2006 Toyota Tacoma

I OWN A 2006 TACOMA, WITH 67,800 MILES ON IT. I PURCHASED IT FROM A DEALERSHIP IN 2013; IT HAD 34,000 MILES ON IT THEN. I RECEIVED CORRESPONDENCE FROM TOYOTA IN 2014 THAT I NEEDED TO HAVE THE FRAME INSPECTED FOR EXCESSIVE RUST. THE SAME DEALERSHIP DID THE INSPECTION AND FOUND IT ELIGIBLE ONLY FOR THE UNDERCOAT SPRAY. LAST WEEK, THE DEALERSHIP REPLACED THE SPRING LEAF (PURSUANT TO A SEPARATE RECALL) AND ADVISED ME THAT THE FRAME HAS EXCESSIVE RUST, CRACKS AND PERFORATION. IT'S CLEAR THAT THE UNDERCOAT "SOLUTION" WAS NO SOLUTION AT ALL AND THAT IT DID NOT RESOLVE THE UNDERLYING PROBLEM. THE DEALERSHIP WAS UNSYMPATHETIC AND DEFENSIVE ABOUT THEIR WORKMANSHIP SPRAYING THE UNDERCOAT. I SEE THAT THERE IS A STATE CLASS ACTION SOMEWHERE DOWN SOUTH -- ARKANSAS? ALABAMA? -- BUT THAT DOESN'T HELP ME (I'M IN THE NORTHEAST) AND I DEPEND EXCLUSIVELY ON THIS TRUCK. CAN NHTSA HELP?

RUSTING FRAME. MY MECHANIC NOTED IT DURING A ROUTINE MAINTENANCE AND SUGGESTED I TAKE IT TO TOYOTA AS HE HAD ONE OTHER CUSTOMER WITH THE SAME PROBLEM AND THAT TOYOTA HAD REPLACED THE DEFECTIVE FRAME. MY EXPERIENCE WAS DIFFERENT. I WAS TOLD THAT TOYOTA DID CONDUCT A "CAMPAIGN" TO INSPECT AFFECTED VEHICLES IN THE 2005 TO 2008 RANGE. THEY CLAIMED THEY SENT OUT RECALL NOTICES BUT I RECEIVED NO SUCH NOTICE. TOYOTA NOW REFUSES TO INSPECT OR REMEDY THE PROBLEM. THERE IS NO WAY OF TELLING HOW MANY OTHER TOYOTA TRUCKS FROM THIS ERA ARE STILL ON THE ROAD AND WITH THE POSSIBILITY OF A FRAME FAILURE WHILE TRAVELING ON A ROADWAY. TOYOTA'S DECISION TO ARBITRARILY SET AN EXPIRATION DATE IS NO WAY TO TREAT A SAFETY PROBLEM. THE FACT THAT TOYOTA HAD A CAMPAIGN IS ITSELF AN ADMISSION THAT A PROBLEM EXISTS. NOW IT NEEDS TO BE FIXED.

VEHICLE EXPERIENCED UNINTENDED ACCELERATION WHILE ATTEMPTING TO PARK IN FRONT OF RESIDENCE. THE BREAK SYSTEM WILL NOT STOP THE VEHICLE...ONLY TURNING OFF THE IGNITION WILL STOP IT. THIS IS THE FOURTH SUCH INCIDENT WITH THIS VEHICLE. NHTSA ODI NUMBER 10253526 WAS FILED ON 01/01/2009 WHEN PROPERTY DAMAGE OCCURED; NHTSA ODI NUMBER 10284909 WAS FILED ON 09/22/2009. FOLLOWING THESE INCIDENCES, THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED BY A TOYOTA REGIONAL REPRESENTATIVE. THE DEALERSHIP ASSURED US THAT THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE VEHICLE. REALLY??

RUST PERFORATION OF FRAME. TOYOTA IS AWARE THAT THE FRAMES DID NOT RECEIVE ADEQUATE CORROSION RESISTANT PROTECTION DURING PRODUCTION AND ISSUED A SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO HAVE INSPECTED. TOYOTA IS ONLY REPLACING FRAMES IF THEY EXHIBIT PERFORATION AT THE TIME OF INSPECTION. IF NO PERFORATION, THEY ARE SPRAYING CORROSION RESISTANT COMPOUND WHICH IS NOT ADEQUATE TO REMEDY THE IMPROPER MANUFACTURING OF THE EQUIPMENT. SEE PHOTO OF VEHICLE FRAME ONLY 14 MONTHS AFTER APPLICATION OF CORROSION RESISTANT COMPOUND.

MY TACOMA WAS RECALLED FOR RUST ON THE FRAME. A NEW FRAME WAS ORDERED BUT I WAS INFORMED THAT I WOULD HAVE TO PAY FOR ANY RUSTED PARTS THAT NEEDED TO BE REPLACED WHEN THE FRAME WAS INSTALLED. I DIDN'T THINK YOU PAID FOR SAFETY RECALL WORK. I CALLED TOYOTA AND ASKED FOR A GUIDELINE AS TO WHAT COSTS WOULD BE MINE AND I HOPED A LITTLE SUPPORT IN DEALING WITH THE DEALER. I DON'T THINK TOYOTA TRUSTS THE DEALER. THEY WERE NO HELP. THIS SAFETY REPAIR WOULD COST ME THOUSANDS WITH THERE BEING NO LIMITS AS TO WHAT THE TOTAL WOULD BE. IF YOU REPLACE A FRAME ON A 10 YEAR OLD TRUCK YOU CAN EXPECT SOME RUSTED BOLTS AND FITTINGS. I DON'T THINK YOU SHOULD BE CHARGED FOR A SAFETY RECALL, BUT THE COST WOULD BE OPEN ENDED. THERE ARE NO LIMITS OR CRITERIA AS TO WHAT WOULD COVERED AND WHAT IS NOT. TOYOTA DOES NOT SEEM TO REALLY WANT TO CORRECT THIS DEFECT. THE LETTER FROM TOYOTA STATED THAT THE DEALER WILL PROVIDE AN APPROPRIATE REMEDY AT NO CHARGE TO ME. WHAT DO I DO? THERE DOESN'T SEEM TO BE ANY HELP COMING.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE, BUT THE PART TO DO THE REPAIR WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE MANUFACTURER EXCEEDED A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME TO DO THE RECALL REPAIR. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE ISSUE. THE NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER AND COMPONENT WERE UNKNOWN. THE CONTACT HAD NOT EXPERIENCED A FAILURE. UPDATED 05/06/16*LJ

EARLY IN 2014 I RECEIVED A NOTICE FROM TOYOTA ABOUT A CONCERN WITH THE FRAME RUSTING OUT TO THE POINT THAT THE VEHICLE WOULD BECOME UNSAFE TO DRIVE. IN SEPTEMBER OF 2014 I HAD THE FRAME INSPECTED BY PRIME TOYOTA IN SACO, MAINE, WHERE I HAD PURCHASED THE VEHICLE NEW IN OCTOBER OF 2006. THE FRAME WAS INSPECTED AND FOUND TO BE FREE OF CONCERNS REGARDING THE FRAME RUST ISSUE. I WAS TOLD THAT IF THE FRAME DID NOT SHOW SIGNS OF RUST IT WOULD BE RESPRAYED WITH RUST PROOFING MATERIAL. THE RESPRAYING WAS COMPLETED IN SEPTEMBER OF 2014. IN OCTOBER OF 2015 I WAS NOTICING A RATTLE UNDER BY TRUCK AND CRAWLED UNDER TO SEE WHAT WAS MAKING THE RATTLE. I FOUND A LOOSE HEAT SHIELD AROUND THE MUFFLER AND AT THAT TIME NOTICED THAT THE RUST PROOFING MATERIAL THAT HAD BEEN APPLIED WAS ALMOST ALL GONE. I BROUGHT IT BACK TO THE DEALER FOR AN OIL CHANGE AND ASKED THEM TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE FRAME. I WAS THEN INFORMED THAT THE FRAME HAD A PERFORATION. I CALLED TOYOTA CUSTOMER SERVICE TOYOTA 1-800-331-4331 WITH CASE #1601273298 AND SPOKE TO CASE MGR NICOLE. I WAS INFORMED THAT BECAUSE THEY HAD RESPRAYED THE FRAME THEY WOULD NOT DO ANYTHING ABOUT THE FRAME RUST. MY POSITION IS THAT EITHER THE INSPECTION WAS NOT DONE CORRECTLY AND OR THE RUST PROOFING WAS IMPROPERLY APPLIED. HENCE THE RUST PROOFING FALLING OFF AND A RUSTY FRAME. I HAD CALLED A SECOND TIME WITH THE SAME RESULT. I WAS NOT INFORMED AT THE TIME THAT IF THEY RESPRAYED THE FRAME I WOULD FORFEIT ALL FURTHER CLAIMS FOR THE RUSTY FRAME. THE ISSUE OF 2005 - 2009 TOYOTA TACOMA FRAME RUST IS WIDELY KNOWN AND DOCUMENTED. ATTACHED ARE THE SERVICE RECORDS FROM 2014 THAT THE INSPECTION WAS DONE AND THE RUST PROOFING APPLIED. NOWHERE IN THERE DOES IT SAY THAT THERE IS NO GUARANTEE FOR THE RUST PROOFING.

TOYOTA SENT ME A NOTICE LAST YEAR CALLED A "LIMITED SERVICE CAMPAIGN" FOR "CERTAIN 2005 THROUGH 2008 MODEL YEAR TACOMA VEHICLES CORROSION-RESISTANT COMPOUND APPLICATION TO THE VEHICLE'S FRAME". THE NOTICE SAID THAT THESE TACOMAS' FRAMES WERE RUSTING MORE THAN USUAL DUE TO INSUFFICIENT CORROSION PROTECTION. THE CAMPAIGN APPLIED ONLY TO COLD WEATHER STATES LIKE MINNESOTA. IT WENT ON TO SAY THAT I SHOULD BRING MY TACOMA TO MY LOCAL TOYOTA DEALER AND HAVE THE FRAME INSPECTED FOR DAMAGE. JAN. 2015: I BROUGHT MY TACOMA TO MAPLEWOOD TOYOTA IN MINNESOTA. THEY TOLD ME THAT THE FRAME WAS INDEED DAMAGED WITH HOLES AND PERFORATIONS ALREADY PRESENT. THEY SAID TOYOTA WOULD REPLACE THE FRAME AND THAT IT WOULD TAKE SEVERAL MONTHS FOR THE FRAME TO ARRIVE, PLUS TIME TO REPLACE IT. WE WERE GOING TO MOVE TO COLORADO IN THE SPRING SO I DECIDED TO HAVE THE WORK DONE THERE. MAPLEWOOD TOYOTA SAID THAT WAS FINE. WE MOVED TO LOVELAND, COLORADO ON JUNE 19, 2015. I THEN CONTACTED THE TOYOTA NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS AND EXPLAINED THE SITUATION TO THEM AND ASKED IF I COULD BRING MY TACOMA TO PEDERSEN TOYOTA IN FORT COLLINS, COLORADO, WHICH IS RIGHT NEXT TO LOVELAND. THEY SAID OK. THEIR FINDINGS WERE THE SAME: DAMAGED FRAME WITH HOLES AND PERFORATIONS. THEY ALSO SAID THE TRUCK WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE AND THEY WOULD GIVE ME A RENTAL FOR THE 5 MONTHS. BUT THEN THEY SAID THAT WHILE THEY WOULD PAY FOR THE FRAME, I WOULD HAVE TO PAY FOR ANY RUSTED-ON PARTS THEY WOULD BREAK, AND I SHOULD EXPECT TO PAY 2 TO 3 THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR THAT! I CALLED THE NATIONAL TOYOTA HEADQUARTERS AND THEY SAID THE SAME THING. THEY ALSO SAID TOYOTA IS NOT ADMITTING TO DEFECTIVE CORROSION PROTECTION, AND THAT IT ISN'T A RECALL. I TOLD THEM IT WASN'T RIGHT TO MAKE ME PAY FOR PARTS ATTACHED TO THE FRAME THAT THEY BREAK BECAUSE THEY DID A DEFECTIVE JOB IN THE FIRST PLACE. THEY SAID THERE WAS NOTHING THEY COULD DO! PLEASE HELP ME.