2004 Toyota Tacoma

MY 2004 TOYOTA TACOMA WAS RECALLED IN 2012. THE RECALL LETTER STATED THAT IN CERTAIN STATES WHERE ROAD SALT IS USED TO MANAGE WINTER DRIVING CONDITIONS, THE POTENTIAL EXISTED FOR PREMATURE RUST/CORROSION OF THE FRAME. I BROUGHT THE TRUCK IN TO THE DEALERSHIP WHERE IT WAS THEN DETERMINED THAT THE FRAME SHOULD BE REPLACED. SIX MONTHS LATER I NOTICED THAT THE REAR DIFFERENTIAL HOUSING WAS LEAKING. WHY DIDN'T THE RECALL COVER THESE COMPONENTS, WHICH ARE LOCATED IN THE SAME GENERAL AREA AND SUBJECT TO THE SAME CORROSIVE CONDITIONS AS THE FRAME, LEAF SPRINGS, CONTROL ARMS, ETC., ALL OF WHICH WERE REPLACED? IF THE FLUID DRAINS FROM THE HOUSING AS A RESULT OF RUST/CORROSION, THE POTENTIAL EXISTS FOR THE DRIVETRAIN TO LOCK UP, ESPECIALLY AT HIGHER SPEEDS, RESULTING IN AN OBVIOUSLY DANGEROUS SITUATION. NO REAL OPTIONS EXIST TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE ASIDE FROM REPLACING THE DIFFERENTIAL HOUSING, A REPAIR THAT COSTS SEVERAL THOUSAND DOLLARS. MY COMPLAINT IS THAT TOYOTA CHOSE NOT TO COVER THE REPLACEMENT OF ALL PARTS NECESSARY IN ORDER TO INSURE THE SAFE OPERATION OF THE VEHICLE IN LIGHT OF THE PREMATURE RUST/CORROSION ISSUE, NOR DID THEY RAISE THE ISSUE IN ANY WAY. I CANNOT IMAGINE HOW TOYOTA COULD BE UNAWARE OF THIS CONDITION. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 10 MPH, SHE NOTICED SOMETHING HAD BECOME DETACHED FROM UNDER THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACT INSPECTED THE VEHICLE AND NOTICED THAT THE FUEL TANK PROTECTOR WAS CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC FOR DIAGNOSIS. THE MECHANIC STATED THAT THE FUEL TANK PROTECTOR WOULD HAVE TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 98,000. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC FOR INSPECTION AND THEY DETECTED THAT THE ENTIRE FRAME EXHIBITED RUST. THERE WAS A VOLUNTARY RECALL ISSUED BY THE MANUFACTURER RELATED TO THE FRAME; HOWEVER, THE RECALL EXPIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE DEFECT. THE VEHICLE HAD NOT BEEN REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 92,000.

I TOOK MY TRUCK IN FOR THE YEARLY INSPECTION AND IT FAILED FOR A HOLE IN THE FRAME. I CONTACTED TOYOTA AND WAS INFORMED THAT I MISSED A CUSTOMER CARE SERVICE TO INSPECT THE FRAME AND THERE WAS NOTHING THAT THEY WOULD DO FOR ME. I REPAIRED THE HOLE AND THE VEHICLES PASSED INSPECTION FOR THE FRAME THE PAST TWO YEARS.I WAS DRIVING TODAY AND FOUND THAT THE BED OF MY TRUCK CROOKED. I CHECKED THE OTHER SIDE OF THE FRAME TO FIND THAT IT IS COMPLETELY ROTTED AND THE TRUCK IS NOW UNSAFE TO DRIVE. WILL THIS FRAME RUST ISSUE EVER BECOME A RECALL? ITS A SHAME THAT A PERFECTLY GOOD RUNNING TRUCK IS NOW GARBAGE. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT HE RECEIVED A MANUFACTURER'S RECALL FOR THE FRAME. AFTER HAVING THE REPAIRS COMPLETED, HE NOTICED THAT THE FRAME WAS SEPARATING FROM THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN BACK TO THE DEALER FOR FURTHER INSPECTION. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND THEY OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 40,000. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 70,000. *TR UPDATED 6/17/13 *CN THE CONSUMER STATED THE 02 SENSOR WAS REPLACED THREE TIMES, THE CATALYTIC CONVERTER WAS ALSO REPLACED THREE TIMES. THE SHROUD THAT COVERED THE GAS TANK, ROTTED AND FELL OF THE TRUCK, AND THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED SEVERAL TIMES. UPDATED 06/25/13

3 YEARS AGO TOYOTA SENT US A NOTICED AND CALLED .. ASKING US TO HAVE OUR FRAME INSPECTED DUE TO FRAME FAILURES AND RUST. WE COMPLIED AND HAD THE UNDERCOATING AND FRAME INSPECTED FOR 3 YEARS WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS WOULD PROTECT US IF FUTURE FRAME PROBLEMS WERE IDENTIFIED. THIS YEAR 2012 WE WERE TOLD WE DIDN'T NEED TO HAVE THE FRAME INSPECTED, HOWEVER WHEN WE WERE REPLACING THE BRAKES WE NOTICED SIGNIFICANT RUST ON THE FRAME OF THE VEHICLE. WE IMMEDIATELY CALLED OUR DEALER FOR A FRAME INSPECTION AND WAS TOLD THE FRAME HAD FAILED AND THAT WE SHOULDN'T DRIVE THE VEHICLE. FOR SAFETY REASONS. I CALLED THE TOYOTA HOTLINE AND RECEIVED A CLAIM NUMBER WAS TOLD WE WERE ELIGIBLE FOR THE A FRAME REPLACEMENT BECAUSE WE HAD RECEIVED THE UNDERCOATING . THEY SET UP AN APPOINTMENT FOR THE TOYOTA REP TO INSPECT THE VEHICLE TODAY MARCH 8TH.. THE REP NEVER SHOWED UP. WE WEREN'T PROVIDED WITH A RENTAL VEHICLE AND THUS HAVING TROUBLE MEETING OUR WORK COMMITMENTS.. AND THEY EXPECT US TO PUT OUR CHILDREN BACK IN A VEHICLE WHICH WE WERE TOLD IS UNSAFE TO DRIVE, I AM VERY CONCERNED ABOUT HOW MANY OTHER TOYOTA DRIVERS ARE DRIVING UNSAFE VEHICLES. *TR

ACCORDING TO RECORDS, [XXX], TOYOTA EXTENDED THE CORROSION-RESISTANT TREATMENT (CRT) BEYOND 2010.THE DOCUMENT READS ADDITIONAL 15 YEARS. CURRENTLY I VISITED A TOYATO DEALER AND THEY CLAIMED TOYOTA ENDED THE AGGREEMENT DEC. 2012. NO NOTICE WAS RECIEVED OF CHANGE. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 50 TO 60 MPH, THE FIFTH GEAR DISENGAGED WITHOUT ANY WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHO WAS UNABLE TO DIAGNOSE THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 10. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 116,000. UPDATED 04/02/13*LJ