2004 Toyota RAV4

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA RAV4. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A RECALL NOTIFICATION FOR NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 15V284000 (AIR BAGS) AND STATED THAT THE PART NEEDED WAS UNAVAILABLE TO PERFORM THE RECALL REPAIR. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE ISSUE. THE CONTACT HAD NOT EXPERIENCED A FAILURE. MA 10/16/15 UPDATED 11/10/15. *JB

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA RAV4. THE CONTACT RECEIVED NOTIFICATION OF NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 15V284000 (AIR BAGS) HOWEVER, THE PARTS NEEDED WERE UNAVAILABLE TO PERFORM THE REPAIRS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE MANUFACTURER EXCEEDED A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME FOR THE RECALL REMEDY. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE CONTACT HAD NOT EXPERIENCED A FAILURE.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA RAV4. THE CONTACT RECEIVED NOTIFICATION OF NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 15V286000 (AIR BAGS) HOWEVER, THE PART NEEDED TO REPAIR THE VEHICLE WAS UNAVAILABLE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE MANUFACTURER EXCEEDED A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME FOR THE VEHICLE REPAIR. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE ISSUE. THE CONTACT HAD NOT EXPERIENCED A FAILURE.

AS MY FAMILY AND I WERE LEAVING MY HOUSE TO GO TO THE COAST, MY 2004 TOYOTA RAV4 SUDDENLY, WITHOUT ANY PRIOR WARNING OR INDICATION, JERKED AND SPUTTERED AND FELT AS IF IT WERE DOWNSHIFTING, AS IF THE TRANSMISSION WERE SLIPPING OR NOT ENGAGING OR MAINTAINING GEAR. UPON TAKING IT TO THE DEALERSHIP, I WAS TOLD THAT THE DIAGNOSTIC REVEALED THAT THE TRANSMISSION HAD TO BE REPLACED. I WAS ALSO INFORMED THAT TOYOTA WOULD NOT ALLOW IT TO BE OPENED UP, ONLY REPLACED. I MENTIONED THE ECM AND WAS TOLD THAT THEY FOUND NOTHING TO INDICATE ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE TRANSMISSION NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. WERE IT NOT A HIGHER POWER CARING FOR ME AND MY LOVED ONES THAT DAY, I BELIEVE IT COULD HAVE BECOME AN EVEN MORE DANGEROUS SITUATION THAN IT ALREADY WAS.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA RAV4. THE CONTACT RECEIVED NOTIFICATION OF NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 15V284000 (AIR BAGS) HOWEVER, THE PART NEEDED TO DO THE REPAIR WAS UNAVAILABLE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE MANUFACTURER EXCEEDED A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME FOR THE RECALL REPAIR. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE ISSUE. THE CONTACT HAD NOT EXPERIENCED A FAILURE.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA RAV4. WHILE DRIVING AT APPROXIMATELY 35 MPH, THE BRAKE PEDAL WAS DEPRESSED AND FAILED TO RESPOND. THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO AVOID A CRASH. THE FAILURE RECURRED INTERMITTENTLY. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED, BUT THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE WAS NOT DETERMINED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS UNKNOWN.

MY MOTHER WAS INVOLVED IN A SIDE IMPACT CRASH (PASSENGERS SIDE) IN 2014. HER CAR WAS TOTALED AS THE OTHER CAR ESSENTIALLY SPEARED HERS CAVING IN THE RIGHT SIDE. SHE WAS WEARING SEATBELT AND THE AIRBAG DEPLOYED. MOM SURVIVED WITH NO INTERNAL INJURIES. HOWEVER SHE WAS LEFT WITH SEVERE LACERATIONS TO THE SCALP, FACE AND HEMATOMA TO THE HEAD WHICH NEEDED SURGERY. I SUSPECT THIS INJURY WAS FROM THE AIRBAG DEPLOYING VIOLENTLY. MY HUSBAND WHO IS A RETIRED FIREFIGHTER/MEDIC INSPECTED THE CAR AFTER THE WRECK AND HE FEELS THE SAME. THERE WAS NO INDICATION THAT HER HEAD HIT THE SIDE WINDOW OR WINDSHIELD. THERE WAS BLOOD ON THE AIRBAG AND ALL OVER HER SEAT. THIS INCIDENT HAPPENED IN FLORIDA ON A HOT AUGUST DAY. THE CAR HAS BEEN IN FL FOR THE LAST TEN YEARS.

I WOULD LIKE TO CALL YOUR ATTENTION TO TOYOTA'S FAILURE TO ADEQUATELY PROVIDE EQUIVALENT RENTAL VEHICLES FOR CUSTOMERS WHOSE VEHICLES ARE DEEMED UNSAFE TO DRIVE DURING THE TAKATA AIRBAG RECALLS. A CUSTOMER CANNOT BE REASONABLY EXPECTED TO MEET THE SAME NEEDS A RAV4 SERVES (IN MY CASE, DOG TRANSPORT) WITH A COROLLA OR SIMILAR SEDAN RENTAL. TOYOTA CORPORATE "RULES" CITED TO THWART THE DELIVERY OF EQUIVALENT RENTAL VEHICLES ARE NUMEROUS (REFUSAL TO PROVIDE LOT VEHICLES, LOANER VEHICLES, VEHICLES OF ANOTHER MAKE, VEHICLES FROM NON-PREFERRED RENTAL AGENCIES, VEHICLES THAT COST MORE THAN $35/DAY TO RENT, OR VEHICLES RENTED DIRECTLY BY CUSTOMERS). FURTHER, DEALERS AND MANUFACTURER CONTINUALLY ASSIGN RESPONSIBILITY TO EACH OTHER IN WHAT SEEMS A DELIBERATE ATTEMPT TO DODGE RESPONSIBILITY ALTOGETHER BY EXHAUSTING THE CUSTOMER WITH AN ENDLESS RUNAROUND, LEAVING THE CUSTOMER LITTLE CHOICE BUT TO DRIVE A SEVERELY DANGEROUS VEHICLE UNTIL A FIX IS IN PLACE (WHICH IN TOYOTA'S CASE IS SAID TO BE MONTHS AWAY). THIS VIOLATES THE VERY PURPOSE OF THE RECALL, WHICH IS TO KEEP CONSUMERS SAFE. THIS MY REPORT FROM THE FRONT LINES OF THIS RECALL, AND I WANT TO ALERT YOU THAT THIS COMPONENT OF THE REMEDY IS FAILING, FAILING SPECTACULARLY, AND AS SUCH IS PUTTING US CITIZENS AT GREATER RISK OF INJURY AND DEATH. I APPRECIATE ANY CORRECTIVE ACTION YOU CAN APPLY.