NHTSA Complaint #10663608 — 2004 TOYOTA TUNDRA

DEALER JUST INFORMED ME THAT MY ROTTED FRAME NEEDS TO BE REPLACED. DEALER INSISTING THAT TRUCK IS ?SAFE? AND IS SAFE TO DRIVE FOR THE NEXT 90 DAYS UNTIL THE FRAME PARTS ARRIVE. DEALER IS REFUSING TO PROVIDE ME WITH A SAFE LOANER FOR THESE 90 DAYS. DEALER IS REFUSING TO PROVIDE CRITERIA USED TO DETERMINE THE SAFETY OF MY FRAME AND TRUCK. DEALER ADMITTED VIA EMAIL THE BED OF THE TRUCK AS WELL AS THE SPARE TIRE CARRIER WAS ?NOT REMOVED DURING INSPECTION?. DEALER STATED (VIA EMAIL) THAT ?ONCE THE >10MM HOLE WAS DISCOVERED, THERE WAS NO NEED TO CONTINUE THE INSPECTION BECAUSE THE FRAME WOULD HAVE TO BE REPLACED.? DEALER IS REFUSING TO TELL ME WHAT CRITERIA WAS USED TO DETERMINE HOW SAFE THE VEHICLE WAS TO DRIVE. DEALER REFUSING TO PROVIDE THE FRAME INSPECTION REPORT AFTER MANY REQUESTS. SAYS ?IT DOESN'T EXIST?. DEALER REFUSED TO GIVE FRAME SAFETY INSPECTION CRITERIA USED TO DETERMINE A FRAMES SAFETY. CONTACTED CUSTOMER SERVICE AND ASKED FOR SAME CRITERIA. 1ST RESPONSE WAS ?ITS PROPRIETARY INFORMATION THAT I CANNOT GIVE YOU?. AFTER PUSHING THE ISSUE FARTHER, AND STATING THAT ALL I WANTED WAS A SAFE LOANER CAR TO DRIVE WHILE MY TRUCK IS WAITING ON A FRAME, THEY TOLD ME TO CONTACT DEALER FOR THE CRITERIA I AM REQUESTING BECAUSE THEY HAVE BEEN GIVEN THAT INFORMATION FROM TOYOTA. CONTACTED DEALER AGAIN, AFTER MULTIPLE EMAILS ASKING THE SAME THING, EVENTUALLY HIS RESPONSE WAS ?THERE IS NO CRITERIA?. I AM DENIED THE USE OF A SAFE LOANER BECAUSE THE DEALER IS SAYING THAT MY TRUCK IS SAFE TO DRIVE (BASED ON NON EXISTENT CRITERIA AS WELL AS AN INCOMPLETE FRAME INSPECTION). ACCORDING TO THE FLOWCHART, IF MY FRAME NEEDS TO BE REPLACED, A LOANER WILL BE PROVIDED FOR UP TO 60 DAYS (OR EVEN LONGER), IF PARTS AVAILABILITY IS CAUSING A DELAY. NOWHERE DOES IT STATE THAT I AM ONLY ENTITLED TO A LOANER IF AT MY DEALERS DISCRETION DEEMS IT AS "UNSAFE TO DRIVE". *TR