NHTSA Complaint #10373367 — 1998 ISUZU RODEO

I OWN A 1998 ISUZU RODEO. I JUST RECEIVED A LETTER FROM ISUZU STATING THAT THERE WAS A RECALL ON THIS VEHICLE DUE TO MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF CORROSION ON THE FRAME. LAST JANUARY, WHEN I WENT TO GET MY INSPECTION STICKER, MY MECHANIC STATED HOW BAD THE RUST WAS ON THE UNDERSIDE AND ADVISED ME TO GET RID OF THE VEHICLE STATING THAT "IT IS UNSAFE TO DRIVE". I ENDED UP HOLDING ON TO THE RODEO UNTIL NOW AND UPON LOOKING INTO THIS MATTER HAVE FOUND OUT THAT THERE HAVE BEEN NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS ABOUT THE SAME ISSUE(S) I HAD. LET ME STATE THAT I ALSO GET A 1998 FORD F-150 REPAIRED BY THE SAME MECHANIC. MY MECHANIC MADE A STATEMENT ABOUT HOW MY WORK TRUCK MAY LOOK ROUGH, BUT IT IS IN WAY BETTER SHAPE STRUCTURALLY THAN THE RODEO. THEY BOTH HAVE THE SAME MANUFACTURING DATE, APPROXIMATELY THE SAME AMOUNT OF MILES, AND BEEN DRIVEN ON THE SAME MASSACHUSETTS ROADS WITH THE SAME SALT ON THEM. SO, MY QUESTIONS TO YOU ARE, WHY DID IT TAKE SO LONG TO GET THIS RECALL IN MOTION? WHY ARE THEY ABLE TO STATE THAT BECAUSE THE VEHICLE IS OVER 10 YEARS OLD THEY ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR IT EVEN THOUGH THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN GOING ON LONG BEFORE ISUZU'S RECALL DATE, OR WHEN THEY NOTIFIED THE NHTSA? IT SEEMS AS IF THEY ARE GETTING KIND OF A PASS HERE. MY FRIENDS TOYOTA TACOMA WAS RECALLED A FEW YEARS AGO AND TOYOTA STOOD BY THEIR PRODUCT AND REIMBURSED HER THE VALUE OF THE TRUCK. THERE SHOULD BE SOME SORT OF STANDARD SET FORTH ON CERTAIN TYPES OF RECALLS. THIS IS NOT AN ISSUE OF A FAULTY SEAT BELT OR RUSTING SPARE TIRE HOLDER, THIS IS AN ISSUE OF A CAR FALLING APART ON THE ROAD WHILE DRIVING IT POSSIBLY INJURING THE PASSENGERS AS WELL AS OTHER MOTORISTS ON THE ROAD. NO EXCUSES FOR HONDA OR ISUZU, THERE IS NO POSSIBLE WAY THEY DID NOT KNOW ABOUT THE FAULTS YEARS AGO WHILE SERVICING THE SAME VEHICLES IN THEIR GARAGES. TOYOTA GOT A PUBLIC LAMBASTING FOR FAULTS IN THEIR VEHICLES BUT I HAVE NOT HEARD A PEEP ABOUT HONDA OR ISUZU'S LACK OF INITIATIVE TO REPAIR THE VEHICLES. THANK YOU *TR