2001 Toyota Sequoia

OUR VEHICLE HAS A SQUEAK AND CRACKING SOUND WHICH IS VERY SCARY WHEN RIDING IN THIS TRUCK.MY HUSBAND WAS INFORMED BY A TOYOTA TECHNICIAN THAT THERE HAD BEEN A RECALL ON THIS VEHICLE FOR UNDER CARRIAGE RUST/CORROSION WHICH COULD LEAD TO POSSIBLE FRAME DAMAGE. ON 9/22 WE CALLED OUR LOCAL TOYOTA DEALERSHIP, GAVE THE VIN AND WAS TOLD THEIR IS NO RECALL, & ADVISED TO NOTIFY TOYOTA IF WE WANTED TO PURSUE THIS ISSUE. SO WE IMMEDIATELY CALLED TOYOTA & REC'D A CASE #, AND WAS INFORMED THE ISSUE WAS THE UNDER CARRIAGE WHICH WAS RUSTING AND THE CORROSION WAS CAUSING FRAME DAMAGE DUE TO THE SALT AND OTHER ELEMENTS ON ROADS FOR ICE & SNOW ON 9/23 WE REC'D A CALL INFORMING US THAT THE "SAFETY CAMPAIGN" ENDED ON 7/29, NOTIFICATIONS WENT OUT TO FIRST TIME OWNERS AND OR DMV CURRENT OWNERS. MY HUSBAND & I HAVE BEEN REGISTERED OWNERS OF THIS VEHICLE SINCE 9/26/07. WE WERE NOT NOTIFIED OF THIS SAFETY CAMPAIGN WHICH POSES A SAFETY HAZARD AND HAVE BEEN TOLD THAT OUR STATE OF MD IS A STATE IN WHICH THIS VEHICLE IS EFFECTED BY THIS RECALL/CAMPAIGN. FOR THE SAFETY AND LIVES OF MY FAMILY I AM WRITING TO HAVE THE "SAFETY CAMPAIGN" OPENED SO THAT THIS VEHICLE WILL FEEL AND SOUND SAFE TO DRIVE AND THE LIVES OF MY FAMILY WILL NOT BE JEOPARDIZED EVERY TIME WE RIDE IN THIS VEHICLE WHICH MOST OF THE TIME IS DAILY.WHY WOULD WE NOT ADHERE TO A RECALL IF WE WERE NOTIFIED? I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW THERE IS A CUT-OFF DATE. I MEAN WHAT HAPPENS AFTER 7/29 THE CORROSION DOESN'T MATTER OR THE LIVES OF THOSE WHO OWN THESE VEHICLES DON'T MATTER? SEEKING HELP IN MARYLAND. *TR

TL-THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA SEQUOIA. THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 60 MPH, THE CONTACT HAD DRIVEN OVER A BUMP ON THE ROAD AND SUDDENLY LOSS CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE,WHICH SHIFTED TO THE RIGHT INDEPENDENTLY. THE CONTACT ATTEMPTED TO MAINTAIN CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE, DECREASED THE SPEED AND COASTED TO THE EMERGENCY LANE. THE CONTACT AND PASSENGERS HAD EXITED THE VEHICLE TO PERFORM A BRIEF INSPECTION AND NOTICED THAT THAT STABILIZER BAR FROM THE REAR AXLE WAS CORRODED AND WAS DETACHED. THE ENTIRE SUB FRAME WAS FRACTURED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE RESIDENCE. THE CONTACT HAD CONTACTED THE DEALER TO EXPLAIN THE FAILURE AND THE DEALER INFORMED THE CONTACT THAT THERE WAS A VOLUNTARY RECALL FOR THE SUB FRAME, HOWEVER, THERE WAS NOTHING THEY COULD DO BECAUSE THE RECALL HAD EXPIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE AND THEY INFORMED THE CONTACT THAT THE VOLUNTARY RECALL WAS EXPIRED AND NO ONE WAS INJURED AND NO ACTIONS COULD BE TAKEN TO ACCOMODATE HIM. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 190,000.GB

THIS VEHICLE HAS BEEN RECALLED UNDER A "LIMITED SERVICE CAMPAIGN" FOR EXCESSIVE FRAME RUST. VEHICLES FOR THIS CAMPAIGN ARE BEING INSPECTED AND IF THEY DO NOT HAVE SIGNIFICANT FRAME PERFORATION FROM RUST, A RUST RESISTANT COMPOUND IS BEING APPLIED. FOR VEHICLES THAT DO HAVE SIGNIFICANT FRAME PERFORATION, FAILING THE INSPECTION, TOYOTA IS REPLACING THE FRAME OF THE VEHICLE. MY COMPLAINT IS THAT WHILE TOYOTA IS REPLACING THE FRAME FREE OF CHARGE, THEY ARE NOT GOING TO COVER THE COSTS OF ANY COMPONENT THAT BREAKS (DUE TO SIGNIFICANT RUST) DURING THE DISASSEMBLY OR REASSEMBLY, I.E. ANY RUSTED PARTS OR EVEN NUTS AND BOLTS THAT ARE NOT REUSABLE. THIS IS OUTRAGEOUS, IT IS THEIR FAULT THAT MANY THINGS WILL HAVE TO BE REMOVED WHEN THEY OTHERWISE WOULDN'T HAVE TO BE, AND I WILL BE EXPECTED TO PAY FOR IT? THIS TREATMENT WAS CONFIRMED BY CALLING TOYOTA CUSTOMER CARE. I BELIEVE I WILL BE LOOKING AT SIGNIFICANT COSTS, WHICH ARE UNKNOWN UNTIL THEY HAPPEN, AT WHICH POINT I WILL BE FORCED TO PAY FOR IT OR BE LEFT WITH A PARTIALLY ASSEMBLED, UNDRIVEABLE VEHICLE DUE TO FAULTY TOYOTA PARTS. *TR

I TOOK MY TRUCK TO THE NEAREST DEALER LOCATED NEAR MY HOME AND I TOOK MY RECALL LETTER I MUST OF SAT THERE FOR 2 HOURS WAITING FOR SOMEONE TO SPEAK TO ME ABOUT THIS RECALL ISSUE BUT GOT THE RUN AROUND FOR 2 MORE HOURS FINALLY A REP APPROACHED ME AND ASKED IF I COULD COME BACK ANOTHER DAY. I REQUESTED A LETTER OR SOME KIND OF DOCUMENT TO VERIFY MY COMPLIANCE WITH THE LETTER I RECEIVED BUT WAS DENIED. MY SPARE TIRE FELL OFF DURING THIS ACCIDENT THANK GOD NO ONE WAS HURT. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA SEQUOIA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF THE SUBFRAME DUE TO CORROSION HOWEVER, THE FAILURE WAS NOT CORRECTED. THE VEHICLE FAILED TO DISENGAGE FROM FOUR-WHEEL DRIVE AND THE BRAKING SYSTEM WOULD FEEL AS IF IT WAS CONSTANTLY AND INDEPENDENTLY ENGAGING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN BACK TO THE DEALER, WHO ADVISED THE CONTACT THAT THE TRANSFER CASE NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 184,286.

I WAS NOTIFIED BY TOYOTA THAT MY 2001 SEQUOIA WAS PART OF A LIMITED SERVICE CAMPAIGN FOR 2001 TO 2004 SEQUOIAS. CERTAIN OF THESE SEQUOIAS EXPERIENCED MORE THAN NORMAL'CORROSION TO THE VEHICLE FRAME. I TOOK THE CAR TO MOLLE TOYOTA IN KANSAS CITY FOR INSPECTION. I WAS INFORMED THAT MY VEHICLE DID HAVE A HOLE IN THE FRAME AND QUALIFIED FOR A FRAME REPLACEMENT. PICTURES WERE TAKEN. I WAS PROMISED COPIES BUT HAVE NOT RECEIVED THEM. APPARENTLY TUNDRA AND THE TACOMA VEHICLES WERE ALSO PREVIOUSLY RECALLED FOR FRAME RUST DUE TO USING INFERIOR METAL WHICH RUSTED FROM THE INSIDE OUT AND BY THE TIME IT WAS VISIBLE IT WAS TOO LATE TO CORRECT. SPECIFICALLY RELEVANT IS THE FACT THAT FOLLOWING AN INVESTIGATION BY NHTSA IN OCTOBER 2009. TOYOTA ISSUED A REGIONAL RECALL THAT COVERED 110,000 2000-2003 TOYOTA TUNDRA VEHICLES. THE SEQUOIA AND TUNDRA ARE BUILT USING THE SAME FRAME AND MAY BE BUILT ON THE SAME ASSEMBLY LINE, AND PROBABLY USE THE SAME STEEL FOR THE FRAME. WHY WAS THE SEQUOIA NOT ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE PREVIOUS INQUIRES AND RECALLS? DEALERSHIPS MUST HAVE KNOWN OF THE PROBLEM FOR THE TUNDRA AND THE SEQUOIA VEHICLES. YET NO ONE INFORMED OWNERS. NO ONE INSPECTED THE SEQUOIA. THIS IS CLEAR NEGLIGENCE. THIS WAS KNOWN SINCE AT LEAST 2009. SINCE THAT TIME I HAVE PUT A LOT OF MONEY INTO THIS VEHICLE. UPON LEARNING OF THE DEFECT I EXPLORED THE POSSIBILITY OF TRADING THE VEHICLE IN. I DISCLOSED THE FRAME PROBLEM AS PART OF THIS. NO DEALER WANTED THE VEHICLE. THE SUGGESTION WAS TO SELL THE VEHICLE MYSELF. I FIND IT PARTICULARLY TROUBLING THAT THE MOLLE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP ACTUALLY SUGGESTED THAT IT MIGHT BE NECESSARY FOR ME TO SIGN A WAIVER IN ORDER TO TAKE THE VEHICLE OUT OF THE DEALERSHIP. THE WAIVER WAS TO HOLD TOYOTA HARMLESS SHOULD SOMETHING RESULT AS A RESULT OF THE DEFECT. I WAS SHOCKED WHEN IN TALKING TO THE CASE MANGER ASSIGNED TO MY COMPLAINT SHE REPEATED THIS REQUEST. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA SEQUOIA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE EXTERIOR REAR LIFT GATE LATCH BECAME FRACTURED AND DETACHED FROM THE VEHICLE. THERE WAS NOT AN INTERIOR LATCH TO OPEN THE LIFT GATE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 71,380. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA SEQUOIA. THE CONTACT NOTICED SEVERE RUST CORROSION WITHIN THE MAIN FRAME. THERE WAS A LIMITED SERVICE CAMPAIGN ISSUED BY THE MANUFACTURER HOWEVER, THE VEHICLE WAS INELIGIBLE FOR REPAIRS UNDER THE SERVICE CAMPAIGN AS A RESULT OF NOT BEING REGISTERED IN THE PARTICULAR STATES THAT THE MANUFACTURER WAS SERVICING. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE PROBLEM. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 125,000. UPDATED 5/22/13 *CN