2003 TOYOTA TUNDRA Complaints

TOYOTA APPLIED A CORROSION RESISTANT COMPOUND TO THE REAR CROSS-MEMBER ASSEMBLIES AND TO THE ADJACENT AREAS OF THE FRAME. THIS COATING HAS COMPLETELY PEELED OFF, RENDERING THE EXPOSED CORRODED METAL BACK TO IT'S ORIGINAL RECALLED STATE. THIS RECALL OCCURRED IN JANUARY OF 2012, THE PROBLEM WAS SUPPOSEDLY FIXED BY TOYOTA. ALL OF THE COATING IS GONE, AND, NO LONGER PROTECTING THE EXPOSED AND CORRODED METAL. *TR

ON MAY 14 2010 I TOOK MY 2003 TOYOTA TUNDRA IN FOR A RECALL REGARDING "EXCESSIVE CORROSION OF THE REAR CROSS MEMBER". REFERENCE: NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER 09V444000, NOVEMBER 18, 2009 & TOYOTA SAFETY RECALL NO. SSC9090M. MY TRUCK WAS INSPECTED AND SUBSEQUENTLY WAS SPRAYED WITH CORROSION PROTECTION COMPOUND. HOWEVER, THE SPARE TIRE MOUNTING BRACKET WAS NOT SPRAYED NOR WAS THE DIFFERENTIAL WITH THE REQUIRED CORROSION PROTECTION COMPOUND. REFERENCE NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER 09V444000 WHICH STATES "DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE REAR CROSS MEMBER AND RELATED COMPONENTS, INCLUDING THE BRAKE LINES AND REPLACE THEM IF NECESSARY" OR "WILL BE SPRAYED WITH A CORROSION PROTECTION COMPOUND". ON JANUARY 8, 2014 AT 103,793 MILES, I WAS FORCED TO REPLACE THE ENTIRE DIFFERENTIAL AT A COST OF $4,657.67 DUE TO THE DIFFERENTIAL RUSTING COMPLETELY THROUGH TO THE POINT IT WOULD NO LONGER RETAIN OIL. MORE RECENTLY, O/A SEPTEMBER 15, 2014 AT APPROXIMATELY 105,500 MILES I WAS DRIVING AT 30 MPH WHEN THE MOUNTING BRACKET THAT RETAINS THE SPARE TIRE IN PLACE RUSTED THROUGH AND THE SPARE TIRE FELL OFF OF MY TRUCK AND ENDED UP ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD APPROXIMATELY 1/4 MILE AWAY. FORTUNATELY, THERE WAS NO ONE DRIVING BEHIND ME AND NO OTHER DAMAGE OR INJURIES OCCURRED. IN BOTH OF THE ABOVE ISSUES AT THE TIME OF EACH INCIDENT CONTACTED TOYOTA CUSTOMER SERVICE AND WAS TOLD THAT THEY COULD NOT ASSIST ME IN EITHER MATTER. I WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT THIS COMPLAINT IN THE HOPES THAT IT MAY HELP OTHERS IN SIMILAR SITUATIONS AND I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF THERE IS MEANS OR PROCESS I CAN FOLLOW TO POSSIBLE OBTAIN RESTITUTION FROM TOYOTA. I HAVE ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTATION TO SUPPORT MY CLAIMS AS OUTLINED ABOVE. THANKING YOU IN ADVANCE FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION IN THIS MATTER. *TR

WE HAVE RECEIVED TWO SAFETY NOTICES ABOUT THE RECALL OF OUR VEHICLE FOR FRONT PASSENGER AIRBAG INFLATOR MODULE. THE SAFETY NOTICES ARE NOT DATED, HOWEVER IT HAS BEEN AT LEAST 4 MONTHS SINCE RECEIVING. WHEN TAKING THE VEHICLE TO THE AUTHORIZED DEALER, WE WERE TOLD THEY DO NOTHAVE THE PARTS TO REPAIR PER RECALL NOTICE. WE WERE TOLD AT THAT TIME, WE WOULD HAVE TO WAIT FOR A THIRD NOTICE. WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY TO CONTINUE TO SEND OUT RECALL NOTICES AND NOT BE ABLE TO COMPLETE THE WORK REQUIRED, LET ALONE THE SAFETY FACTOR. THE PROBLEM HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED, OWNERS NOTIFIED AND 6 MONTHS LATER, HERE WE SIT. *TR

I RECEIVED A SAFETY RECALL NOTICE FROM TOYOTA, FOR MY VEHICLE, DUE TO A PROBLEM WITH THE FRONT PASSENGER AIRBAG INFLATOR MODULE. I CALLED MY LOCAL DEALERSHIP TO SCHEDULE AN APPOINTMENT FOR REPAIR AND WAS TOLD THEY WERE NOT AUTHORIZED BY TOYOTA TO MAKE THE REPAIR AT THIS TIME. I CALLED THE TOYOTA CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE CENTER AT 1-888-270-9371 TO ASK ABOUT THE RECALL. I WAS TOLD THE REMEDY NOTICE WAS SENT TO ME BY MISTAKE AND THAT ONLY CERTAIN STATES WERE INCLUDED, FOR A NO CHARGE REMEDY, DUE TO LIMITED PARTS AVAILABLE. MY COMPLAINT IS THAT ALL STATES ARE NOT CURRENTLY REPAIRING THIS SAFETY ISSUE. THE RECALL NOTICE SAYS "THERE IS A RISK OF SERIOUS INJURY. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA TUNDRA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE REAR DIFFERENTIAL WAS LEAKING. THE DEALER STATED THAT THE REAR END HOUSING NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED AND THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED. THE VIN WAS UNAVAILABLE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 180,000.

AFTER HAVING HAD MY TIRES ROTATED & BALANCED TWICE,I WAS TOLD BY THE MECHANIC THAT IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THE TIRE BELTS ARE POSSIBLY STARTING TO SEPARATE. WHILE DRIVING ON THE INTERSTATE AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS THE TIRES VIBRATE THE ARMREST AND THE REAR VIEW MIRROR... AT TIMES VERY VIOLENTLY. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA TUNDRA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE HAVING THE VEHICLE SERVICED, HE WAS INFORMED THAT THE DIFFERENTIAL WAS RUSTED OUT AND THAT FLUID WAS LEAKING. AS A RESULT, THE DIFFERENTIAL NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 80,000.

WITHIN A YEAR OF TOYOTA INSPECTING FRAME AND SPRAYING .I LOST SPARE TIRE WITH OUT KNOWING .APPROXIMATELY 3/14 A MECHANIC SAW HOLES IN FRAME .TOWED TO TOYOTA DEALERSHIP AND THEY LOOKED AT IT AND REPORTED IT TO COMPANY.I GOT A CALL SAYING THERE WAS NO FRAME RECALL AND I WOULD HAVE TO COMPLAIN TO TOYOTA MY SELF. I DID AND FILED A COMPLAINT.A WOMAN NAMED JAY CALLED ME AND SAID THERE WAS NO CURRENT RECALL ON 2003 TUNDRAS AND MINE WAS RECALLED JUST FOR SPRAYING THE FRAME.I SHARED MY OPINION OF THE SITUATION AND THOUGHT THEY WOULD RECONSIDER THERE DECISION. I HAVE HEARD NOTHING AND MY TRUCK SITS IN MY DRIVEWAY. *TR

MY DAD BOUGHT THIS TUNDRA NEW IN 2003. THE FRAME STARTED RUSTING IN A COUPLE OF YEARS AND IN 2011 HE RECEIVED A RECALL LETTER FROM TOYOTA STATING THAT HE NEEDED TO TAKE THE TRUCK IN AND HAVE THE FRAME INSPECTED. HE TOOK IT TO HICKORY TOYOTA TO HAVE THE DEALER EVALUATE IT. BECAUSE THE FRAME WAS HEAVILY RUSTED MY DAD ASSUMED THE FRAME WOULD BE REPLACED. HOWEVER, THE SERVICE MANAGER AT THE DEALERSHIP STATED THAT THE FRAME WAS STRUCTURALLY FINE AND INTACT AND DID NOT NEED REPLACEMENT. MY DAD GAVE ME THE TRUCK IN 2012 AND I TOOK IT TO MY MECHANIC TO HAVE BRAKES REPLACED. MY MECHANIC COMMENTED ON THE EXCESSIVE RUST AND TOLD ME I SHOULD TAKE IT TO A DEALER TO BE INSPECTED. I TOLD HIM MY DAD HAD TAKEN IT AND SUPPOSEDLY EVERYTHING WAS OK. SKIP AHEAD TO JUNE OF THIS YEAR AND I HAD THE TUNDRA IN AGAIN FOR A REGULAR STATE INSPECTION. AS SOON AS MY MECHANIC PUT MY TRUCK UP ON THE LIFT, THE FRAME BENT IN THE MIDDLE ON BOTH SIDES AND HOLES WERE TORN IN THE FRAME. I CONTACTED BOTH TOYOTA AND THE DEALER THAT DID THE INSPECTION IN 2011 AND WAS TOLD THAT THE EXTENDED WARRANTY PERIOD FOR THE RECALL ON THESE FRAMES HAD EXPIRED AND THEY WERE GOING TO DO NOTHING. I FEEL THAT THE TOYOTA DEALER THAT TOLD US WE DIDN'T NEED A NEW FRAME IN 2011 BEFORE THE RECALL EXPIRED WAS TRYING TO SAVE BOTH HIMSELF AND TOYOTA MONEY BY NOT REPLACING THE FRAME WHEN IT NEEDED IT. I BELIEVE THE DEALER AND TOYOTA STILL BEAR RESPONSIBILITY FOR REPLACING THE FRAME. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA TUNDRA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE THE VEHICLE BEING SERVICED, THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE FRAME WAS FRACTURED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER, WHO DIAGNOSED THAT THE FRAME NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 173,566.