2002 Toyota Tacoma

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHILE BACKING OUT OF THE DRIVEWAY AT A VERY LOW RATE OF SPEED, THE REAR DRIVER SIDE SPRING SHACKLE SUDDENLY FRACTURED AND RENDERED THE VEHICLE UNDRIVABLE. THE VEHICLE WAS EXAMINED BY AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHO DIAGNOSED THAT THE FAILURE WAS CAUSED BY SEVERE RUSTING OF THE VEHICLE'S FRAME. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 86,039. ....UPDATED 07/11/16 *BF *CN

RUSTING FRAME.I BROUGHT MY 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA TRUCK TO DEALER FOR THE CORROSION RESISTANT SPRAYING TO PREVENT FURTHER RUSTING OF FRAME.SPRAYING COMPLETED ON 03/25/03.RUST ON FRAME CONTINUES.SPRAYING DID NOT WORK.TOYOTA SAID THEY ONLY SPRAY TRUCK ONCE.RUST WARRANTY EXTENDED FOR 15 YEARS EXPIRING ON 10/01/16.TOYOTA SHOULD EXTEND RUST WARRANTY WITH NO EXPIRATION DATE AS TRUCK WILL HAVE TO BE SPRAYED EVERY TWO YEARS.EARLIER YEARS RUST WARRANTY COVERED REPLACING FRAME OR VEHICLE BUYBACK.TOYOTA SHOULD COVER SAME WARRANTY FOR LATER YEAR TACOMAS AS RUST PROBLEM PERSISTS IN EVERY YEAR. LEAF SPRINGS AND HARDWARE ARE RUSTED AS ARE MUFFLER BRACKETS LEADING TO POTENTIONAL SAFETY HAZARD IF ITEMS FAIL WHILE DRIVING.TOYOTA ADMITTED RUST PROOFING NOT DONE PROPERLY BY SUBCONTRACTOR.PLEASE HOLD TOYOTA ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR NEGLIGENCE IN PROPERLY PROTECTING FRAMES,SPRINGS.AND SUSPENSION SYSTEMS WITH CORROSION RESISTANT MATERIALS.TOYOTA IS JUST BUYING TIME UNTIL WARRANTIES EXPIRE.AFTER THAT TIME THE OWNERS WILL HAVE NO RECOURSE WITH TOYOTA.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME FROM THE REAR LEAF SPRING HANGER WAS CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE FRAME NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 120,000. UPDATED 11/01/16*LJ

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER TO BE REPAIRED UNDER NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 12V542000 (TIRES) HOWEVER, THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED BY THE SERVICE TECHNICIAN THAT THERE WAS EXCESSIVE CORROSION TO THE SUBFRAME OF THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE CORROSION TRAVELED FROM THE FRONT DRIVER SIDE SUSPENSION TO THE REAR DRIVER SIDE SUSPENSION. THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS UNSAFE AND COULD NOT BE REPAIRED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 169,175.

HELLO, I OWN A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA AND I BROUGHT IT TO A LOCAL TOYOTA DEALERSHIP WHERE A SERVICE ADVISOR CAME OUT TO THE PARKING LOT, GOT UNDER THE VEHICLE AND NOTICED THAT THE FRAME HAS RUSTED THROUGH (HE STUCK HIS HAND THROUGH THE RUST HOLE) NEAR WHERE THE LEAF SPRINGS ATTACH TO THE FRAME. IT IS A KNOWN SAFETY ISSUE AND TOYOTA HAS REPAIRED/REPLACED MANY TACOMA'S DUE TO THIS SAFETY ISSUE. I DID SOME RESEARCH, AND FOUND OUT THAT TOYOTA KNOWS THEIR FRAMES ARE UNSAFE, AND HAVE EXTENDED THE WARRANTY TO 15 YEARS FROM THE DATE OF NEW CAR DELIVERY. I TRIED TO GET MINE REPLACED SINCE ITS STILL WELL WITHIN TIME-FRAME, BUT THEY ARE STATING THAT THE ORIGINAL OWNER REFUSED A FRAME INSPECTION/APPLICATION ANTICORROSION SPRAY SO NOW THEY WILL NOT HONOR THE UNSAFE FRAME. I HAVE VEHICLE SERVICE HISTORY SHOWING OTHER RECALLS (FRONT BALL-JOINT) WERE DONE, AND OTHER REPAIRS TO THE CAR, SO ITS LIKELY THAT THE ORIGINAL DEALERSHIP DID NOT OFFER THE APPLICATION ANTICORROSION SPRAY, OTHERWISE THE OWNER WOULD HAVE HAD THIS FREE SERVICE COMPLETED (THE CUSTOMER SERVICED IT REGULARLY AND KEPT IT IN GREAT SHAPE) AND THE FRAME WOULD NOT BE UNSAFE. ORIGINAL NEW CAR DELIVERY DATE WAS OCTOBER OF 2002, MEANING THE 15 YEAR FRAME RECALL SAFETY ISSUE IS COVERED UNTIL OCTOBER OF 2016 (A YEAR FROM NOW). I SPOKE WITH TOYOTA CUSTOMER SERVICE AND THEY ARE UNWILLING TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT THIS KNOWN SAFETY ISSUE. IN ANY CASE, SINCE TOYOTA KNOWS ITS A SAFETY ISSUE, AND ITS WELL WITHIN THE 15 YEAR RECALL FRAME TIME-FRAME, WHY SHOULD TOYOTA EXPECT ME TO JUST DRIVE AROUND AN UNSAFE VEHICLE?

I DRIVE A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. HEARD A CLUNKING NOISE I THOUGHT WAS A LOOSE PICK UP BED (SHORTLY AFTER DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY AT LEGAL BUT HIGH SPEED COMING HOME FROM WORK). STOPPED AND NOTED MY TRUCK FRAME HAD BROKEN IN TWO PLACES OVER THE REAR AXEL AND GAS TANK AREA. THE BROKEN SIDE OF THE FRAME WAS JUST SITTING LOOSELY ON THE L REAR LEAF SPRINGS. LUCKILY I STOPPED TO CHECK THE PICKUP BED. I COULD HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN A SERIOUS ACCIDENT OR EVEN KILLED OR WHAT'S WORSE COULD HAVE LOST CONTROL AND HURT SOMEONE ELSE. I KNOW TOYOTA HAS HAD SIGNIFICANT FRAME QUALITY CONTROL ISSUES WITH THESE MODEL TACOMAS IN THE PAST. I DID HAVE A FRAME CHECK IN DEC. 2010 ON A RECALL NOTICE AND IT WAS FINE. WAS TOLD BY THE DEALERSHIP NO FURTHER ACTION WAS NEEDED. NOW I FIND AFTER TALKING TO TOYOTA CORPORATE, THE FRAME SHOULD HAVE BEEN UNDERCOATED AT THAT TIME. (THEY CLAIM TO HAVE SENT 5 LETTERS ADVISING ME OF THIS.NONE OF WHICH I RECEIVED, AND I AM THE ORIGINAL OWNER AT THE SAME ADDRESS FOR THE PAST 16 YEARS). LOOKING AT THE INTERNET FORMS CONCERNING TACOMAS, I AM NOT THE ONLY ONE TO HAVE BEEN GIVEN THIS COCK AND BULL STORY. WHY WOULD I HAVE NOT TAKEN THE TRUCK IN FOR PROTECTIVE UNDERCOATING IF INFORMED BY TOYOTA AFTER ALL READY RESPONDING TO A RECALL INSPECTION ONLY A FEW WEEKS EARLIER?. THIS IS A POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS SITUATION AND COULD CAUSE CATASTROPHIC PROBLEMS. I THINK TOYOTA CORP IS DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS SITUATION BY ORIGINALLY INSTALLING DEFECTIVE FRAMES THEN NOT FOLLOWING THROUGH ON RECALLS OR SERVICE BULLETINS PROPERLY AND ACTUALLY STONE WALLING OWNERS CALLING WITH COMPLAINTS ABOUT THE DEFECTIVE FRAMES WITH AN EXTENDED 15 YEAR WARRANTY.

2002 TOYOTA TACOMA WAS TAKEN INTO THE SHOP FOR AN OIL CHANGE, TIRE ROTATION AND BRAKE INSPECTION WHEN THE SHOP SERVICE TECHNICIAN CALLED TO REPORT THE FRAME OF THE VEHICLE CONTAINS PINHOLES AND IS NOTICEABLY RUSTING, PRESENTING A SAFETY ISSUE. THE SHOP TECHNICIAN RECOMMENDED CONTACTING TOYOTA DIRECTLY AS HE THOUGHT ANY RECALL HAD SINCE EXPIRED. POST RESEARCHING RECALL INFORMATION, WE DID VERIFY THAT THE "RECALL" PERIOD HAD EXPIRED. HOWEVER, THIS VEHICLE WAS PURCHASED NEW AS A CORPORATE ASSET AND REMAINS IN OUR POSSESSION. WE ABSOLUTELY DID NOT RECEIVE ANY RECALL NOTIFICATIONS FOR THE FRAME ISSUES NOR A REQUEST FOR INSPECTION!

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 30 MPH, THE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE WHEEL SUDDENLY SEPARATED FROM THE VEHICLE CAUSING THE VEHICLE TO SKID ONTO THE ROAD SURFACE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHO DIAGNOSED THAT THE PASSENGER SIDE FRONT WHEEL BEARING MALFUNCTIONED, WHICH CAUSED THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 147,000.

HAD A RECALL ON MY TACOMA. I HAD BOUGHT FROM FATHER, HE BOUGHT NEW FROM SPARTAN TOYOTA IN LANSING MI. IT WAS FOR A POSSIBLE FRAME RUST RECALL. I HAVE THE RECORDS OF TAKING IT IN FOR THAT PURPOSE. IT WAS CLEARED BY SERVICE DEPARTMENT. APPARENTLY, THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO SPRAY A PROTECTIVE COAT ON THE FRAME AT NO COST TO ME, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE A 15 YEAR WARRANTY ON FRAME. THEY DID NOT DO THIS. I SOLD TRUCK TO MY SON, APPROXIMATELY JULY 2014. HE TOOK IT IN FOR MUFFLER WORK AND THEY WOULDN'T PUT ON HOIST BECAUSE FRAME IS WEAK FROM RUST. EVERYONE FROM THE DEALER AND TOYOTA NATIONAL HAS SAID IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN SPRAYED, BUT BECAUSE IT WASN'T THEY SORRY BUT CAN'T DO ANYTHING. I FEEL THAT SOLUTION TO THE SERVICE DEPARTMENTS MISTAKE IS NOT ADEQUATE. DO I HAVE ANY OTHER RECOURSE TO HELP MY SON? [XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR