1996 Toyota Tacoma Structure

1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. ATTORNEY WRITES ON BEHALF OF CLIENT IN REGARDS TO A RUST CORROSION PERFORATION PROBLEM *TGW THE CONSUMER NEVER RECEIVED A NOTICE STATING THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH THE VEHICLE. THE CONSUMER LEARNED ABOUT THE PROBLEM IN NOVEMBER 2001, AND HAD THE VEHICLE INSPECTED, WHERE IT WAS CONFIRMED THAT RUST WAS PRESENT. *JB THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED AND THE CORROSION PROBLEM WAS FOUND IN NOVEMBER 2011, WELL BEFORE THE CUTOFF DATE. UPDATED 08/28/12 UPDATED 10/15/12

1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO FRAME RUST CORROSION *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED HE RECEIVED A LETTER IN THE MAIL REGARDING FRAME RUST. THE CONSUMER MADE AN APPOINTMENT TO HAVE THE VEHICLE INSPECTED. THE CONSUMER STATED IT APPEARED THE DEALER NEVER PERFORMED ANY INSPECTION IN REGARDS TO THE FRAME OF HIS TRUCK. THE DEALER INFORMED THE CONSUMER THAT EVERYTHING LOOKED GOOD AND THERE WERE NO MAJOR PROBLEMS AND THE BODY SHOP WOULD TREAT THE FRAME, BY TREATING ANY BAD SECTIONS, THEN UNDER COAT AND CONDITION THE FRAME. TWO DAYS LATER, THE CONSUMER RECEIVED A CALL STATING THE BODY SHOP FOUND A FEW MAJOR PROBLEMS, AND THEY WERE UNABLE TO CONTINUE AND TOYOTA WOULD COME AND TALK TO THE CONSUMER ABOUT A BUY BACK AS THE VEHICLE WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. THE CONSUMER STATED IN TWO DAYS, THE VEHICLE WENT FROM BEING OK TO UNSAFE TO DRIVE. *JB

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR AN UNKNOWN FRAME CORROSION RECALL. THE DEALER INSPECTED THE VEHICLE AND STATED THAT THE FRAME WAS SEVERELY CORRODED. THE DEALER ALSO STATED THAT THE FRAME COULD NOT BE REPLACED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 103,000. UPDATED 05/21/12 *BF UPDATED 06/04/12

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME WAS FRACTURED UNDER THE PASSENGER SIDE OF THE VEHICLE. THE FRACTURE BEGAN FORM THE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE OF THE VEHICLE TO THE REAR OF THE PASSENGER SIDE. THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER AND THE FAILURE WAS CONFIRMED BUT THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 176,000. THE CONSUMER WAS INFORMED THAT RUST HAD PERFORATED THE FRAME OF THE VEHICLE IN SEVERAL PLACES AND THE VEHICLE WAS NOT SAFE TO DRIVE. UPDATED 03/14/12

THERE IS AN ACTUAL HOLE RUSTED THROUGH THE STRUCTURAL FRAME OF THE TRUCK. IN DECEMBER OF 2010, WHILE INSIDE OF THE 15 YEAR WARRANTY PERIOD, TOYOTA CLAIMED THERE WAS NO RUST ON THE FRAME OF THE VEHICLE OTHER THAN "SURFACE RUST." IN SEPTEMBER OF 2011, AFTER THE 15 YEAR WARRANTY HAD EXPIRED, TOYOTA CLAIMED THERE WAS RUST, CORROSION, AND AN ACTUAL HOLE IN THE FRAME OF THE VEHICLE. TOYOTA IS CLAIMING TO HAVE ISSUED A VOLUNTARY RECALL FOR THEIR RUSTED FRAMES, BUT IS PASSING THE FRAMES UNTIL THEY ARE JUST OUTSIDE OF THEIR 15 YEAR WARRANTY PERIOD AND THEN FAILING THEM. THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR HAVING STEEL RUST COMPLETELY THROUGH ON THE FRAME OF A VEHICLE THAT HAS BEEN CARED FOR AND MAINTAINED. IT IS A SAFETY HAZARD, AND IT IS AMAZING TO THINK THAT THESE VEHICLES COULD BREAK IN HALF WHILE ON THE HIGHWAY AT HIGH SPEED. TOYOTA NEEDS TO STEP UP AND TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR SUBCONTRACTERS CUTTING CORNERS DURING THE MANUFACTURING PROCESS. THEIR SELF-IMPOSED PROGRAMS ARE NOT EXTENSIVE ENOUGH, FEDERAL PENALTIES NEED TO BE ENACTED. THANK YOU. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THE DEALER CONFIRMED THAT THE FRAME WAS COVERED WITH RUST AND CORRODED DURING AN INSPECTION. THE DEALER WILL NOT REPAIR THE VEHICLE SINCE THE WARRANTY EXPIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE AND OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 90,000. UPDATED 09/27/11 *BF UPDATED 10/11/11

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT AFTER HAVING A REAR LEAF SPRING REPLACED ON HER VEHICLE, SHE NOTICED THAT THE FRAME WAS SEVERELY RUSTED AND DAMAGED. THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED BY THE DEALER AND ADVISED HER THAT THEY COULD NOT ASSIST HER SINCE THE VEHICLE WAS NO LONGER UNDER WARRANTY. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 259,000.

I OWN A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. I RECEIVED A "LIMITED SERVICE CAMPAIGN" LETTER IN THE MAIL ON JULY 18TH 2011. THE NOTICE STATED THAT TACOMA MODEL YEARS 1996-2000 NEED TO BE INSPECTED FOR FRAME RUST AND POSSIBLE PERFORATION. IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE FRAMES IN A NUMBER OF THESE VEHICLES MAY NOT HAVE CORROSION-RESISTANT PROTECTION SUFFICIENT FOR AREA WITH HIGH ROAD SALT USE. THIS CONDITION IS UN-RELATED TO NORMAL SURFACE RUST COMMONLY FOUND ON METALLIC SURFACES AFTER YEARS OF USE. I LIVE IN NORTHERN ILLINOIS AND WITH MY VIN, MY TRUCK CERTAINLY FALLS INTO THIS CATEGORY. THE NOTICE, WHICH WAS MY FIRST AND ONLY ONE RECEIVED, CAME TO MY HOUSE 90 DAYS PAST THE 15 YEAR IN SERVICE DATE THAT TOYOTA EXTENDED THE CAMPAIGN FOR. AFTER SPEAKING WITH TOYOTA, I WAS ABLE TO HAVE MY TRUCK INSPECTED. THE FRAME HAS SEVERE RUST BUT SOMEHOW MANAGED TO "PASS" THE PERFORATION TEST. THE RESULTS OF THE TEST WERE IN MY OPINION MARGINAL AT BEST. I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO HAVE TOYOTA SEND A FACTORY REPRESENTATIVE TO MY LOCAL DEALERSHIP TO FURTHER INSPECT MY TRUCK FRAME. THIS HAS NOT HAPPENED AS OF YET (JULY 27TH,2011) AND TOYOTA SEEMS TO BE PLAYING A BACK AND FORTH GAME TO GET THIS DONE. CORPORATE TOYOTA IS WELL AWARE OF THIS FRAME CORROSION ISSUE BUT IS FAILING MISERABLY BY NOT STANDING BEHIND THE PROBLEM. DURING THIS CAMPAIGN, TOYOTA HAS REPLACED NUMEROUS FRAMES AND HAS "RE-PURCHASED" MANY TRUCKS FROM CONSUMERS IN THE AFFECTED STATES. ONCE MY TRUCK WAS DEEMED "PAST 15 YEARS FROM IN SERVICE DATE", THEY ARE TURNING THEIR BACKS ON THIS ISSUE. AS STATED BEFORE, MY NOTICE WAS NOT RECEIVED UNTIL JULY 18TH 2011, PUTTING THE TRUCK LITERALLY 90 DAYS PAST. I STARTED TRYING TO RESOLVE THIS ISSUE WITH TOYOTA JULY 19TH 2011. I WILL NO LONGER ALLOW MY FAMILY TO RIDE IN THIS VEHICLE AS I HAVE NO CONFIDENCE THAT THE FRAME WILL HOLD UP. I'M FILING THIS COMPLAINT TO MAKE SURE TOYOTA DOES WHAT IS RIGHT IN THIS CASE AND STAND BEHIND THEIR PRODUCT AS THEY SO OFTEN PROMOTE IN THEIR ADDS. THANK YOU. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THERE WAS FRAME DAMAGE IN THE REAR OF THE VEHICLE. THE DEALER MADE THE CONTACT AWARE OF A POSSIBLE SILENT RECALL, BUT THE VIN WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT CONTACTED AND THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 203,000.

RUSTED TRUCK FRAME.

FRAME ON 1996 TACOMA HAS RUST HOLE THROUGH FRAME. DID NOT RECEIVE A NOTIFICATION OF WARRANTY EXTENSION FROM TOYOTA AND WARRANTY EXPIRED 11 DAYS BEFORE I UNCOVERED THE WARRANTY COVERAGE. TOYOTA WILL NOT HONOR THE WARRANTY AND TRUCK IS UNSAFE . *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME WAS RUSTED. THE DEALER ADVISED THE CONTACT THAT THEY WOULD BUY THE VEHICLE BACK BUT LATER RETRACTED THE OFFER. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE BUT DID NOT OFFER ANY ASSISTANCE. THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED BY A PRIVATE MECHANIC WHO INFORMED THE CONTACT THAT SHE WOULD NEED TO REPLACE THE ENTIRE FRAME. NO REPAIRS WERE PERFORMED. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 243,000. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 240,000.

I OWN A 96 TOYOTA TACOMA AND IT HAS DEVELOPED FRAME ROT. TOYOTA WILL NOT DO THEIR BUYBACK AS I BROUGHT IT FOR ITS SECOND INSPECTION 68 DAYS BEYOND THE 15 YEAR BUYBACK OFFER. THE TRUCK HAS BEEN CONDEMNED AND REPORTED TO CARFAX, TOYOTA CORPORATE AND THE MA RMV RENDERING THIS VEHICLE INSTANTLY UNFIT TO DRIVE AND ILLEGAL TO OPERATE FOR SAFETY ISSUES..YET TOYOTA DENIES ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR THIS AND THE DEALER SERVICE REP SAID, YOU CAN STILL TAKE THE TRUCK, ITS YOURS AFTER ALL. HOW CAN A SAFETY RECALL FOR FAULTY FRAME CONSTRUCTION INVOLVING POOR QUALITY STEEL AND ABSENCE OF RUST INHIBITOR NOT BE A TOTAL RECALL OF ALL VEHICLES ON LIST DEMANDING BUYOUT OR FRAME REPLACEMENT FOR THE LIFE OF THE VEHICLE? WHY WAS TOYOTA GRANTED A 15 YEAR BACK-END TO THIS RESPONSIBILITY? FURTHER, TOYOTA PERFORMS THE INSPECTIONS AND YOU ARE ONLY ALLOWED 1 INSPECTION PER YEAR. I HAD MANCHESTER NH TOYOTA INSPECT MINE ABOUT 1 1/2 YEARS AGO AND THE TECH INSPECTING COMMENTED, "..THIS ONE WAS ONE OF THE BEST HE'S SEEN YET." I DISCOVERED A BROKEN LEFT REAR UPPER SHOCK MOUNT WITH A CHUNK OF FRAME TWO WEEKS AGO AND ARRANGED AS EARLY AS POSSIBLE TO GET THE TRUCK TO TOYOTA IN FALMOUTH, MA. WHERE THEY IMMEDIATELY CONDEMNED THE TRUCK DETERMINING IT UNSAFE TO DRIVE, THEN INFORMED ME THAT I HAD EXCEEDED THE BUYBACK TERM BY 68 DAYS PAST THE 15 YEAR OLD MARK. THEN THEY TOLD ME I COULD TAKE THE VEHICLE BACK BECAUSE AFTER ALL, IT IS STILL MY TRUCK. YOU'VE ALLOWED TOYOTA TO CONDUCT THEIR OWN SAFETY INSPECTIONS AND ALLOWED THEM TO BACK-END THEIR RESPONSIBILITY FOR SYSTEM-WIDE PRODUCTION DEFICIENCY? HOW IS IT THEY GOT TO CALL THAT SHOT? TALK ABOUT ALLOWING THE FOX TO GUARD THE HEN HOUSE! I BOUGHT A TOYOTA AT A MUCH HIGHER PRICE THAN THEIR COMPETITORS BECAUSE OF THEIR ADVERTISED QUALITY ENGINEERING. "EIGHT OUT OF TEN COROLLAS SOLD SINCE 1985 ARE STILL ON THE ROAD TODAY" WELL, THEY FAILED MISERABLY WITH THE TACOMA, PROVEN BY THE HUGE NUMBER OF TRUCKS THEY'VE HAD TO BUY-OUT OR PERFORM A FRAME REPLACEMENT. WHY? *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. HE STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 20 MPH AND ATTEMPTING TO MAKE A LEFT TURN LEFT THE VEHICLE CONTINUED DRIVING STRAIGHT AND HE LOST CONTROL OF VEHICLE. HE WAS ABLE TO PULL OVER AND HAD THE VEHICLE TOWED TO A DEALER. THE DEALER STATED THAT HE NEEDED TO REPAIRE THE FRAME. THERE IS A RECALL OUT FOR THIS VEHICLE WHERE THEY WILL HAVE TO REPLACE THEM BUT THIS VEHICLES FRAME CAN BE REPAIRED AT THE OWNERS EXPENSE AT $480.00 DOLLARS. THERE WILL BE REPAIRS DONE TO THE VEHICLE . THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 211000 AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 211800.

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT TOYOTA WILL NOT ACCEPT HIS VEHICLE FOR THE VOLUNTARY CUSTOMER SUPPORT PROGRAM. THIS PROGRAM IS IN REGARDS TO THE REAR FRAME CORROSION ON THE 1995 AND 1996 TACOMAS. TOYOTA IS OFFERING 1.5 TIMES THE BLUE BOOK VALUE FOR THESE VEHICLES. THE MANUFACTURER INFORMED THE CONTACT THAT HIS VEHICLE HAS A SALVAGE TITLE; THEREFORE, THEY WERE UNABLE TO BUY HIS VEHICLE BACK. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 179,171 AND FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 178,000.

TOYOTA TACOMA RUSTED FRAME RE-CALL. TOYOTA IS SENDING ALL OWNERS A TRADE-IN **ONLY** TOWARDS A TUNDRA PURCHASE OFFER ON 95-04 TACOMAS. THESE VEHICLES POSE A SAFETY-HAZZARD TO THEIR OWNERS, AS THERE ARE THOUSANDS OF AFFECTED VEHICLES WITH * * HEAVILY - ROTTED * * FRAMES. THERE ARE NO BUY-BACK OFFERS OR TRADE-INS ALLOWED TOWARDS ANY OTHER TOYOTA PORODUCT, JUST TUNDRA. WHEN THE TACOMAS ARE BROUGHT IN THEY ARE INSPECTED, MOST ARE NOT ALLOWED TO LEAVE!!!!!!!! *TR

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE REAR FRAME HAD ROTTED. WHILE DRIVING 30 MPH, THE REAR FRAME FELL OFF THE VEHICLE BECAUSE IT WAS RUSTED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A LOCAL REPAIR SHOP AND THEY PLACED A PIECE OF METAL ON THE VEHICLE TO HOLD IT TOGETHER TEMPORARILY. NO PERMANENT REPAIRS WERE MADE AND THE VEHICLE REMAINS PARKED. THE VIN, ENGINE SIZE, AND NUMBER OF CYLINDERS WERE UNKNOWN. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 66,000.

TOYOTA TACOMA 1996 HAS EXTREME FRAME RUST MAKING VEHICLE UNSAFE. *TR

PREMATURE FRAME DETERIORATION. ENGINE IS GOOD AND STILL GETS 24 MPG, NO OIL BURNING. REAR FRAME OVER TIRES FAILED AND HAD TO BE WELDED WITH NEW FRAME PIECES. BOTH SIDES. ABOUT 5 MONTHS LATER, COULD NOT REGISTER VEHICLE DUE TO ADDITIONAL, UNREPAIRABLE FRAME FAILURES. REPAIR SHOP SAID HE HAS WELDED ABOUT 100 TOYOTA TACOMA TRUCKS. KNOWN TO HAVE PREMATURE FAILURES IN THE CHASIS. *TR

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE DRIVERS SIDE DOOR DOES NOT HAVE A SAFETY CRASH BAR. WHEN REPAIRING A BROKEN LOCK, THE REPAIR SHOP STATED THAT THE VEHICLE HAD NO SAFETY CRASH BAR INSTALLED IN THE DOOR. PRESENTLY, NO FAILURE HAS OCCURRED. THE ENGINE SIZE WAS UNKNOWN. THE CURRENT MILEAGE IS 190,000 AND FAILURE MILEAGE WAS INAPPLICABLE. UPDATED 02-01-08. *KB

SEVERLY RUSTED FRAME. *TR

ABOUT TWO WEEKS AGO THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO DEALER BECAUSE FRONT LEFT TIRE WOBBLED WHILE DRIVING. THE DEALER STATED THAT FRAME RAIL WOULD BE REPLACED PER RECALL #96V129000. *AK

DRIVER'S SIDE DOOR DOES NOT CLOSE PROPERLY.

POOR DESIGN OF THE FENDERS ALLOW DIRT AND DEBRIS TO BE THROWN ONTO VEHICLE. FENDER DOES NOT COME OUT FAR ENOUGH TO COVER THE TIRES.