2001 TOYOTA TACOMA Structureframe And Members Problems

The contact owns a 2001 Toyota Tacoma. The contact stated that the vehicle was previously serviced under recall for corrosion underneath the vehicle. The contact became aware that there was corrosion underneath the vehicle. The vehicle was taken back to the dealer and rust protection was sprayed on the corrosion but the failure reoccurred. The manufacturer was contacted and referred the contact to the NHTSA Hotline. The failure mileage was 100,000. The vehicle was taken back to Toyota for service, which was outside the extended warranty and the tech was shown the gaping holes in the frame that had rusted through and at that point the contact was told the extended warranty had expired so they couldn't do anything. The frame has now rusted so bad that Toyota has deemed it unsafe as of 2 months ago when the tech looked at it so the contact reached out to Toyota...

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHILE DRIVING 65 MPH, THE CONTACT HEARD A KNOCKING SOUND UNDERNEATH THE VEHICLE. HE PARKED THE VEHICLE, CHECKED UNDERNEATH, AND FOUND THAT THE ENTIRE FRAME WAS RUSTED. AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC INSPECTED THE VEHICLE AND RECOMMENDED THAT THE ENTIRE FRAME BE REPLACED. THE FRAME WAS RUSTED TO THE POINT WHERE THE VEHICLE WAS NO LONGER SAFE TO DRIVE. THE DEALER WAS NOT CALLED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED AND STATED THAT NOTHING COULD BE DONE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 173,000.

THE FRAME RUSTED OUT WITH ONLY 150,000 MILES, INFORMED VEHICLE NEEDS TO BE JUNKED OR HAVE FRAME REPLACED.THIS VEHICLE IS UNSAFE TO DRIVE.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS UNDERGOING REPAIRS, THE MECHANIC NOTICED THAT THE FRAME WAS RUSTED. THE DEALER WAS NOT NOTIFIED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED AND OPENED CASE NUMBER: 1805082285. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 104,000.

2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO RUSTS PERFORATION OF THE FRAME RAILS AND SPARE TIRE CARRIER RECALL ISSUES. *LD THE CONSUMER STATED THE DEALER WOULD NOT HONOR THE FRAME RAIL RECALL. *JS

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME OF THE VEHICLE WAS SEVERELY CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE IT WAS CONFIRMED THAT THE FRAME WAS SEVERELY CORRODED AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 160,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 30 MPH, THE REAR FRAME BECAME DETACHED FROM THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER. THE TECHNICIAN DIAGNOSED THAT THE REAR FRAME NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 220,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN FOR AN INSPECTION, THE MECHANIC NOTICED THAT THE ENTIRE FRAME WAS RUSTED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 72,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHILE ROUTINE MAINTENANCE WAS BEING PERFORMED ON THE VEHICLE, THE TECHNICIAN NOTICED THAT THE SUBFRAME WAS COMPLETELY CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC. THE TECHNICIAN DEEMED THE VEHICLE UNSAFE TO DRIVE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 126,000..UPDATED 09/30/14 *BF

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHILE SERVICING THE VEHICLE, AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC DISCOVERED THAT THE FRAME NEEDED TO BE REPLACED DUE TO CORROSION BUILD-UP. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED AND THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 171,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME WAS COMPLETELY CORRODED AND BEGAN TO DETERIORATE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC. THE TECHNICIAN DIAGNOSED THAT THE FRAME NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE ISSUE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 230,000. ..UPDATED 10/06/14 *BF UPDATED 3/11/2015 *JS

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE SUB FRAME WAS PERFORATED DUE TO RUST. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A PRIVATE MECHANIC WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE ENTIRE FRAME NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 102,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 111,000.

IN REVIEWING YOUR WEBSITE FOR RECALLS ON THE TOYOTA TACOMA, IT APPEARS THAT THERE IS ONE MISSING THAT CAME BEFORE THE RECALL FOR THE SPARE TIRES. THE ONE I SPEAK OF IS THE RECALL ON THE VEHICLE FOR FRAME PERFORATIONS OF WHICH MY VECHICLE NOW HAS AND HAS DEEMED UNSAFE FOR DRIVING. I BELIEVE THIS RECALL SHOULD BE ENFORCED BY TOYOTA AS MYSELF AND NUMEROUS OTHERS HAVE VEHICLES THAT CAUSE SAFETY HAZARDS FOR NOT ONLY OURSELVES BUT INJURIES TO OTHERS. THESE VEHICLES ARE STILL ON THE ROAD, AS OTHERS LIKE MY SELF WERE NOT AWARE OF THE DANGEROUS SITUATIN TOYOTA HAS PLACED US IN BECAUSE THEY ARE DOING NOTHING TO RECTIFY THE SITUATION, I'D LIKE TO TAKE M VEHICLE IN FOR THE TIRE RECALL HOWEVER I WILL NOT RISK MY LIFE IN ORDER TO GET THIS REPAIR DONE. AS AN AGENCY TO IS ESTABLISHED TO PROTECT CONSUMERS FROM HAZARDS, I...

WE PURCHASED A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA NEW IN LATE 2000. MY HUSBAND RECENTLY REALIZED THE FRAME IS ALMOST RUSTED THROUGH ON THE REAR OF THE VEHICLE NEAR THE GAS TANK. NEEDLESS TO SAY, IT ISN'T SAFE TO DRIVE THE VEHICLE UNTIL/IF IT CAN BE FIXED. WE HAVE VIEWED AND READ UP ON NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS FROM OTHER TACOMA OWNERS AND HAVE SEEN SOME RECALLS OR NOTIFICATIONS TO SELECT TACOMA OWNERS BUT NOT IN THE STATE WE RESIDE IN-MO. WE RAN INTO A SIMILAR ISSUE WITH ANOTHER NON-TOYOTA VEHICLE WHICH ONLY COVERED HOT-WEATHER STATES. WE LIVE IN MISSOURI....WE HAVE EXPERIENCED EXTREME HEAT AND COLD DURING THE LAST FEW YEARS. IT'S UNREASONABLE TO ME THAT THE AUTO DEALERS CAN EXCLUDE CERTAIN STATES WHEN IT IS HIGHLY LIKELY CUSTOMERS IN THOSE EXCLUDED STATES COULD EXPERIENCE THE SAME ISSUE. IF IT'S DETERMINED TO BE THE SAME ISSUE OWNERS IN OTHER STATES ARE FACING, WHY NOT...

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS HAVING ROUTINE MAINTENANCE PERFORMED, THE TECHNICIAN NOTICED THAT THE FRAME WAS RUSTED AND CORRODED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED WHO RECOMMENDED THAT THE VEHICLE NOT BE DRIVEN. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 71,000.

THE FRAME OF MY 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA WAS REPLACED IN 2010 BECAUSE OF SEVERE RUST PROBLEMS. THE REAR AXLE ASSEMBLY HAS THE SAME RUST PROBLEM , THE AXLE IS LEAKING. SHOULD TOYOTA HAVE REPLACED THE REAR AXLE ALSO. *TR

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS AT THE DEALER TO HAVE A CORROSION RESISTANCE PRODUCT APPLIED TO THE FRAME, THE TECHNICIANS STATED THE FRAME WAS RUSTED. THE MANUFACTURER HAD A VOLUNTARY RECALL WHICH EXTENDED THE WARRANTY FOR THE VEHICLE TO BE INSPECTED YEARLY FOR CORROSION. THE DEALER STATED THE FRAME WOULD HAVE TO BE REPLACED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND STATED THE FRAME WOULD BE REPLACED FREE OF CHARGE BUT IF THERE WERE OTHER PARTS THAT MAY BE DAMAGED DUE TO THE CORROSION THAT THE CONTACT WOULD HAVE TO COVER THE COSTS. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 109,000.

THIS IS ABOUT MY 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA IN MASSACHUSETTS ON JUNE 6 2008 WENT IN FOR FRAME INSPECTION REPORT FROM DEALER NO ROT CONDITION IS EXCELLENT BROUGHT IT IN TODAY NOVEMBER 23, 2010. TOTAL ROT REPLACING THE FRAME, UP TO 3 MONTH WAIT FOR FRAME. *TR

THE 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA TRUCK I OWNED WAS RECALLED FOR RUSTING FRAME. AT THE TIME I RECEIVED THE RECALL NOTICE THE FRAME ON MY TRUCK WAS ALMOST 90% RUSTED. ON MAY 7, 2010 I TOOK IT TO FOX LAKE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP FOR THE SAID RECALL AND APPLICATION FOR A CORROSION PREVENTATIVE COMPOUND WAS PERFORMED BY THE DEALER SERVICE DEPARTMENT. ON EARLY OCTOBER OF THIS YEAR I NOTICE THAT LARGE AMOUNT OF THE APPLIED COMPOUND ARE PEELING. I TOOK IT BACK TO THE SAME DEALERSHIP ON OCTOBER 20 FOR INSPECTION RELATED TO THE PEELING ISSUE. THE DEALERSHIP CALLED BACK OCTOBER 22 INFORMING ME THAT THEY CAN'T DO ANYTHING SINCE ALMOST ALL OF THE COMPOUND ARE NOW GONE. THE SERVICE PERSONNEL CLAIM THAT UPON SPEAKING TO TOYOTA, IT WAS NOTED THAT THEY ARE RESEARCHING IT. I WAS TOLD TO TAKE MY VEHICLE BACK. I HAVE THE VEHICLE WITH ME NOW BUT I...

I OWN A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA DOUBLECAB THAT I PURCHASED USED IN 2008. I RECENTLY RECEIVED A LETTER FROM TOYOTA STATING THAT I SHOULD MAKE AN APPOINTMENT TO HAVE THE FRAME CHECKED OUT FOR CORROSION AND RUST. I DID AND IT FAILED INSPECTION. IT WAS PERFORATED ON BOTH SIDES OF THE FRAME AND HAD EXCESSIVE RUST. TOYOTA OFFERED TO REPLACE THE FRAME RATHER THAN BUY THE TRUCK BACK. I DO NOT FEEL SAFE IN THIS VEHICLE ANYMORE. THE REAR BUMPER IS ROTTED THROUGH, THE FRAME , AND BY DOING RESEARCH I'VE FOUND SEVERAL RECALLS THAT I WAS UNAWARE OF. THEY WANT TO BREAK DOWN THE TRUCK TO THE FRAME AND REPLACE AND REBUILD IT WITH THE SAME OLD PARTS IN A DEALERSHIP, NOT A MANUFACTURING PLANT. I WAS TOLD THAT TOYOTA DOES NOT BUY BACK 2001 TACOMAS AND REFUSES TO NEGOTIATE TO GET THIS VEHICLE OFF THE ROAD. THIS VEHICLE...

THE FRAME MY 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA WAS BUILT ON IS ROTTING AND HAS A WHOLE IN IT. TOYOTA WANTS TO REPLACE THE FRAME, BUT THE COST EXCEEDS THE VALUE OF TRUCK. I DO NOT THINK THIS IS LEGAL. THE FIRST CUSTOMER SERVICE REP I SPOKE TO SAID "SHE WOULD NOT FEEL SAFE IN A TRUCK IN SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES". *TR

JUST PAID TOP DOLLAR FOR A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA ONLY TO FIND ON THE INSIDE OF THE FRAME IS COMPLETELY ROTTED AWAY AND IS VERY UNSAFE WITH ANY WEIGHT LOADED IN IT. HAVE FOUND NUMEROUS ACCOUNTS OF PREMATURE FRAME FAILURE DUE TO FAULTY MATERIALS DOCUMENTED ON THE INTERNET. NEW FRAME WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED ALONG WITH NEW FASTENERS. *TR

MY 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA HAS A PERFORATED FRAME. I WAS ISSUED A LETTER FROM TOYOTA EXPLAINING THE OPTIONS. ONE OPTION WAS TO REPLACE MY FRAME. THE OTHER OPTION WAS FOR TOYOTA TO BUY BACK MY VEHICLE AT 1.5 % OF EXCELLENT KELLY BLUE BOOK. I WAS NOT GIVEN THE BUY BACK OPTION AND THEY ARE TRYING TO FORCE THE FRAME REPLACEMENT ON ME. I AM NOT HAPPY WITH THE REMEDY THEY HAVE SELECTED FOR ME. THIS VEHICLE MAY NEVER BE THE SAME AFTER THE FRAME IS REPLACED. THIS IS NOT ANY EASY FIX . TO MANY PARTS ARE INVOLVED AND I WAS INFORMED IT WILL TAKE ABOUT 2 MONTHS TO COMPLETE THESE REPAIRS. *TR

TOYOTA REFUSED TO FIX DANGEROUS RUST DEFECT ON 2001 TACOMA, WHICH CAUSED A REAR DIFFERENTIAL GEAR OIL LEAK. *TR

MY 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA HAS DEALER VERIFIED FRAME RUST PERFORATION. WHEN THE FIRST LETTER FROM TOYOTA CAME TO MY DOOR IN EARLY 2009 I WENT DIRECTLY TO MY LOCAL DEALER WHO DID NOT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THIS ISSUE AND STATED TO ME THAT THEY WOULD GET BACK TO ME WITH MORE INFORMATION AS IT BECAME AVAILABLE TO THEM. SEVERAL MONTHS LATER, I WAS TOLD BY THE DEALER THAT WISCONSIN WAS ASKING TOYOTA TO PROVIDE MORE DATA ON THE PROPOSE SOLUTIONS TO THIS ISSUE AND HAD NOT APPROVED TOYOTA TO MAKE ANY REPAIRS. I WAS ALSO TOLD THAT THEY WOULD CONTACT ME WHEN I COULD GET MY TRUCK INSPECTED. MANY MORE MONTHS PASSED AND FINALLY I HAD ENOUGH AND CALLED TOYOTA DIRECT. I WAS ASSIGNED A CASE MANAGER AND SHE SAID SHE WOULD HELP ME GET MY TRUCK INSPECTED. THIS FINALLY HAPPENED ON APRIL 27, 2010. NOW THEY TELL MY ONLY...

2001 TOYOTA TACOMA-PASS NJ STATE INSPECTION. A FRIEND LOOKED AND SAID YOUR FRAME IS RUSTED. TOOK IT TO MY LOCAL TOYOTA SATURDAY 4/17/10 AND THEY SAID THE TRUCK WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. THEY WILL HAVE TO REPLACE THE FRAME. I SAID I NEEDED A TRUCK FOR A RENTAL THEY SAID BY MONDAY OR TUESDAY THEY SHOULD HAVE ONE. IT IS THURSDAY 4/22/10 AND CAN NOT GET IN TOUCH WITH ANYONE... I NEED A TRUCK THAT IS HOW I PUT FOOD ON MY TABLE.. CALLED CORPORATE AND THEY ARE GIVING ME THE RUN AROUND TOO... MY OTHER CONCERN IS AFTER THEY REMOVE EVERYTHING AND PUT IT BACK TOGETHER OTHER THINGS ARE GOING TO BREAK. ALSO, THE RESALE VALUE OF MY TRUCK HAS DECREASED... *TR

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHEN HE TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER FOR ROUTINE MAINTENANCE HE WAS INFORMED THAT THE FRONT FRAME WOULD EVENTUALLY FALL OFF. HE CONTACTED THE MANUFACTURER AND REPORT 2008061402 WAS FILED. THE MANUFACTURER SENT AN INSPECTOR WHO FOUND NO CORROSION OR HOLES ON THE FRAME. THE MANUFACTURER TOLD HIM BECAUSE A FAILURE WAS NOT LOCATED THEY WILL INSPECT THE FRAME FOR HIM ON A YEARLY BASIS. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 178,567 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 209,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE EMERGENCY/PARKING BRAKE WOULD NOT ENGAGE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A LOCAL MECHANIC FOR INSPECTION. THE MECHANIC DISCOVERED CORROSION ON THE FRAME AND THE BRAKE LINKAGE. HE THEN ADDED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS NON-REPAIRABLE. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 159000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. SHE NOTICED CORROSION ON THE FRAME OF HER VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC, WHO ADVISED HER TO CONTACT BOTH NHTSA AND THE MANUFACTURER IN REFERENCE TO A SAFETY CONCERN. THE MANUFACTURER HAD NOT YET RETURNED HER CALL. NO REPAIRS WERE MADE. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE UNDER 70,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE FRAME ON THE VEHICLE HAS CORROSION AND THERE WAS A HOLE IN THE FRAME ON THE DRIVER SIDE NEAR THE FUEL TANK. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER FOR INSPECTION. THE TECHNICIAN STATED THE MAIN FRAME WAS SEVERELY DAMAGED, BUT NO REPAIRS WERE MADE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE IDENTIFICATION NUMBER WAS UNAVAILABLE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 109,000.

PERFORATED FRAME. *TR

THE FRAME ON MY 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA IS RUSTED THROUGH IN SEVERAL PLACES. TOYOTA HAS OFFERED TO REPLACE THE FRAME FOR FREE, BUT IS OFFERING OWNERS OF 1995 - 2000 TACOMAS TO BUY THEIR TRUCKS FROM THEM FOR 1.5 X THE KELLEY BLUE BOOK VALUE, AT THE "EXCELLENT CONDITION" RATE REGARDLESS OF THE VEHICLE'S CONDITION. SO THE OWNERS OF THE OLDER TRUCKS REAP A CASH BENEFIT OF OVER 50% OF THE TRUCK'S VALUE, WHILE WE OWNERS OF 01-04 TACOMAS END UP DRIVING REBUILT VEHICLES. A TOYOTA REP TOLD ME THAT THEY'RE BUYING THE OLDER ONES BACK BECAUSE THEY CAN NO LONGER GET REPLACEMENT FRAMES FOR THEM. IF THAT'S THE CASE, IN A COUPLE OF YEARS, OWNERS OF TRUCKS LIKE MINE WILL BE GETTING THE 150% BUYBACK AND THE REST OF US WILL BE DRIVING OUR ORIGINAL (REBUILT) TRUCKS WITH THE REPLACEMENT FRAMES. MY LOCAL TOYOTA DEALER INSPECTED MY FRAME YESTERDAY,...

I AM FILING A COMPLAINT ON A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA WITH A RUSTY PERFORATED FRAME. WE HAVE DOCUMENTS AND PICTURES OF TWO HOLES AND FLAKING ON OUR FRAME. MANY MECHANICS HAVE TOLD US THAT OUR FRAME WAS UNSAFE, BUT WHEN BROUGHT TO TOYOTA DEALERSHIPS WE ARE TOLD THAT IT PASSES THEIR 2001-2004 RUST PERFORATION PROGRAM AND THEY SENT US AWAY. WE ARE LEFT WITH AN UNSAFE VEHICLE AND WE KNOW THAT IT CONTAINS PERFORATION IN THE FRAME. WE HAVE REQUESTED TO SEE THE TOYOTA REGIONAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR SOUTH TEXAS, BUT WE ARE GETTING THE RUN AROUND. WE REQUESTED TO SEE THE REP A MONTH AGO AND HAVE HEARD NOTHING SINCE. WE DO HAVE A CASE MANAGER AND # BUT OUR CASE KEEPS GETTING CLOSED AND OUR CASE MANAGER DOESN'T SEEM TO HAVE ANY AUTHORITY TO ACCEPT PICTURES OF THE PERFORATION OR TO CONTACT THE REGIONAL REPRESENTATIVE. WE WOULD APPRECIATE A...

2001 TOYOTA TACOMA RUSTED FRAME. CALLED THE SERVICES DEPT WHERE I BOUGHT THE TRUCK AND THEY SAID THAT THERE'S NO RECALL OR ANYTHING TO EVALUATE THE PROBLEM. THAT MY YR DID NOT QUALIFY FOR THE RUSTED FRAME ISSUE. MY INSPECTION STATION SAID THAT IT'S SO RUSTED THAT HE SHOULDN'T PASS ME. THAT HE WOULD FOR THIS YR BUT FORGET FOR NEXT YR. *TR

RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE LETTER FOR MY 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA (LETTER STATED VEHICLES COVERED WERE 2001-2004). THE REASON WAS TO INSPECT FRAME FOR RUST PERFORATION. UPON INSPECTION THE VEHICLE WAS FOUND TO HAVE THE PERFORATION. THEIR OFFER OPTION WOULD BE TO HAVE THE FRAME REPLACED. THE REPLACEMENT WOULD COME WITH A WARRANTY OF THE FRAME FOR AN ADDITIONAL 15 YEARS(...ON THE NEW ONE.....FRAME ONLY...) BUT NO OTHER WARRANTY OF THE AFFECTED COMPONENTS REMOVED, HANDLED, OR REPLACED DURING THE FRAME REPLACEMENT WOULD BE WARRANTIED. I HAVE OPENED A CASE WITH TOYOTA STATING THAT I WOULD BE BETTER SERVED WITH THE OPTIONAL BUYOUT, MENTIONED IN THE RECALL LETTER, WHICH IS AVAILABLE AT THEIR OPTION. IT IS UNDER REVIEW. *TR

2001 TOYOTA TACOMA WITH DIAGNOSED RUST PERFORATION TO FRAME. TOYOTA INSTITUTED A BUYBACK PROGRAM FOR 1995 THROUGH 2000 FOR THIS ISSUE, BUT WILL NOT HONOR THIS COMMITMENT TO VEHICLES POST THIS WINDOW THAT EXPERIENCE THIS SAME SAFETY ISSUE. TOYOTA WILL ONLY REPLACE FRAMES AS COUNTERMEASURE TO THIS ISSUE AND WILL NOT WARRANT THIS TEARDOWN/REASSY PROCESS THAT WILL BE PERFORMED AT DEALERSHIPS (NOT RETURN TO FACTORY FOR REWORK) WHICH WILL LEAVE THE CONSUMER OPEN TO ADDITIONAL VEHICLE (SAFETY) CONCERNS AND NO COMMITMENT FROM TOYOTA THAT THIS PROCESS WILL NOT AFFECT RESALE VALUE AS WELL. THIS IS AN UNACCEPTABLE AND UNSAFE STANCE. I HAVE CONTACTED TOYOTA CUSTOMER CARE AND ASSIGNED CASE NUMBER 0904119004 AND AWAITING FEEDBACK. *TR

2001 TOYOTA TACOMA FRAME RUST PERFORATION. TOYOTA SHOULD BE FORCED INTO A RECALL ON THE TACOMA TRUCK FRAMES. MINE IS PERFORATED TO THE POINT WHERE THE VEHICLE IS NOT SAFE, ONLY 70,000 MILES. *TR

I OWN A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA PICKUP TRUCK THAT HAS EXCESSIVE FRAME ROT. RECENTLY THE FRAME BROKE WHERE THE REAR BUMPER MOUNTS TO THE FRAME. THERE IS ROT LOCATED ALL OVER THE FRAME. THIS VEHICLE FALLS INTO THE SCOPE OF TOYOTA MOTOR COMPANY RUSTED FRAME PROBLEM. *TR

I HAD MY 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA CHECKED AND THE FRAME IS RUSTED OUT, THE DEALER DEEMED IT UNSAFE TO DRIVE, I CONTACTED TOYOTA THAT SAME NIGHT AND THEY SAID TO TAKE IT HOME IF YOU DON;T HAVE A RIDE. DEALER SAID ALL THEY CAN DO IS A FRAME REPLACEMENT AND I SAID THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE, WHY ISN'T TOYOTA TREATING THIS THE SAME WAY AS IT DID THE 1995-2000 MODELS??.. I KNOW THAT THE TRUCK WILL NEVER BE THE SAME ONCE THE MECHANICS ARE DONE,, THIS IS LIKE GOING BACK INTO PRODUCTION , AND I KNOW THEY'RE NOT TRAINED FOR THAT.. TOYOTA DIDN'T KNOW WHAT TYPE OF WARRANTY I WOULD HAVE AFTER THE WORK WAS DONE,, THEY SAID THAT THE SOLUTION TO THIS PROBLEM WAS DECIDED ON 02/06/09 , MY TRUCK WAS EVALUATED ON 02/18/09 A MATTER OF 12 DAYS,, I NEVER RECEIVED ANY TYPE OF NOTICE ON THIS. MY...

I HAVE A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA THAT HAS FRAME RUST THROUGH, AND HAVE RECEIVED NO HELP FROM TOYOTA ABOUT A FAIR BUY BACK AS THEY DO WITH THE 95-2000 TRUCKS. THE TRUCK HAS BEEN INSPECTED BY TOYOTA SERVICE, THE SERVICE PERSON SAID IT FAILED BUT THE FACTORY DISTRICT GUY SAYS IT ISN'T BAD ENOUGH. I NOW HAVE A TRUCK WITH A RUSTED FRAME THAT I CAN'T SELL AND THEY WON'T BUY BACK. *TR

TOYOTA TACOMA 2001 PERFORATED FRAME TOYOTA REFUSES TO PUBLICLY DECLARE THESE CARS ARE UNSAFE TO DRIVE. MY FRAME IS PERFORATED AND DEEMED BY THE LOCAL TOYOTA DEALER AS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. THEY ADMITTED THIS IS A "KNOWN" PROBLEM AND I NOW MUST ACCEPT COMPLETE LIABILITY IF I TAKE THE CAR OFF THE LOT. MY CASE MANAGER KEVIN INSISTED THAT "TOYOTA HAS PUBLICLY ANNOUNCED A WARRANTY EXTENSION ON DECEMBER 8TH, BUT IT IS PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO NOTIFY ALL THE OWNERS." YET HE COULD NOT MAKE ANY REFERENCE TO WHERE I COULD FIND THIS PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT. TOYOTA INSISTS THAT THIS DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A RECALL, YET HIS EXPLANATION FOR A RECALL WAS A FAULTY COMPONENT THAT CAUSES A SAFETY ISSUES THAT WILL BE REPLACED BY THE MANUFACTURER. THIS IS PRECISELY WHAT THE CASE MANAGER STATED TOYOTA IS PREPARING TO DO. HOW CAN TOYOTA BE AWARE OF SUCH A SAFETY HAZARD AND NOT...

2001 TOYOTA TACOMA WITH FAILING FRAME DUE TO RUST ISSUES. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT TOYOTA IS NOW OFFERING TO REPLACE FAILING FRAMES ON 2001 AND NEWER MODELS AS OPPOSED TO THEIR BUYBACK OF 95-200 MODELS. UNACCEPTABLE DUE TO THE OBVIOUS DECREASED RETAIL VALUE CAUSED BY THIS MAJOR ISSUE, NOT TO MENTION THAT MANY CERTIFIED MECHANICS STATE THAT THE FRAME REPLACEMENT IS A TERRIBLE IDEA DUE TO THE ELECTRICAL, ALIGNMENT, AND STRUCTURAL ISSUES THAT ARE COMMON WHEN THIS IS DONE. NEVER A GOOD IDEA AND TOYOTA KNOWS IT. I AM IN LIMBO, WANTED TO TRADE IN MY TRUCK, BUT AM NOT BEING OFFERED THE SAME PLAN THAT 95-2000 OWNERS WERE. *TR

ON 12/23/08 WHEN MY VEHICLE WAS IN FOR NORMAL SERVICE I WAS TOLD BY THE DEALER THAT MY FRAME WAS ROTTING AND THE VEHICLE WAS NOT SAFE TO DRIVE. I WAS TOLD TO CALL TOYOTA CORP AND A CASE WAS ASSIGNED (200812230213). ON 12/24 A CASE MGR CALLED ME AND SAID THAT MY ENTIRE FRAME HAD TO BE REPLACED AND THAT THEY WOULD BE EXTENDING MY WARRANTY. HE STATED THAT THE FRAME IS ROTTED AND UNSAFE SO I WAS TO BE PROVIDED A LOANER FROM MY DEALER - BUT NOT A LIKE VEHICLE. I WAS TOLD I WOULD GET A LETTER OUTLINING THE PROGRAM TOYOTA WAS INTRODUCING. THE PROGRAM AS TOLD IS DIFFERENT THAN THE ONE TOYOTA HAS FOR PRE-2001 TACOMAS. I WAS TOLD THAT PROGRAM WAS DIFFERENT AND NOT AVAILABLE BECAUSE PARTS (FRAME) ARE AVAILABLE. I SPOKE AGAIN WITH THE CASE MGR ON 1/6/09 AND WAS TOLD THEY DO...

I HAVE A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA EXTD. CAB AND THE FRAME HAS HOLES ROTTED IN IT. OBVIOUSLY MY '01 DOESN'T QUALIFY FOR THE '95-'00 BUYBACK PROGRAM. TOYOTA SAYS THEY WILL REPLACE THE FRAME BUT I DON'T LIKE THIS OPTION. I PERSONALLY KNOW THE TRUCK WILL NEVER BE THE SAME AND THE RESALE VALUE IS GOING TO DROP SIGNIFICANTLY. I WANT TO BE OFFERED THE SAME BUYBACK OPTION AS THE OLDER TACOMAS. *TR

TOYOTA ISSUED A RECALL ON 95-2000 TACOMA PICKUP TRUCKS DUE TO FRAME ROT. I HAVE A 2001 TACOMA AND WAS CONCERNED THAT I MIGHT HAVE THE SAME ISSUE. I CALLED THE DEALERSHIP I PURCHASED MY TRUCK AT 3 SEPARATE TIMES IN THE LAST 6 MONTHS TO "DOUBLE CHECK AND MAKE SURE" MY TRUCK WAS OKAY AND WAS ASSURED ALL THREE TIMES, BY THREE DIFFERENT INDIVIDUALS, THAT NO SUCH ISSUE PERTAINED TO MY VEHICLE AND THAT MY TRUCK WAS FINE. LAST FRIDAY (1-2-09) I WAS UNABLE TO PASS THE STATE INSPECTION BECAUSE OF FRAME ROT. THE DEALERSHIP CONFISCATED MY TRUCK BUT DID PROVIDE A RENTAL VEHICLE AND I AM NOW WAITING TO HEAR BACK FROM TOYOTA ABOUT THE RESOLUTION FOR MY TRUCK. THE 95-2000 OWNERS WERE OFFERED A VERY FAIR BUY-BACK PROGRAM. THE 2000-2004 OWNERS WHO ARE EXPERIENCING THE SAME PROBLEM ARE IN A "GRAY AREA" RIGHT NOW. THE SERVICE PEOPLE...

HI I HAVE A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA IN MINT CONDITION THAT HAS FRAME ROT I TOOK VERY GOOD CARE OF MY TRUCK NOW TOYOTA SAID ITS NOT SAFE AND I HAVE TO TAKE IT OFF THE ROAD . I NOW HAVE TO BUY A NEW CAR I CANT AFFORD I ONLY GOT 7 YEARS OUT OF MY TRUCK I COULD HAVE EASILY GOTTEN 15 I FEEL THIS IS WRONG AND TOYOTA SHOULD REPLACE MY TRUCK. *TR

MY 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA HAS FAILED A FRAME ROT INSPECTION BY TOYOTA THAT HAS BEEN OCCURRING IN TACOMAS SINCE 1995. A RECALL WAS ISSUED ON 1995 THROUGH 2000 TACOMAS HAS BEEN ISSUED AND TOYOTA IS BUYING BACK THE PICKUP AT 1 AND 1/2 TIMES THE SUGGESTED BLUE BOOK ON THE PICKUPS. I WAS TOLD THAT THERE IS NO RECALL ON 2001 AT THIS TIME. I HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM AS THE 1995 THROUGH 2000 WHY SHOULD THEY NOT BE MADE TO RECALL THE 2001 TACOMA FOR AN OBVIOUS SAFETY PROBLEM. I HAVE DONE ALOT OF RESEARCH AND FOUND MANY OTHER TOYOTA OWNERS WITH A 2001 TACOMA WITH THE SAME SAFETY PROBLEM HOW CAN TOYOTA ALLOW PEOPLE TO DRIVE A PRODUCT WITH SUCH A SAFETY PROBLEM. THE FRAME CAN SNAP AND THE CAB BECOME SEPARATED FROM THE FRAME. TOYOTA SHOULD BE MADE TO RECALL ALL THE TRUCKS WITH THIS PROBLEM AS...

2001 TOYOTA TACOMA NOT COVERED IN 1995-2000 FRAME RUST "SOFT RECALL" OF MARCH, 2008. ON NOVEMBER 7, 2008 VEHICLE FAILED VT STATE SAFETY INSPECTION DUE TO PERVASIVE PENETRATING FRAME RUST. ALTHOUGH TOYOTA KNEW OF THE DEFECTIVE FRAMES PRIOR TO THE MARCH CUSTOMER NOTIFICATION, TOYOTA CHOSE NOT TO ALERT ME (OWNER OF A 2001 MODEL) OF THIS CONDITION. ON NOVEMBER 14, 2008 AND NOVEMBER 19, 2008, TOYOTA DEALERSHIP AND CORPORATE STAFF VERIFIED THE RUSTED FRAME AND NOTED THAT VEHICLE WAS NOT SAFE TO DRIVE. ALTHOUGH THIS FAILURE DIDN'T RESULT IN INJURY OR DEATH, I AM CONCERNED OTHER 2001 OWNERS MAY NOT BE SO LUCKY. TOYOTA HAS DONE NOTHING TO ALERT 2001 OWNERS OF THIS SERIOUS SAFETY DEFECT. WE'RE FINDING OUT ONE AT A TIME AS OUR VEHICLES FAIL SAFETY INSPECTIONS. BASED UPON MY OBSERVATIONS OF THE FRAME, I BELIEVE THE DEFECT IS NOT SIMPLY THE ABSENCE OF A CORROSION INHIBITING COATING,...

THE FRAME ON MY TOYOTA TACOMA HAS EXTENSIVE RUST. TOYOTA HAS RECALLED VEHICLES WITH RUSTED FRAMES FOR THE YEARS 1995 TO 2000. THE SAME THING IS HAPPENING TO NEWER VEHICLES AND THE DANGER IS STILL THE SAME. RUST KEEPS GETTING WORSE AND SOON IT WILL BE A SAFETY HAZARD. *TR

I OWN A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. RECENTLY I BECAME AWARE THAT THE FRAME WAS RUSTED AND THE VEHICLE WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. I CONTACTED TOYOTA AND WAS INFORMED THAT MY 2001 WAS NOT COVERED BY THEIR CONSUMER PROTECTION PROGRAM THAT BOUGHT BACK 1995-2000 TACOMAS WITH THE SAME PROBLEM, AT 150% OF THE KELLY BLUE BOOK VALUE. THEY HAVE INDICATED THAT THEY WILL MAKE ME AN OFFER PROBABLY AT 100% OF THE KBB VALUE. I HAVE TWO CHILDREN IN COLLEGE AND 529 PLANS ROCKED BY THE ECONOMY AND NO EXTRA MONEY TO SPARE. I WAS COUNTING ON THE 'BULLET PROOF' RELIABILITY CLAIMS OF TOYOTA AND TO KEEP THE VEHICLE FOR SEVERAL MORE YEARS. I HAVE ENJOYED AND APPRECIATED THE VEHICLE UNTIL NOW AND CANNOT REPLACE THE TRUCK AT THE CURRENT KBB VALUE. I THINK THIS ISSUE HAS IMPACTED THE RESALE VALUE OF THESE VEHICLES. MORE IMPORTANTLY HOWEVER IS THAT IT IS...