2007 TOYOTA TACOMA Complaints

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT RECEIVED NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 14V604000 (SUSPENSION). HOWEVER, THE PART TO DO THE REPAIR WAS UNAVAILABLE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE MANUFACTURER EXCEEDED A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME FOR THE RECALL REPAIR. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE ISSUE. THE CONTACT HAD NOT EXPERIENCED A FAILURE.

LAST FALL I RECEIVED A LIMITED SERVICE CAMPAIGN FOLLOW-UP NOTICE FROM TOYOTA MOTOR SALES, U.S.A., INC. REGARDING POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS SITUATIONS ARISING FROM POSSIBLE FRAME PERFORATIONS. THEIR LETTER SAID AND I QUOTE 'SOME VEHICLES MAY NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT CORROSION-RESISTANT PROTECTION...THIS MAY CONTRIBUTE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF MORE-THAN-NORMAL RUST IN THE FRAME OF SOME VEHICLES'. THE LETTER SUGGESTED THE OWNERS OF SAID VEHICLES SCHEDULE AN INSPECTION AT A PARTICIPATING DEALERSHIP NO LATER THAN THE MARCH 31, 2016 EXPIRATION DATE. THE INSPECTION WAS PERFORMED ON DECEMBER 11, 2015 AT SUNRISE TOYOTA, 4002 SUNRISE HWY., OAKDALE, NY 11769, (631) 589-9000 AND A PERFORATION OF THE FRAME ON THE FRONT DRIVERS SIDE WHEEL WELL WAS DISCOVERED. THE DEALERSHIP INFORMED ME THAT IT PRESENTED A SAFETY CONCERN THAT WOULD REQUIRE TOTAL REPLACEMENT. AT THIS POINT I WAS TOLD IT WAS ORDERED AND WOULD TAKE 4-6 WEEKS TO ARRIVE. AT 8 WEEKS I HAD TO MAKE THE FIRST CONTACT. THEY SAID NOW IT COULD BE BETWEEN 3-4 MONTHS BUT NEVER REACHED OUT TO INFORM ME OF THIS CHANGE. AT 12 AND 16 WEEKS I CALLED THE DEALERSHIP AGAIN TO NO AVAIL. THEY HAVE NO IDEA OF A DELIVERY DATE AND DON'T SEEM TO CARE. AT THIS POINT I CALLED TOYOTA CORPORATE CUSTOMER SERVICE AND THEY PROVIDED ME TWO THINGS. THEY WOULD HAVE SUNRISE TOYOTAS CUSTOMER RELATIONS MANAGER CALL ME ALSO TO ABSOLUTELY NO AVAIL AND TO PROVIDE ME A REFERENCE NUMBER [XXX] FOR MY COMPLAINT. PLEASE EXERCISE INFLUENCE ON SUNRISE TOYOTA TO ADDRESS THIS HAZARDOUS SITUATION PROMPTLY AND WITH FULL DISCLOSURE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT A TECHNICIAN INFORMED THAT THE VEHICLE HAD MODERATE TO SEVERE CORROSION ON THE FRAME AND IT NEEDED TO BE SPRAYED WITH ANTI-CORROSIVE ADHESIVE). THE TECHNICIAN WAS NOT ABLE TO APPLY THE ADHESIVE UNTIL THE PARTS FOR NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 14V604000 (SUSPENSION) WERE AVAILABLE. THE VEHICLE WAS REMEDIED FOR THE RECALL AFTER ONE YEAR AND A HALF. PRIOR TO THE REMEDY, THE LEAF SPRING HAD FRACTURED. AFTER THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED, THE TECHNICIAN REFUSED TO APPLY THE ADHESIVE SPRAY. THE REPRESENTATIVE FROM TOYOTA INFORMED THE CONTACT THAT DUE TO GOVERNMENT REGULATION THAT THE VEHICLE COULD NOT HAVE THE ADHESIVE APPLIED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 93,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT RECEIVED NOTIFICATION OF NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 14V604000 (SUSPENSION); HOWEVER, THE PART TO DO THE REPAIR WAS UNAVAILABLE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE MANUFACTURER EXCEEDED A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME FOR THE RECALL REPAIR. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE ISSUE. THE CONTACT HAD NOT EXPERIENCED A FAILURE. PARTS DISTRIBUTION DISCONNECT. UPDATED 07/25/16.*JB

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT RECEIVED NOTIFICATION OF NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 14V604000 (SUSPENSION); HOWEVER, THE PART TO DO THE REPAIR WAS UNAVAILABLE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE MANUFACTURER EXCEEDED A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME FOR THE RECALL REPAIR. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE ISSUE. THE CONTACT HAD NOT EXPERIENCED A FAILURE. PARTS DISTRIBUTION DISCONNECT.

DUNLOP AT20 P245/75/R16 DOT M670 C8ER 1012, TIRES ARE THE SECOND SET TO BE REPLAED ON MY 2007 TOYOTA TACOMA. FIRST SET FAILED TO MEET THE MANUFACTURES WARRANTY OF 70K MILES WITH ONLY 43K ON TIRES. WERE REPLACED AFTER MUCH HAGELING WITH GOOD YEAR. AFTER PUTTING 23K ON SECOND SET OF TIRES, FOUND ONE WITH A LARGE BUBBLE IN THE OUTER SIDEWALL. IF THIS TIRE WERE TO HAVE BLOWN OUT, A TRUCK THIS SIZE WOULD HAVE LOST CONTROL AND THE POSSIBLITY OF SEVERE INJURIES WERE PRESENT. AGAIN I AM HAGELING WITH GOOD YEAR TO REPLACE THE TIRE, ALTHOUGH DEFECTIVE, I AM EXPECTED TO PAY 43.00 COST TO REPLACE IT. THIS ON A DEFECTIVE PRODUCT, AND SHOULD BE AT NO COST TO THE CONSUMER.

FRAME RUST. MY VEHICLE EXHIBITED PERFORATED RUST ON THE STRUCTURAL PARTS OF THE FRAME. I TOOK THE TRUCK TO TOYOTA ON 29 FEBRUARY 2016 FOR REPAIR UNDER THEIR SERVICE CAMPAIGN THAT WAS NOT TO END UNTIL 31 MARCH 2016. THE TECHNICIANS COULD NOT FIND THE HOLES OF RUST UNTIL I SHOWED THEM AND THEN I WAS INFORMED THAT TOYOTA WOULD NO LONGER REMEDY THE ROTTING FRAME BECAUSE IT HAD BEEN PREVIOUSLY COATED BY TOYOTA WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS OWNED BY A DIFFERENT OWNER. I POINTED OUT TO THEM THAT THE REMEDY THAT TOYOTA HAD EMPLOYED WAS OBVIOUSLY INEFFECTIVE AND SINCE THE SERVICE CAMPAIGN WAS STILL IN FORCE, A PROPER REMEDY SHOULD BE EMPLOYED. THE DEALERSHIP REFUSED AND REFERRED ME TO TOYOTA NATIONAL FOR USA. THEY ALSO REFUSED TO ASSIST AND SENT A LETTER TO ME TO THAT EFFECT. TOYOTA LAUNCHED THIS SERVICE CAMPAIGN BUT ARE NOT ENSURING THAT THEIR REPAIRS ARE EFFECTIVELY FIXING THE ISSUE WHICH INVOLVES THE UNDERMINING OF THE STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF THEIR VEHICLE FRAMES. IT IS UNACCEPTABLE THAT THE FRAME RECALL IS NOT WORKING AND THAT TOYOTA IS NOT WILLING TO STAND BEHIND THEIR PRODUCT, LEAVING THE CUSTOMER WITH AN UNSAFE VEHICLE DUE TO THE COMPROMISED STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF THE FRAME ITSELF.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT RECEIVED NOTIFICATION OF NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 14V604000 (SUSPENSION); HOWEVER, THE PART TO DO THE REPAIR WAS UNAVAILABLE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE MANUFACTURER EXCEEDED A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME FOR THE RECALL REPAIR. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE ISSUE. THE CONTACT HAD NOT EXPERIENCED A FAILURE. VIN TOOL CONFIRMS PARTS NOT AVAILABLE.

THE FRAME IS RUSTING OUT ON MY TACOMA THAT I PURCHASED AND TOYOTA SAYS SINCE THEY INSPECTED IT 9 MONTH AGO IT NO LONGER QUALIFIES FOR FRAME REPLACEMENT PROGRAM. IT HAD NOT BEEN DRIVEN UNDER ANY NEGATIVE ROAD CORROSIVE CONDITIONS IN THIS TIME, AND THIS FRAME WAS I BELIEVE RUSTED WHEN INSPECTED AND NOT DISCOVERED BECAUSE IT HAS RUSTED FROM THE INSIDE OUT. NOW THE POWER STEERING HAS GONE OUT AND I HAVE BEEN EXPERIENCING ACCELERATION PROBLEMS WITH IT SINCE PURCHASING IT. I CONTACTED TOYOTA ABOUT THE FRAME RUST AND WAS TOLD BASICALLY TOO BAD SO SAD. THEY HAVE TOLD ME THEY FILED MY COMPLAINT UNDER FILE #1603091915 AT THEIR NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS. THE FRAME METAL IS DEFECTIVE. THE POWER STEERING HAS QUIT WORKING AT APPROXIMATELY 75000 MILES, AND THE TRUCK ACCELERATES UNDER ITS OWN POWER WHEN SHIFTING INTO 5TH GEAR.

I PURCHASED A NEW 2007 TOYOTA TACOMA (VIN # [XXX]) FROM BOCH TOYOTA OF NORWOOD MA. IT CURRENTLY HAS 44,836 MILES ON THE ODOMETER. IN JULY 2014 TOYOTA HAS A SAFETY RECALL FOR CORROSION OF FRAMES ON VEHICLES LIKE MINE. AT THAT TIME THEY ONLY REMOVED LOOSE RUST AND APPLIED SOME KIND OF RUST PROOFING. ON MARCH 25, 2016 I TOOK MY TRUCK IN FOR ANOTHER RECALL. THIS RECALL IS FOR CORROSION OF LEAF SPRINGS.BOTH LEAF SPRINGS WERE REPLACED. THE MANAGER SAID THEY HAD FOUND CORROSION DAMAGE TO THE FRAME OF MY TRUCK, INCLUDING A RUST THROUGH OR CRACK IN AN AREA BELOW THE PASSENGER SIDE DOOR. HE SAID THE FRAME SHOULD BE REPLACED AND I SHOULD CONTACT TOYOTA, BECAUSE THEY HAVE REPLACED SUCH FRAMES UNDER THE TERMS OF THE FRAME CORROSION RECALL. I CONTACTED TOYOTA. MY CASE # IS [XXX]. TOYOTA SAID THE FRAME RECALL ENDED IN JULY OF 2014, AND SINCE THE DAMAGE WAS NOT NOTED UNTIL LATER, THEN IT WAS NOT COVERED. MY COMPLAINT IS: ?THIS PROBLEM IS NOT CAUSED BY NORMAL USE, BUT IS A SAFETY DEFECT, WHICH TOYOTA ACKNOWLEDGED WITH THEIR 2014 RECALL.. ?THE INSPECTION OF MY TRUCK FOR CORROSION AND FRAME DAMAGE IN JULY 2014 MISSED THE SEVERITY OF THE PROBLEM WITH MY TRUCK. ?THE APPLICATION OF RUST PROOFING WAS EITHER NOT PROPERLY DONE OR INADEQUATE TO ADDRESS THE DAMAGE, WHICH THE RECALL INTENDED TO ADDRESS. ?TOYOTA?S DEADLINE FOR HAVING THE FRAME REPLACEMENT WORK DONE UNDER THEIR RECALL IS MARCH 31ST 2016. I REPORTED MY FRAME DAMAGE AND REQUESTED REPLACEMENT PRIOR TO THAT DATE A TOYOTA REP SAID THAT, BECAUSE THEIR TECHNICIANS DID NOT NOTE THE SEVERITY OF MY FRAME DAMAGE IN 2014, A FRAME REPLACEMENT BY TOYOTA IS NOT COVERED NOW. THIS TRUCK HAS SEEN VERY LIGHT USE. THE CONDITION OF THIS FRAME IS A SAFETY DEFECT, WHICH TOYOTA HAS COVERED IN OTHER CASES.TOYOTA SHOULD COVER FRAME REPLACEMENT FOR MY TRUCK UNDER THE 2014 RECALL. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR