NHTSA Complaint #10640174 — 2000 TOYOTA 4RUNNER

WE PURCHASED A 2000 TOYOTA 4RUNNER WITH THE KNOWLEDGE THAT THE VEHICLE WAS 14 YEARS OLD HOWEVER, THE BODY, ENGINE AND INTERIOR OF THE VEHICLE WERE IN GREAT CONDITION. WE BECAME AWARE OF THE FRAME RUST WHEN TAKING IT FOR INSPECTION AND HAD SOME REPAIRS MADE IN ORDER FOR THE VEHICLE TO PASS STATE INSPECTION. WE TAKE GOOD CARE OF OUR VEHICLES AND WE WERE CHECKING THE BRAKES AND WE WERE GOING TO UNDERCOAT THE FRAME WHEN WE DISCOVERED THE LARGE AMOUNT OF RUST AND DAMAGE. I CONTACTED TOYOTA, THEY GAVE ME A CASE NUMBER AND TRANSFERRED MY CALL TO "CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS". SPOKE TO A PHONE REPRESENTATIVE WHO BASICALLY TOLD ME THERE WAS NOTHING THEY COULD DO AND THE WEATHER CONDITIONS CAUSE A LOT OF THE PROBLEMS. MY RESPONSE TO THAT WAS OUR 1998 BLAZER NEVER HAD THE AMOUNT OF FRAME RUST THAT THIS 4RUNNER HAS, BOTH DRIVEN IN THE SAME CONDITIONS. CERTAIN TOYOTA MODELS THAT ARE ALSO HAVING FRAME RUST HAVE BEEN COVERED UP TO AS LONG AS 15 YEARS ON FRAME DAMAGE WHY WASN'T THE 4RUNNER. I'M SURE ALL MODELS DURING THIS TIME WERE BUILT WITH BELOW STANDARD FRAME MATERIAL SO WHY WASN'T THIS ADDRESSED WITH ALL MODELS? *TR