2005 Toyota Tacoma

DUE TO A FAULTY PAINT OR MANUFACTURING PROCESS MY VEHICLE IS EXPERIENCING EXCESSIVE PAINT CHIPPING, NOT CAUSED BY EXTERNAL FORCES. THE MANUFACTURER'S LOCAL DEALER AS WELL AS LOCAL REPUTABLE BODY SHOPS, ARE AWARE OF THE PROBLEM. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED WITHOUT RESOLUTION. WHILE RESEARCHING MY PARTICULAR SITUATION, I CAME ACROSS NUMEROUS WRITE UPS OF OTHER CONSUMERS EXPERIENCING THE SAME ISSUE. *TR

I OWN A 2005 TOYOTA TACOMA ACCESS CAB. I GOT A "LIMITED SERVICE CAMPAIGN NOTICE" THAT MY TRUCK MIGHT HAVE ABNORMAL RUST ON THE FRAME. I PUT IT ON A LIFT AND BEHOLD THERE WAS A HUGE HOLE IN MY FRAME MAKING IT NOT DRIVABLE. APPARENTLY TOYOTA IS NOT BEING UP FRONT WITH ITS CUSTOMERS AND HAS KNOWN ABOUT THIS DEFECT IN THE 2005-2011 MODEL YEARS. MY DEALER SAID A NEW FRAME WILL COST AROUND $14,000 TO REPLACE. THEY SAID TOYOTA WOULD PAY FOR THE FRAME BUT WILL NOT BUY BACK THE TRUCK. I STILL DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW THEY ARE WILLING TO SPEND $14,000 ON A FRAME ON A TRUCK THAT IS WORTH $15,000 I HAVE HEARD FROM DEALERS THAT THE FRAMES ARE ON NATIONAL BACK ORDER AND ARE AT LEAST 3 MONTHS OUT. PLEASE INVESTIGATE THE 2005-2011 TACOMA CLAIMS. I THINK A FULL RECALL IS DUE. MY TRUCK COULD OF KILLED SOMEONE. I AM SURE THERE IS A LOT OF TICKING TIME BOMBS OUT THERE. *TR

TL- THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE HAD DEVELOPED SEVERE CORROSION AND A HOLE NEAR THE DRIVERS SIDE TIRE. THE CONTACT WHO WAS A CERTIFIED MECHANIC STATED THAT THE FRAME NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 194,000. PAM

MY TRUCK FRAME HAS AN INORDINATE AMOUNT OF RUST AND A PERFORATING RUST ON THE DRIVERS SIDE FRONT OF THE FRAME APPROXIMATELY 7X6 INCHES OF FRAME THAT HAS JUST CRACKED AWAY WITH RUST, I AM SURE MY TRUCK WILL NOT PASS STATE INSPECTION THIS YEAR. UNDER TOYOTA'S LIMITED SERVICE CAMPAIGN MY TRUCK SHOULD QUALIFY FOR REPAIRS BUT TOYOTA CORPORATE DOES NOT RECOGNIZE MY TRUCK AS NEEDING REPAIR BASED ON THE VIN NUMBER. *TR

THE TAILGATE OF THE VEHICLE LACKS THE REQUIRED AMOUNT OF STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY TO SERVE ITS INTENDED PURPOSE. SINCE THE TAILGATE IS DESIGNED TO BE OPENED TO A FLAT POSITION FOR LOADING OR UNLOADING ITEM(S) PLACED IN THE BED OF THE TRUCK IT WILL CERTAINLY REQUIRE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF STRENGTH FOR THIS PURPOSE. I NOTICED THAT MY TAIL GATE WAS NO LONGER STRAIGHT ACROSS WHEN IN THE CLOSE POSITION BUT HAD A CONCAVE APPEARANCE. I WORRIED THAT THE TAIL GATE MAY COME UNLATCHED WHILE IN THE UP POSITION OR WORSE BY COLLAPSING BY FOLDING IN THE MIDDLE IF USING IT TO CARRY A PARTIAL LOAD. I LOAD MY 4-WHEELER IN THE BACK OF THE TRUCK AT TIMES AND DUE TO THE SHORT BED HAVE TO LEAVE THE REAR TIRES RESTING ON THE TAIL GATE. THE WEIGHT, ALTHOUGH NOT EXCESSIVE, SEEMED TO POSSIBLY BE THE CAUSE OF THE DISTRESS ON THE TAILGATE. I REMOVED THE INTERIOR COVER AS WELL AS THE TOP TAILGATE COVER FOR INSPECTION. MY INSPECTION DID REVEAL TWO CREASES IN THE TAILGATE TOP SECTION (WHEN IN THE CLOSE POSITION) ABOUT 18" FROM THE RIGHT TOP AND THE SAME DISTANCE FROM THE LEFT TOP SIDE. I CALLED TOYOTA TO SEE IF ANY POSSIBLE RECALL WAS IN PLACE TO ADDRESS THIS SITUATION AND THEY SAID THERE WAS NO SUCH RECALL. I ASKED IF THEY RECOMMENDED ANY REMEDY FOR THE CONDITION THAT I DESCRIBED AND THEY SUGGESTED A COMPANY THAT DOES AFTERMARKET TRUCK MODIFICATIONS. IF THIS TAILGATE ISN'T DESIGNED TO CARRY A LOAD THAN A PERMANENT WARNING SIGN SHOULD BE CLEARLY VIEWED FROM THE TAILGATE POSITION AT OR NEAR THE HANDLE OR THE FLAT SURFACE WHEN THE TAILGATE IS LOWERED. SINCE IT IS APPARENT THAT AT TIMES A LOAD WILL TRAVEL ACROSS THE TAIL GATE MOVING INTO THE BED CAVITY OR BE REQUIRED TO REST ON THE TAILGATE, IT SHOULD MEET ALL LOAD REQUIREMENT THAT COULD BE REASONABLY ANTICIPATED. *TR

IN THE SUMMER OF 2013 MY REAR TIRE FEEL OUT FROM BENEATH MY TRUCK WHILE I WAS DRIVING. THE CROSS BARS THAT HELD THE TIRE HAD RUSTED THROUGH. I FILED AN NHTSA COMPLAINT. EARLY THIS SPRING I BROUGHT MY TACOMA TO MY TOYOTA DEALER TO COMPLAIN ABOUT A LARGER PERFORATION THAT APPEARED IN MY FRAME. THERE DEALER PHOTOGRAPHED IT, SENT IT TO TOYOTA, AND INFORMED ME THEY WOULD CALL ME IF TOYOTA WAS GOING TO TAKE ANY ACTION. THE SERVICE MANAGER TOLD ME HE WAS HEARING RUMORS OF A FRAME RECALL AND THAT I SHOULD CHECK IN PERIODICALLY. EARLY IN OCTOBER OF THIS YEAR I READ ON HE INTERNET ABOUT THE TACOMA "LEAF SPRING" RECALL AND BROUGHT MY TRUCK BACK TO TOYOTA. MY TRUCK WAS AGAIN INSPECTED, PHOTOGRAPHED, AND A FEW DAYS LATER I WAS TOLD TO BRING MY TRUCK IN. I WAS TOLD THAT TOYOTA WAS MAILING OUT NOTICES TO QUALIFIED TOYOTA OWNERS AND THAT I SHOULD BE GETTING MY RECALL NOTIFICATION LETTER SOON. I HAVE NEVER YET RECEIVED THAT LETTER. HOWEVER, I BROUGHT MY TRUCK BACK TO THE DEALER ON OCTOBER 10 AND THEY PROMPTLY IMPOUNDED IT, SAYING IT WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. THE SERVICE MANAGER TOLD ME THAT ALTHOUGH THE FRAME REPLACEMENT WOULD TAKE JUST A FEW DAYS, THE FRAMES HAD NOT YET ARRIVED AND I SHOULD EXPECT A TWO TO THREE MONTH DELAY. I FILED A COMPLAINT WITH TOYOTA AND A FEW DAYS LATER THE CUSTOMER SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE WHO CALLED ME OFFERED NO FURTHER SOLUTION (I SUGGESTED THAT TOYOTA BUY BACK MY TRUCK AND OFFERED ME A CREDIT TOWARDS THE PURCHASE OF A NEW TOYOTA), BUT DID ADD THAT SHE THOUGHT THE FRAMES WOULD TAKE LONGER STILL TO COME IN AND THAT I SHOULD EXPECT TO BE WITHOUT MY TRUCK FOR FOUR MONTHS. I AM CURRENTLY DRIVING A LOANER PAID FOR BY TOYOTA, BUT ONE THAT DOES NOT WELL MEET THEN NEEDS MET BY MY PERSONAL TRUCK. *TR