAME WAS COMPLETELY RUSTED AND AS A RESULT, THE REAR AXLE AND SPRING HANGER BECAME DETACHED FROM THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT BEING DRIVEN DUE TO A POTENTIAL SAFETY HAZARD. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE PROBLEM. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 162,000.

2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO VEHICLE SPLIT IN HALF DUE TO RUSTED FRAME. *SMD THE CONSUMER STATED THE FRAME RUSTED FROM THE INSIDE OUT.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME AND THE REAR LEAF SPRINGS CONTAINED MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF RUST AND WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE DUE TO THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE HAD NOT BEEN REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 151,000.

I COULD HEAR A RATTLING NOISE. UPON INSPECTION I SAW THAT THE FUEL TANK HAD DROPPED ALMOST TO THE GROUND. THE REAR STRAP , THAT HOLDS THE FUEL TANK TO THE BODY HAD BROKEN FROM CORROSION(RUST) . THIS RUST HAD ALSO DESTROYED THE PROTECTIVE SHIELD THAT WAS MOUNTED OVER THE FUEL TANK STRAP ,TO PROTECT IT FROM CORROSION AND PHYSICAL DAMAGE. A GAS TANK FALLING TO THE ROAD IS A SAFETY HAZARD. *TR

THIS VEHICLE WAS ALREADY INVOLVED IN A "CAMPAIGN" BY TOYOTA TO REPLACE SEVERELY RUSTED FRAMES. NOW THE SPARE TIRE LIFT PLATE IS ALSO RUSTED THROUGH ON MANY OF THEM WHICH TOYOTA IS "IMPLEMENTING A REMEDY FOR". MY COMPLAINT IS THAT I HAVE A SEVERELY RUSTED HOUSING OF THE REAR DIFFERENTIAL, NEXT TO AND JUST BELOW THE RUSTED SPARE TIRE CARRIER LIFT PLATE,TOYOTA REFUSES TO PAY FOR THE RUSTED THROUGH HOUSING OF THE REAR DIFFERENTIAL. THIS IS A NEGLIGENT SAFETY ISSUE ON THEIR PART, BECAUSE THOSE OWNERS WHO ARE NOT AWARE OF THE LEAKAGE OF THIS PART MAY FIND THEMSELVES WITHOUT POWER, OR WORSE PERHAPS, A LOCKUP OF THAT PART WHEN THEY ARE GOING 65 MPH ON HIGHWAY POSSIBLY WITH CHILDREN IN THEIR VEHICLE. THE RUST ON THESE VEHICLES IS LEGENDARY AMONG TOYOTA OWNERS AS EVIDENCED BY THEIR COMPLAINTS ON THE INTERNET. TOYOTA DID REPLACE THE FRAME ON MY 2002 TACOMA, BUT IN MY OPINION, IT IS THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO REPLACE THE RUSTED OUT HOUSING. IT IS NOT AS IF THAT IS THE ONLY RUST ON THIS VEHICLE, AND NO OTHER VEHICLES THAT I AM AWARE OF HAVE THIS PROBLEM. *TR

I PURCHASED THIS TRUCK WITH 100,000 MILES IN A PRIVATE SALE IN 2010. I DROVE IT FOR A FEW YEARS AND WHEN I BROUGHT IT IN FOR INSPECTION THEY FAILED IT FOR A RUSTED OUT FRAME. THEY SAID THAT THEY WOULDN'T DRIVE IT AND THAT IT WAS VERY DANGEROUS. I CALLED TOYOTA AND THEY TOLD ME THAT THEY WOULDN'T DO ANYTHING TO HELP ME OUT. THEY SAID SINCE THE PREVIOUS OWNER DID NOT GET IT SPRAYED THE WARRANTY WAS NULL AND VOID. SO MY TRUCK THAT HAS 100,000 MILES AND WAS KBB AT $8-$9K IS WORTH NOTHING. I AM NOT A PERSON THAT IS WELL OFF AND THAT WAS A BIG HIT FOR ME. I LIVE PAY CHECK TO PAY CHECK AND I WONDER HOW MANY OTHERS WERE EFFECTED BY AN OBVIOUSLY CHEAP FRAME. 100,000 MILES AND THE FRAME RUSTS, THAT JUST SEEMS WRONG. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT RUSTING AND CORROSION WAS DISCOVERED ON THE FRAME. THE CONTACT INDICATED THAT THE REAR DRIVER'S SIDE LEAF SPRING SHACKLE HAD SUNK INTO THE UNDER FRAME DUE TO THE RUST AND CORROSION. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE DEFECT BUT NO SOLUTION WAS OFFERED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 150,000. *TR

UPON BRINGING 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA TO MECHANIC FOR TIRE ROTATION AND OIL CHANGE, THE FRAME BROKE IN HALF DUE TO RUST AND CORROSION. CONTACTED TOYOTA WHO SAID IT WAS NOT COVERED UNDER 2008 EXTENDED CORROSION WARRANTY SINCE IT HAD NOT BEEN BROUGHT IN FOR THE UNDERCARRIAGE COMPOUND APPLICATION BEFORE 2011. WE WERE NEVER NOTIFIED BY ANY RECALL THAT IT SHOULD BE BROUGHT IN. *TR

I BOUGHT A USED 2002 TACOMA FROM A GOOD FRIEND. HE TOOK VERY GOOD CARE OF THE TRUCK, IT WAS MINT. AFTER I BOUGHT THE TRUCK I ASKED ABOUT THE FRAME RECALL, BUT HE SAID WHEN HE TOOK IT IN THAT THEY COULDN'T DO IT AND HE HAD FORGOTTEN TO TAKE IT BACK. NO NEGLIGENCE, JUST DIDN'T SEE RUST AND DIDN'T TAKE IT IN FOR THE UNDER COATING. I TRIED TO GET IT DONE BUT TOYOTA WOULD NOT STAND BEHIND THE WARRANTY. TWO YEARS LATER AND I HAVE A SOME PRETTY BAD FRAME RUST. THIS IS A SAFETY ISSUE AND I REALLY CANNOT AFFORD ANOTHER PAYMENT. THERE NEEDS TO BE A RECALL FOR THIS PROBLEM.

MY TACOMA WAS RECALLED 2 YEARS AGO FOR FRAME RUST. THEY TOLD ME IT WAS OK + UNDERCOATED IT TO PREVENT FUTURE RUSTING. ALL THAT UNDERCOATING IS FALLING OFF. THAT CAN ONLY BE DUE TO IMPROPER APPLICATION OR FAULTY PRODUCT. THE DEALER THAT APPLIED THE PRODUCT (FERRIS TOYOTA) SAYS THE PRODUCT IS FAULTY + THEY'VE SEEN IT MANY TIMES. THEY'VE ALSO CONFIRMED THE SAME WITH OTHER DEALERSHIPS. TOYOTA, OTOH, SAYS THERE'S NOTHING WRONG. IF THE FRAME DOESN'T NEED UNDERCOATING, THEN WHY'D THEY DO IT? ARE THEY SUGGESTING IT WORKS WHEN 50% HAS FALLEN OFF? THIS IS THE SAME VEHICLE WHICH IS NOW BEING RECALLED FOR SPARE TIRES FALLING OFF ON THE HIGHWAY + MY EMERGENCY BRAKES HAVE BEEN SEIZED WITH CORROSION SINCE I'VE OWNED THE TRUCK. I'VE CONTACTED TOYOTA MANY TIMES + THEY REFUSE TO PUT THEIR CORRESPONDENCE IN WRITING, BUT THE REPRESENTATIVE, TIFFANY BISHOP, SAYS SHE TYPES A TRANSCRIPT OF OUR CONVERSATIONS, JUST WON'T GIVE ME COPIES. SHE ALSO CALLS FROM A PHONE WITH A BLOCKED NUMBER. WHAT KIND OF BULL IS THIS? THESE VEHICLES ARE OBVIOUS HAZARDS ON THE ROAD + TOYOTA IS PLAYING GAMES INSTEAD OF MAKING SERIOUS EFFORTS TO MAKE THE VEHICLES SAFE. PLEASE BRING THIS TO THE ATTENTION OF SOMEONE AT TOYOTA OTHER THAN [XXX], I AM FINISHED CORRESPONDING WITH HER! INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

THE FRAME HAS RUSTED OUT AND I HAVE BEEN TRYING FOR YEARS TO GET TOYOTA TO COVER THIS DAMAGE.

WHEN ENGINE (COLD) FIRST STARTED, THERE IS ENGINE (PISTON SLAP/RATTLE) NOISE. SUCH CONTINUES FOR APPROX. ONE FULL MINUTE AND THEN SOUNDS NORMAL. SUCH NOISE IS VERY EXPENSIVE TO REPAIR, COMPLETE ENGINE OVERHAUL AND SHOULD CERTAINLY NOT BE OCCURRING IN VEHICLE WITH ONLY 50,000 MILES. TRUCK WAS VERY CAREFULLY BROKEN IN WHEN NEW AND ALL APPROPRIATE OIL CHANGES AT TOYOTA RECOMMENDED TIMES...OR EVEN SOONER. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING AT VARIOUS SPEEDS, THE VEHICLE WOULD SWAY FROM SIDE TO SIDE. THE CONTACT DISCOVERED THAT THE ENTIRE SUB FRAME OF WAS RUSTED AND CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 147,000.

AIRBAG LIGHT ON, DRIVING.

10/22/2012 RECENTLY HAD OCCASION TO LOOK AT THE FRAME ON MY TRUCK, IT IS RUSTED THROUGH IN MANY SPOTS MAKING VEHICLE UNSAFE, 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA, APPARENTLY I MISSED SOME "COURTESY" FRAME PROGRAM. I AM STUCK WITH A 10,000.00 TRUCK THAT I CAN'T AFFORD TO FIX AND TOYOTA HAS SAID THAT THEY WILL NOT OFFER ANY HELP.I THINK THIS NEEDS TO GO BEYOND A "COURTESY " RECALL, WITH THE LARGE AMOUNTS OF THESE TRUCKS ON THE ROAD IN UNSAFE CONDITIONS NEW YORK STATE HAS FORCED AN EXTENSION OF THIS PROGRAM, TRAFFIC SAFETY SHOULD FORCE A RECALL AS THERE ARE THOUSANDS OUT THERE IN THIS SHAPE BY TOYOTAS OWN ADMISSION I WOULD LIKE REPAIRS OR FAIR MARKET VALUE. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME NEAR THE REAR PASSENGER'S SIDE TIRE WAS RUSTED. THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A MECHANIC AND WAS TOLD THAT THE FRAME COULD NOT BE REPAIRED AND THAT THE VEHICLE SHOULD NOT BE DRIVEN. THE VEHICLE WAS THEN TAKEN TO THE DEALER AND IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE VEHICLE COULD BE REPAIRED AT THE CONTACT'S EXPENSE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED BUT PROVIDED NO ASSISTANCE. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS UNKNOWN AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 120,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN FOR REGISTRATION INSPECTION AND WAS ADVISED THAT THE ENTIRE FRAME WAS RUSTED AND ROTTED. THE CONTACT SPOKE WITH THE MANUFACTURER BUT NO ASSISTANCE WAS PROVIDED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 111,000 UPDATED 02/22/13. *JB

FRAME RUST WHEN PURCHASED OUT OF STATE (MINNESOTA) FROM DEALER AND INSPECTED ON 10/2/2012 (IN VIRGINIA, UPON TRANSPORT ARRIVAL). THEY SAID THEY BELIEVED IT WAS MOSTLY SURFACE RUST. INSPECTED AGAIN IN MAY OF 2014 AND FOUND WITHIN 20 MONTHS AND 24000 MILES LATER, THE FRAME HAD PERFORATED, AND DEEMED UNSAFE TO DRIVE. IT WAS MARKETED AS A VEHICLE IN GREAT SHAPE, AND WASN'T CHEAP. MUCH MONEY IS STILL OWED ON THIS CONDEMNED VEHICLE. THESE VEHICLES HAVE A HISTORY OF THIS, YET THERE IS NOTHING BEING DONE CONCERNING THESE UNSAFE VEHICLES. *JS

SOMETIME IN 2012, MY SPARE TIRE AND RIM WERE LOST ON THE HIGHWAY DUE TO A FAILED SPARE TIRE CARRIER. THE LIFT PLATE ON THE SPARE TIRE CARRIER, FAILED DUE TO CORROSION AND RELEASED THE SPARE TIRE (AND RIM) ON THE HIGHWAY. NO CRASH OF INCIDENT OCCURRED BECAUSE NO ONE WAS FOLLOWING THE VEHICLE AT THE TIME. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE TRAVELING 25 MPH, THE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE WHEEL SEPARATED FROM THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A PRIVATE MECHANIC WHERE IT WAS CONFIRMED THAT THE BALL JOINT HAD FAILED, SIMILAR TOTHE DEFECT LISTED IN NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER: 05V225000 (SUSPENSION:FRONT:CONTROL ARM:LOWER BALL JOINT). THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 220,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS INCLUDED IN NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 12V542000 (TIRES) AND INDICATED THAT THE DEALER IN NEW YORK WAS NOT ABLE TO DO THE UNDERCOATING PROCESS DUE TO STATE REGULATIONS. IN APPROXIMATELY MID AUGUST 2012, THE DEALER INDICATED THAT THE REMEDY FOR THIS DEFECT WAS NOT AVAILABLE AT THE TIME THE CONTACT TRIED TO SCHEDULE THE RECALL REPAIR. THE CONTACT WAITED FOR YEARS TO DETERMINE WHEN THE MANUFACTURER WOULD FINALIZE THE REMEDY PLAN TO REPAIR THE VEHICLE. THE RUST BECAME EXTENSIVE TO THE POINT THAT THE UNDERBODY, THE CHASSIS, THE LEAF SPRING, AND THE REAR WHEEL WELLS ALL HAD CORROSION TO THE POINT THAT THE COMPONENTS COULD FRACTURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED FOR YEARS OF THE FAILURE AND WAS UNABLE TO PROVIDE A PERMANENT REMEDY. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 150,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE CHASSIS WAS PREMATURELY RUSTING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER WHICH CONFIRMED THAT THE CHASSIS WAS RUSTED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 175,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 176,000.

I CALLED TOYOTA IN 2012 TO ASK ABOUT FRAME. WAS TOLD I DIDN'T QUALIFY. HAVE HAD TO REPLACE EVERYTHING ATTACHED TO FRAME IN A 2 YEAR PERIOD. LAST FALL THE GAS TANK FELL OFF. FRAME SO RUSTED IT WOULDN'T HOLD IT. CALLED TOYOTA AGAIN, AS RECOMMENDED BY MECHANIC, WAS TOLD I DIDN'T QUALIFY. WENT TO DEALER FOR RECALL REPAIR ON SPARE TIRE HOLDER, THEY COULDN'T FIX IT. TOO RUSTED. TOLD ME IT S NOT SAFE TO DRIVE. TOLD ME TO CALL TOYOTA. I DID. TOLD ME I DIDN'T QUALIFY BECAUSE RECALL EXPIRED. EXPIRED?! I HAVE NEVER RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE!! I HAVE LIVED AT THE SAME ADDRESS FOR 32 YEARS. THEY FOUND ME THIS TIME, THEY SHOULD HAVE FOUND ME FOR THAT ONE. NOW WHAT? I AM OUT WELL OVER $3500 DOLLARS I'VE PAID OUT THE LAST 3 YRS AND ITS NOT SAFE! NEED HELP HERE. *JS

MY FRAME HAS SIGNIFICANT RUST, AND HAS HOLES IN THE FRAME NEAR THE PASSENGER SIDE LEAF SPRING ATTACHMENT. I PURCHASED AND REGISTERED THE TRUCK TOWARDS THE END OF TOYOTA'S GOODWILL CAMPAIGN, BUT THEY DID NOT NOTIFY ME. PREVIOUS OWNER RECEIVED NO NOTICE OF CAMPAIGN, SO THE FRAME WAS NOT SPRAYED INTERNALLY WITH RUST PROHIBITOR TREATMENT. TRUCK HAS APPROX. 136,000 MILES, AND IS OTHERWISE IN GOOD CONDITION. TOYOTA SHOULD RECALL THE FRAMES FOR THIS MODEL YEAR LIKE THEY DID FOR OTHER MODEL YEARS. THE GOODWILL CAMPAIGN WAS ADVERTISED INCONSISTENTLY, AND A SERIOUS STRUCTURAL ISSUE SHOULD BE A RECALL, NOT ARBITRARY. CASE #1402130463 WAS ESTABLISHED WITH TOYOTA A FEW YEARS AGO, BUT THEY HAVE NOT DONE ANYTHING ABOUT IT. THEY ALSO COULD NOT CONFIRM THAT PRIOR OWNER WAS CONTACTED REGARDING GOODWILL CAMPAIGN.

2002 TOYOTOA TRUCK, LOST CONTROL AND HIT MY FORD S/W, TRUCK WAS ON RECALL FOR BALL/JOINTS , BOTH ME AND WIFE WAS HURT BY THIS UN INSURED DRIVER, DRIVER WAS CITED FOR WRONG TURN INTO MY LANE, I LOST BOTH MY CAR AND MY HEALTH, WHAT CAN I DO TO RECOVER DAMAGES FROM A UNINSURED TRUCK AND DRIVER? *JS

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A LOCAL MECHANIC FOR ROUTINE MAINTENANCE WHEN THE MECHANIC ADVISED THAT THE FRAME WAS CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR FURTHER INSPECTION OR REPAIRS. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND THEY ADVISED THAT THE VIN QUALIFIED FOR REPAIRS UNDER NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER: 05V225000 (SUSPENSION:FRONT:CONTROL ARM:LOWER BALL JOINT) BUT THE RECALL WAS EXPIRED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 88,500 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 89,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHILE AT AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC FOR ROUTINE MAINTENANCE, THE MECHANIC STATED TO THE CONTACT THAT THE VEHICLE WAS NOT SAFE TO DRIVE BECAUSE THE FRAME WAS CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSTICS. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND STATED IT WAS CAUSED BY SCALING AND NOT RUSTING THERE FOR THEY WOULD NOT COVER THE REPAIRS. THE DEALER REFUSED TO PROVIDE A LETTER STATING THE VEHICLE WAS SAFE TO DRIVE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 161,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR AN INSPECTION. THE DEALER DETERMINED THAT THERE WAS RUST ON THE LEAF SPRINGS AND STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS NOT SAFE TO BE DRIVEN. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED, BUT DENIED ANY ASSISTANCE WITH REPAIRS OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 128,500.