1998 Toyota Sienna

IT APPEARS THAT TOYOTA HAS CREATED ARTIFICIAL OBSTACLES TO PREVENT MY OBTAINMENT OF AN ELIGIBLE REIMBURSEMENT FOR RECALL (SAFETY RECALL A9E - TIRE CARRIER CABLE) REPAIRS. IN RESPONSE TO THE RECALL NOTICE I HAD THE CABLE INSPECTED THEN CONTACTED TOYOTA IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECALL LETTER BUT I WAS DENIED REIMBURSEMENT. ON OCTOBER 2, 2013 I WROTE TO TOYOTA FOLLOWING THE INSPECTION AND ATTACHED THE ORIGINAL WORK ORDER FROM A TOYOTA DEALER FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF PART NUMBER "51900-08010" AS REQUIRED. I RECEIVED AN OCTOBER 17TH RESPONSE SAYING I NEEDED TO PROVIDE ANSWERS TO THREE QUESTIONS:REASON THE VEHICLE BROUGHT INTO THE REPAIR FACILITY; THE REPAIR FACILITY DIAGNOSES, AND THE REPAIR PERFORMED IN ORDER TO CORRECT THE CONCERN. AFTER SEVERAL TELEPHONE CALLS TO TOYOTA CUSTOMER SERVICE AND AGAIN HAVING THE CURRENT CABLE REINSPECTED, OBTAINING AND FORWARDING COPIES OF THE REPAIR ORDER, PROOF OF PAYMENT, AND OWNERSHIP OF THE VEHICLE FOR REPAIR WORK PERFORMED BY A TOYOTA DEALERSHIP USING AN IDENTICAL PART NUMBER FOR REIMBURSEMENT ELIGIBILITY, I WAS DIRECTED TO CONTACT THE MANAGER AT THE DEALERSHIP AND OBTAIN WRITTEN INFORMATION ON THE CAUSE OF THE BREAKAGE THAT OCCURRED NEARLY TEN YEARS EARLIER AND THAT I NEEDED TO CONTACT HIM BECAUSE HE WAS NOT RESPONDING TO THE CORPORATE CUSTOMER SERVICE OFFICE. I SENT A LETTER, DATED JANUARY 20, 2014, TO HIM BUT NEVER EVEN RECEIVED AN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT. ALTHOUGH I'VE DONE EVERYTHING REQUIRED, SOMETIMES MORE THAN ONCE, HAD REPAIRS COMPLETED USING THE PROPER PART NUMBER, AS SHOWN ON THE REPAIR WORKSHEET ISSUED BY A TOYOTA DEALER, I'VE BEEN DENIED REIMBURSEMENT DUE TO TOYOTA'S OWN DEALERSHIP REPAIR MANAGER'S LACK OF COOPERATION. IF THE REPAIRS WERE NOT DUE TO THE CABLE BREAKAGE AND IF THE REPLACEMENT PART WAS NOT NEEDED, WHY DID THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP DO THE REPAIR AND CHARGE ME FOR IT? COPIES - LETTERS AND RECEIPTS WILL BE PROVIDED, IF NEEDED. *TR

I PURCHASED 2 COOPER LIFELINER TOURING SLE SIZE 215/ 65R-15. THEY COMPLETE UNRAVELED WITHIN ONE WEEK OF EACH OTHER. ONE WAS REPLACED AS MY DAUGHTER WAS HEADED ON A 350 MILE TRIP BACK TO HER COLLEGE TOWN, AND THE OTHER I STILL HAVE DISINTERGRATED ON HER WAY HOME FROM COLLEGE. SHE COULD HAVE BEEN SERIOUSLY INJURED IF THEY WERE ON THE FRONT INSTEAD OF THE BACK. I COULD NOT BELIEVE IT IT CAME APART RIGHT DOWN TO THE STEEL BELT. *JB

MICHELIN HYDROEDGE TIRE: TREAD SEPARATED FROM THE SIDEWALL OF THE TIRE FOR THE ENTIRE CIRCUMFERENCE OF THE TIRE ON A PASSENGER VAN. TIRE WAS PROPERLY INFLATED JUST 4 WEEKS AGO WHEN ONE OF THE TIRES WAS REPLACED BECAUSE OF A PREVIOUS ROAD HAZARD. NO APPARENT DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE SINCE THE DRIVER WAS ABLE TO QUICKLY REMOVE THE VEHICLE FROM LANES OF TRAFFIC TO THE ROAD SHOULDER. THERE DOESN'T APPEAR TO HAVE ANY DAMAGE (ROAD HAZARD) TO THE TIRE. *JB

ON MAY 24, 2004, MY WIFE WAS DRIVING OUR TOYOTA SIENNA VAN NORTH ON I-35 IN OKLAHOMA AT HIGHWAY SPEED WHEN THE FRONT DRIVER SIDE TIRE BLEW OUT AND THE TREAD SEPARATED. THE TIRE WAS REPLACED BY THE DEALER AND ALL OTHER TIRES CHECKED FOR WEAR. ON JULY 17, 2004 I WAS DRIVING THE SAME VAN ON I-44 IN OKLAHOMA AT HIGHWAY SPEED WHEN THE DRIVER SIDE REAR TIRE'S TREAD SEPARATED AND WENT FLAT. THERE WAS NO ROAD HAZARD ENCOUNTERED AT ETIHER EVENT. *AK