2003 Toyota Tacoma

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR SERVICE UNDER A NHTSA CAMPAIGN I.D. 12V542000 (TIRES) HOWEVER, THE DEALER COULD NOT REMEDY THE RECALL DUE TO EXCESSIVE RUST ON THE FRAME. THE DEALER ADVISED THAT THERE WAS A PREVIOUS RECALL FOR AN UNDERCOATING SPRAY TO PREVENT FRAME RUST. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE RECEIVED THE TREATMENT BUT IT STILL DID NOT PREVENT THE FRAME RUST, WHICH THE DEALER STATED WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 106,000.

I HAVE A TOYOTA 2003 TACOMA THE FRAME IS GONE ROTTED SO UNSAFE WAS TOLD I SHOULD NOT HAVE IT ON THE ROAD!! I CANT AFFORD THE WELDING AND THE GUY SAID HE DOES NOT WANT THE RESPONSIBILITY IT COULD LAST 6 MONTHS OR MORE HE WOULD HAVE TO KEEP CHECKING IT! I TOOK IT TO SEVERAL TOYOTA DEALERS THEY SAID THEY COULD NOT EQUALLY SWAP ANY VEHICLE BUT YET TOLD ME IT IS UNSAFE TO DRIVE I CALLED CALIFORNIA MY CASE WAS DECLINED I HAD A MECHANIC SAY NOT TO DRIVE THIS ANYTIME THE FRAME WILL SPLIT IN HALF SO CLOSE TO IT I CAN'T WORK BECAUSE I NEED A TRUCK FOR MY JOB MY BOSS IS GIVING ME TIME BUT IS FED UP SO WHO KNOWS WILL I HAVE A JOB NEXT WEEK? I LOST SIDE JOB THAT WAS PAYING FOR MY TAXES DUE TO NO TRUCK.TOYOTAS HAVE HAS SO MANY ISSUES ON THIS THEY HAD THE BUY BACK PEOPLE WERE STILL GETTING MONEY THE YEARS THEY TOLD US WERE NOT MINE THE BUY BACK STOPPED IN 2011 WE KNOW SOMEONE GOT 17,0000 BACK ! ON HER OLD 99 HERS WAS NOTHING LIKE MINE!!!!! THERE WAS A RUST UNDERCOATING WE NEVER GOT THE LETTER !!!!!!!!!!!! AS A CHRISTIAN AFTER TELLING THEM THAT I NOW GOT A LETTER THAT SAYS THE SPARE TIRE LIFT PLATE YUP RUSTED BUT I CAN'T DRIVE IT TO THEM CANT USE THE SPARE TIRE RUSTED OUT RIM I AM READY TO HAVE A NERVOUS BREAKDOWN I HAVE TRIED EVERYTHING I WAS TURNED DOWN FROM MY CASE IN CALIFORNIA HEADQUARTERS CALLED AGAIN TODAY I WILL HEAR BACK IN A DAY NO ONE CAN BELIEVE THIS I AM READY TO CALL THE NEWS MY WIFE WAS SUPPOSED TO TODAY BUT HAD ME FILL THIS OUT WHY WHO KNOWS I THINK AT THIS POINT IT NEEDS TO GO PUBLIC MONDAY NIGHT ON FACEBOOK TOYOTA USA MY WIFE PUT UP A STORY AND PICS AS PEOPLE WROTE THEY KEPT REMOVING THE POST !!!!!! THEY DID NOT WANT THOSE PICS OUT THERE SAW A COMPLAINT ON A 2006 ABOUT THE SAME ISSUE WHAT HAPPENED TO TOYOTA? I REFUSE TO DRIVE A DEATHTRAP MY GRANDSON WENT WITH ME IN THAT TRUCK ON SATURDAYS .[XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THE FRAME WAS CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED BY AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC. THE MECHANIC STATED THE FRAME WOULD HAD TO BE REPLACED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 163,000. UPDATED 11/21/13*CN

MY 2003 TOYOTA WITH CURRENTLY 77,197 MILES WAS RECALLED MULTIPLE TIMES FOR FRAME INSPECTIONS FOR EXCESSIVE RUST AND CORROSION WITH THE FIRST TIME RESULTING IN TOYOTA APPLYING A CORROSION-RESISTANT TREATMENT BACK ON 6/25/2010. UNFORTUNATELY AFTER INSPECTING MY FRAME AND UNDERCARRIAGE RECENTLY I NOTICED THE CORROSION AND RUST GETTING WORSE. I HAD MY FRAME INSPECTED AT MY DEALERSHIP BACK IN JUNE OF 2013 WITH THE DEALER STATING THE FRAME WAS IN GOOD CONDITION. I CURRENTLY RESTRICT MY DRIVING TO AROUND TOWN BECAUSE I FEAR FOR MYSELF AND MY FAMILIES SAFETY. *TR

I OWN A 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE ENTIRE FRAME, FRONT BUMPER, AND UNDERCARRIAGE IS COMPLETELY RUSTED FROM THE FRONT BUMPER TO THE REAR. IN SEPTEMBER OF 2010 , THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER AND THE DEALER CONFIRMED THAT THERE WAS SURFACE RUST ON THE VEHICLE. AS A REPAIR, THE DEALER APPLIED AN ANTI-RUST COATING ONTO THE FRAME TO PREVENT FURTHER DAMAGE (COSMETIC COVER UP). I WAS TOLD BY MY MECHANIC WHEN I WENT TO GET A RECENT OIL CHANGE ON 07/25/13 THE REPAIR DID NOT PREVENT THE FRAME FROM BECOMING COMPLETELY RUSTED AND HE STATED THAT IT WAS NOT SAFE BECAUSE EVEN THE SEAMS WERE SHOEING SIGNS OF POSSIBLE FAILURE. BROUGHT VEHICLE BACK TO DEALERSHIP AND AFTER INSPECTION WAS TOLD THAT FRAME IS SAFE BY TOYOTA STANDARDS THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE ORIGINAL MILEAGE WHEN BROUGHT IN FOR INITIAL RECALL WAS 24794, BUT AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE IS 29,820

A TOYOTA TACOMA PICKUP WAS TAKEN TO MY MECHANIC FOR ROUTINE MAINTENANCE AND FRAME RUST WAS NOTED. I CALLED TOYOTA AND TOOK THE CAR TO A LOCAL TOYOTA DEALERSHIP. THEY REPLIED THEY COULD DO NOTHING AS THE COST OF REPAIRING THE FRAME WAS NOT WORTH THE VALUE OF THE CAR. THEY INSTRUCTED ME TO CALL TOYOTA DIRECTLY AND HAVE BEEN TOLD I AM ON MY OWN. THERE ARE 96,000 MILES ON THE CAR AND THIS WAS THE FIRST TIME RUST WAS NOTED. WE NEVER RECEIVED ANY NOTIFICATIONS THAT THERE WERE PROBLEMS AS I AM NOT THE ORIGINAL OWNER. I AM STUCK WITH A VALUELESS CAR WITH NO HELP FROM THE PARENT COMPANY. *TR

THIS IS A FOLLOW FROM A RECENT CALL WITH THE TOYOTA CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE CENTER (MAY 2, 2013). I CALLED TO GET A STATUS UPDATE ON THE CLAIM REFERENCED IN CASE # [XXX] AND WAS INFORMED THE CLAIM WAS DENIED BECAUSE THE INVOICE FROM THE DEALER STATED THE SPARE TIRE WAS STOLEN. I NEVER RECEIVED NOTIFICATION THAT THE CLAIM WAS DENIED ALTHOUGH THE CUSTOMER SERVICE AGENT SUGGESTED A LETTER HAS BEEN MAILED. I WAS INSTRUCTED TO RETURN TO THE DEAL AND GET THE ?STOLEN? COMMENTS REMOVED FROM THE INVOICE. THE ORIGINAL INVOICE SUGGESTED THE SPARE TIRE WAS STOLEN BECAUSE THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT AND PARTS PERSON AT THE DEALER SUGGESTED THE CABLE WOULD NOT BREAK AND THE CONCLUSION WAS THE CABLE MUST HAVE BEEN CUT AND THE TIRE STOLEN. THIS WAS IN AUGUST OF 2012 PRIOR TO THE RECALL NOTIFICATION. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THAT THE TIRE WAS STOLEN. I RETURNED TO THE DEALER AND ATTACHED IS AN UPDATED INVOICE WITH ?STOLEN? REMOVED. TO SAY I AM FRUSTRATED BY THE RESPONSE FROM TOYOTA IS AN UNDERSTATEMENT. THE FACTS ARE THE SPARE TIRE AND ASSEMBLY WERE MISSING. THE DEALER CONCLUDED THEY MUST HAVE BEEN STOLEN AND WROTE THAT ON THE ORIGINAL INVOICE. IT IS OBVIOUS FROM THE RECALL THAT THE CABLE BROKE AND THE TIRE AND ASSEMBLY WERE LOST AS A RESULT OF THE THIS MALFUNCTION. AGAIN DENIED. *TR

DURING A RECENT SAFETY INSPECTION SEVERE FRAME CORROSION WAS FOUND. THE GARAGE SAID THAT TOYOTA HAD A FRAME RECALL. WHEN I SPOKE WITH TOYOTA AMERICA THEY SAID IT HAD EXPIRED BECAUSE I HAD NOT ANSWERED THE RECALL NOTICES. WICH INEVER RECIEVED. I EXPLAINED THAT I WAS THE ORIGINAL OWNER AT THE SAME ADRESS AS THE TIME OF THE PURCHASE. THEY REVIEWED IT AGAIN AND THE NEXT DAY SAID THEY SENT THE REQUIRED NOTIFICATION 5 TIMES. BUT COULD NOT TELL TO WHAT ADDRESS THEY WERE SENT .THE FINAL ANSWER WAS I WAS NO LONGER COVERED. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE ENTIRE FRAME, FRONT BUMPER, AND UNDERCARRIAGE WERE COMPLETELY RUSTED FROM THE FRONT BUMPER TO THE REAR. TWO YEARS PRIOR TO THE FAILURE, THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER AND THE DEALER CONFIRMED THAT THERE WAS SURFACE RUST ON THE VEHICLE. AS A REPAIR, THE DEALER APPLIED AN ANTI-RUST COATING ONTO THE FRAME TO PREVENT FURTHER DAMAGE. THE REPAIR DID NOT PREVENT THE FRAME FROM BECOMING COMPLETELY RUSTED. THE CONTACT SPOKE WITH THE MANUFACTURER AND WAS TOLD THAT THE FRAME WAS NOT UNDER WARRANTY. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS UNKNOWN, BUT THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 100,000. *TR