1995 TOYOTA TACOMA Complaints

MY MECHANIC SAID MY FRAME IS SO RUSTED THAT IT HAD TO HAVE BEEN BAD WHEN I HAD IT CHECKED BY TOYOTA AND THEY TOLD ME IT WAS FINE. HE SAID THEY DO THAT SO THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO PAY FOR REPAIRS. I WOULD LIKE THIS INVESTIGATED TO SEE IF THE DEALERSHIP MISLEAD ME SO AS TO SAVE MONEY AND LEAVE ME WITH A DANGEROUS VEHICLE. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE HAVING ROUTINE MAINTENANCE PERFORMED ON THE VEHICLE, HE WAS ADVISED THAT THE FRAME WAS COMPLETELY CORRODED. THE DEALER ALSO STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND DID NOT OFFER ANY ASSISTANCE SINCE THE VEHICLE WAS NOT INCLUDED IN ANY RECALLS. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 130,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT HAD TAKEN THE VEHICLE TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER FOR ROUTINE MAINTENANCE AND THE TECHNICIAN DETECTED THAT THE FRONT DRIVER'S SIDE SUSPENSION SUPPORT FRACTURED. THERE WAS A RECALL UNDER NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER 96V129000 (SUSPENSION: FRONT). THE VIN WAS INCLUDED; HOWEVER THE DEALER REFUSED TO REPAIR THE VEHICLE FOR AN UNKNOWN REASON. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED AND THEY PLANNED TO INVESTIGATE THE PROBLEM. THE VEHICLE HAD NOT BEEN REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 217,668.

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS PREVIOUSLY REPAIRED UNDER NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER: 96V129000 (SUSPENSION: FRONT). RECENTLY, THE CONTACT DISCOVERED THAT THE ENTIRE FRAME WAS BENT AND COMPLETELY RUSTED. THE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE OF THE FRAME WAS SEVERELY CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 99,500.

ON DECEMBER 23, 2010 DURING A CONVERSATION WITH A CO-WORKER I LEARNED THAT TOYOTA HAD BEEN REPAIRING OR BUYING BACK 1995-2004 TACOMAS DUE TO A SAFETY ISSUE BASED ON EXCESSIVE FRAME RUST TO THE POINT OF FAILURE DUE TO A MANUFACTURER'S DEFECT. ON DECEMBER,24, 2010 I CONTACTED MY TOYOTA DEALER, AND THEY ADVISED THAT THERE WAS A PROGRAM IN PLACE, AND THEY ADVISED ME TO BRING THE TRUCK IN ON DECEMBER 28TH FOR AN INSPECTION. ON DECEMBER 28TH, 2010 I BROUGHT MY TRUCK TO THE DEALERSHIP AND THEY ADVISED THAT MY TRUCK FAILED THE INSPECTION OF THE FRAME AND THAT THEY WERE CONDEMNING MY TRUCK BECAUSE THE FRAME WAS UNSAFE DUE TO A MANUFACTURER'S DEFECT. THEY PROVIDED ME WITH A LOANER CAR AND STATED TOYOTA WOULD CONTACT ME AND ARRANGE FOR A BUYBACK AMOUNT. ON JANUARY 3RD I WAS CONTACTED AND ADVISED TOYOTA WOULD NOT DO ANYTHING FOR ME BECAUSE THE ORIGINAL OWNER PURCHASED THE VEHICLE IN APRIL OF 1995 AND THEY WOULD ONLY HONOR THE BUYBACK UNTIL THAT DATE IN 2010. THE DEALERSHIP STILL HAS MY TRUCK AS I WAS TOLD IT WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE, AND TOYOTA IS REFUSING TO DO ANYTHING TO CORRECT THEIR MANUFACTURER'S DEFECT IN THE FRAME. FURTHER MORE DUE TO THE NATURE OF THE INSPECTION (HITTING THE FRAME WITH A HAMMER) WHICH WAS AUTHORIZED BY TOYOTA, THERE IS PROBABLY FURTHER DAMAGE TO THE FRAME THEN WHEN I BROUGHT IT IN. WITH ADMITTING THAT THEIR DEFECT CAUSES A SAFETY ISSUE, I FEEL TOYOTA SHOULD BE FORCED TO REMEDY THE PROBLEM OR BUY BACK MY VEHICLE. THEIR STANCE ON THE INITIAL INSERVICE DATE SHOULD NOT APPLY TO ME AS I AM NOT THE ORIGINAL OWNER, AND I WAS NEVER NOTIFIED BY TOYOTA ABOUT THIS SAFETY ISSUE AT ANY TIME AND HAVE BEEN THE REGISTERED OWNER OF THIS VEHICLE SINCE 2006. *TR

BASICALLY MY BATTERY JUST COMPLETELY DIED FOR NO REASON I LOST ALL ELECTRICAL POWER HEADLIGHTS, POWER STEERING, AND ALL....IT WAS NIGHT TIME . WHEN I TRIED TO JUMP START THAT IS WHEN THE BATTERY CAUGHT ON FIRE AND EVERY SINCE THAT AWFUL NIGHT (ENDED UP GETTING IT TOWED WHILE I WENT TO GET HELP FOR IT BEING PARKED IN A ZONE WITH NO PROPER PARKING STICKER AND IT COST ME 350 MORE DOLLARS TO GET IT OUT) THE 6 BRAND NEW BATTERIES HAVE ALL EITHER NEVER WORKED TO BEGIN WITH OR THEY HAVE BEEN JUMPED OFF I THINK THE MOST TIMES OUT OF ONE BATTERY WAS JUMPING IT OFF FIVE SUCCESSFUL TIMES. I JUST DONT DRIVE THE TRUCK ANYMORE BC I CANT TRUST IT.

MY 1995 TOYOTA TACOMA WAS SERVICED AT COLONIAL TOYOTA IN MILFORD, CT IN MARCH OF 2009. DURING THAT SERVICE, THE DEALER INFORMED ME THAT MY TRUCK QUALIFIED FOR AN EXTENSION OF THE FRAME RUST CORROSION PERFORATION WARRANTY. THEY PERFORMED AN INSPECTION AND STATED THAT THE FRAME PASSED. APPROXIMATELY 1 MONTH AGO I RECEIVED MY FIRST OFFICIAL LETTER FROM TOYOTA MOTOR SALES INDICATING THAT MY 1995 TOYOTA TACOMA HAS QUALIFIED FOR AN EXTENSION OF THE FRAME RUST CORROSION PERFORATION WARRANTY FOR A PERIOD OF 15 YEARS FROM THE VEHICLE'S IN SERVICE DATE. I PRESENTED THE TRUCK TO TOYOTA OF MIDDLETOWN, CT ON 11/20/10 AND WAS NOTIFIED THAT THE FRAME FAILED INSPECTION DUE TO AN EXTREMELY LARGE HOLE. I WAS TOLD THAT DUE TO THE THICKNESS OF THE FRAME AND LARGE DIAMETER OF THE HOLE, IT WOULD HAVE TAKEN OVER A YEAR TO DEVELOP. AS A RESULT, TOYOTA OF MIDDLETOWN STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS 'UNSAFE TO DRIVE'. I WAS ALSO INFORMED THAT THE VEHICLE NO LONGER QUALIFIED FOR THE WARRANTY EXTENSION AS THE IN SERVICE DATE WAS 10/2/1995. IT IS CLEAR THAT THE HOLE IN THE FRAME WAS OVERLOOKED IN MARCH OF 2009. I AM THE SECOND OWNER OF THE VEHICLE AND WAS NOT AWARE OF THE SPECIFIC IN SERVICE DATE. I AM NOW IN A VERY DIFFICULT POSITION AS TOYOTA MOTOR SALES HAS DEEMED THE TRUCK 'UNSAFE TO DRIVE' DUE TO 'INADEQUATE CORROSION-RESISTANT PROTECTION' APPLIED BY TOYOTA. AS MY PRIMARY VEHICLE, I WILL NOT PUT MY FAMILY OR OTHER DRIVERS AT RISK AND CANNOT SELL THIS TRUCK KNOWING THAT IT UNSAFE TO DRIVE. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT NOTICED THERE WAS FUEL LEAKING FROM THE FUEL TANK AND TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A LOCAL MECHANIC. AFTER INSPECTING THE VEHICLE THEY FOUND THAT THE FRAME, EXHAUST AND THE FUEL TANK WERE SEVERELY CORRODED AND RUSTED. THE VEHICLE WAS THEN TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER WHO ADVISED THE CONTACT TO SPEAK WIT THE MANUFACTURER FOR FURTHER ASSISTANCE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 94,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THE REAR OF THE FRAME WAS RUSTED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER AND THEY INFORMED HIM THERE WAS NO RUST ON THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WOULD NOT PROVIDE ANY ASSISTANCE STATING THERE WAS NO RUST ON THE VEHICLE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 191,000. UPDATED 08/19/10*BF THE CONSUMER STATED THE FRAME RUSTED THE REAR SPRING HANGERS AND CAUSED THE REAR OF THE TRUCK TO MOVE AND HIT A FIRE HYDRANT. UPDATED 09/28/10

1995 TOYOTA TACOMA WITH A RUSTED FRAME. *KB THE CONSUMER STATED THE GAS TANK HAD TO BE REPLACED BECAUSE IT RUSTED OUT AT THE TOP AND BOTTOM. *JB