2002 Toyota Tacoma

EXCESSIVE RUST CORROSION ON THE VEHICLE FRAME. EXCESSIVE RUST CORROSION TO THE POINT WHERE THERE ARE ACTUAL HOLES IN THE MAIN FRAME OF THE VEHICLE WHERE THE VEHICLES SUSPENSION ATTACHES. THE VEHICLE HAD BEEN INSPECTED FOR CORROSION AND UNDER RECALL AND HAD ADDITIONAL CORROSION PROTECTION APPLIED. I JUST NOTICED THE HOLES IN THE FRAME ON MARCH 2, 2017 AND WISH TO INQUIRE IF THE VEHICLE FALLS UNDER THE EXTENDED FRAME WARRANTY. JUDGING BY THE EXTENT OF RUST AND DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLES FRAME, I FEEL CONFIDENT STATING THAT THE DAMAGE HAPPENED SEVERAL MONTHS TO A YEAR AGO.

I WENT TO HAVE MY TIRES ROTATED. WHEN THEY RAISED THE TRUCK ON THE LIFT THE FRAME BROKE ON BOTH SIDES OF THE TRUCK NEAR THE BED. THE ENTIRE BED OF THE TRUCK FELL BACKWARDS. THE FRAME WAS COMPLETELY RUSTED THROUGH. I HAD OWNED THE TRUCK FOR FOUR YEARS AND NEVER RECEIVED A NOTICE FROM TOYOTA THAT THIS MIGHT BE AN ISSUE. I CALLED TOYOTA AND THEY ADMITTED THAT THERE WAS AN ISSUE WITH THE FRAME BUT MY VEHICLE WAS NOT PART OF THE RECALL. AS A RESULT THEY REFUSED TO HELP FIX THE ISSUE. MY $11,000 TRUCK IS NOW TOTALED. A WORKER AT THE TIRE PLACE COULD HAVE EASILY BEEN KILLED. THIS IS ALSO A CONCERN WITH MYSELF AND FAMILY THAT DROVE IN THIS VEHICLE UNAWARE OF ANY ISSUE. TOYOTA HAS AVOIDED FIXING A KNOWN PROBLEM BY TAKING ADVANTAGE OF A WEAK RECALL REQUIREMENT ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT AND HAS COST HARDWORKING FAMILIES MONEY AND COULD END U COSTING SOMEONE A LIFE. ALL TO SAVE MONEY. WHY DOES TOYOTA GET TO ADMIT THEY MADE A MISTAKE BUT ONLY BE REQUIRED TO FIX IN ON VEHICLES THEY CHOSE?

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO BE SERVICED FOR NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 12V542000 (TIRES), THE TECHNICIAN DISCOVERED THAT THE PASSENGER SIDE FRAME WAS RUSTED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 212,632. UPDATED 05/10/17*LJ *CN

I HAVE DRIVEN THIS VEHICLE VERY LITTLE. HAS 46500 MILES, DONE IN STAMFORD CT A CITY THAT DOES NOT USE SALT IN THE WINTER BUT ONLY SAND. I NOTICED EXCESSIVE RUST UNDER AND IT NEEDED TO WELD STEEL PLATES TO SUPPORT THE CHASSIS TWICE ( THE FIRST WHEN THE CAR WAS 5 YEARS OLD). IN SPITE OF THAT THE DETERIORATION CONTINUED AND NOW THE CHASSIS IS BROKEN NEAR THE FRONT PASSENGER WHEEL MAKING THE CAT LOCK ,UNABLE TO TURN,UNDRIVABLE, PARKED AT HOME. CARS OF THIS MODEL WERE RECALLED BY TOYOTA AT FIRST SOME YEARS AGO AND EVEN AFTER THAT MORE PEOPLE COMPLAINED AND ADDITIONAL PRIOR YEARS WERE ADDED. I HAVE CONTACTED TOYOTA DEALER IN STAMFORD AND TELLS ME IT IS PRIOR TO THE LATEST RECALL.

I OWN A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A TIRE SHOP AND THE TECHNICIAN NOTICED THAT THE FRAME OF THE VEHICLE HAD A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF RUST. THE DEALER DIAGNOSED THAT THE FRAME NEEDED TO BE REPLACED DUE TO THE RUST AND THE VEHICLE WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. THE VEHICLE NEEDS TO REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE ISSUE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 150,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A TIRE SHOP AND THE TECHNICIAN NOTICED THAT THE FRAME OF THE VEHICLE HAD A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF RUST. THE DEALER DIAGNOSED THAT THE FRAME NEEDED TO BE REPLACED DUE TO THE RUST AND THE VEHICLE WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE ISSUE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 164,000. ...UPDATED 03/13/17 *BF UPDATED 08/11/2017*JS

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT NOTICED RUST ON THE VEHICLE'S FRAME NEAR THE SPRING HANGER ON THE PASSENGER SIDE. THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE THE DEALER, BUT THE VEHICLE WAS NOT COVERED UNDER WARRANTY DUE TO THE COATING ON THE VEHICLE. THE DEALER DIAGNOSED THAT THE FRAME OF THE VEHICLE WAS RUSTED COMPLETELY THROUGH. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 160,000. UPDATED 01/25/2017*CT UPDATED 7/10/18*JB *TR