2008 TOYOTA TUNDRA — Problems, Recalls & Safety Data

The contact owns a 2008 Toyota Tundra. The contact stated that the rear subframe of the vehicle was extremely rusted. The vehicle was driven to an independent mechanic to be inspected, and it was determined that there was severe corrosion to the rear subframe. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure, and the contact also informed the manufacturer that similar vehicles were under an undisclosed recall. The failure mileage was 284,023.

Odometer Fraud. The contact purchased a 2008 Toyota Tundra. The contact stated that it was discovered that there was a mileage discrepancy after the purchase. The vehicle was a private sale. At the time of purchase, the vehicle mileage was 43,893. It was later discovered that the CarFax report listed the mileage at 243,893.

The 2016 Toyota Frame Rust Settlement (Burns v. Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc.): This $3.4 billion class action directly addresses premature corrosion in 2007–2008 Tundras (and similar models). It claims Toyota “knowingly failed to apply adequate rust protection,” leading to frame perforation despite later treatments like HOF. The settlement’s “recurrent perforation” clause applies even after HOF. My rusted-through fuel tank strap and holes in the rear cross member qualify. HOF RO# XXX. Claim #XXX My 2008 Tundra SR5 TRD was treated with HOF in Nov 2017. In November 2025 my mechanic told me the gas tank was falling out as the straps that hold the tank in place were completely rotted out. And rust perforation was on the rear cross member. He instructed me to get a safety inspection at a Toyota dealership to document the rust. Toyota of Waldorf didn’t even schedule a appt, they told me to call the Brand Engagement Center and that there was no possibility of repair because Toyota had no frames. Brand engagement refused to provide any guidance. I scheduled an inspection at Koons Toyota of Annapolis, which it failed inspection with multiple >10mm frame holes and a rusted-through tank strap (held by bungee). They deemed it unsafe to operate and unrepairable. They kept leaving out the information about the rust or the holes until they realized I was not leaving until they documented it properly. I have 3 versions. Despite ZH7 expiration, this is a post-HOF recurrence and safety hazard. I requested goodwill repurchase at 1.5x KBB (~$12k) under the settlement’s intent. The Brand Engagement Center had me call them and [XXX] ” announced she was my case manager, then almost as quickly announced it was going to “Internal Dept” for repurchase review, that she would no longer be my case manager, and that they would get back to me in 60 days. I said the average is 2-4 weeks, not months and that I expected a response in 3-7 days. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C.

The 2016 Toyota Frame Rust Settlement (Burns v. Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc.): This $3.4 billion class action directly addresses premature corrosion in 2007–2008 Tundras (and similar models). It claims Toyota “knowingly failed to apply adequate rust protection,” leading to frame perforation despite later treatments like HOF. The settlement’s “recurrent perforation” clause applies even after HOF. My rusted-through fuel tank strap and holes in the rear cross member qualify. HOF RO# XXX. Claim #XXX My 2008 Tundra SR5 TRD was treated with HOF in Nov 2017. In November 2025 my mechanic told me the gas tank was falling out as the straps that hold the tank in place were completely rotted out. And rust perforation was on the rear cross member. He instructed me to get a safety inspection at a Toyota dealership to document the rust. Toyota of Waldorf didn’t even schedule a appt, they told me to call the Brand Engagement Center and that there was no possibility of repair because Toyota had no frames. Brand engagement refused to provide any guidance. I scheduled an inspection at Koons Toyota of Annapolis, which it failed inspection with multiple >10mm frame holes and a rusted-through tank strap (held by bungee). They deemed it unsafe to operate and unrepairable. They kept leaving out the information about the rust or the holes until they realized I was not leaving until they documented it properly. I have 3 versions. Despite ZH7 expiration, this is a post-HOF recurrence and safety hazard. I requested goodwill repurchase at 1.5x KBB (~$12k) under the settlement’s intent. The Brand Engagement Center had me call them and [XXX] ” announced she was my case manager, then almost as quickly announced it was going to “Internal Dept” for repurchase review, that she would no longer be my case manager, and that they would get back to me in 60 days. I said the average is 2-4 weeks, not months and that I expected a response in 3-7 days. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C.

Standard Vehicle Components failed. My 2008 Tundra [VIN [XXX] ] was inspected in Nov 2017 under HOF/WEP, passed with CRC applied, but now has a 2-finger-wide perforation in the frame and rusted through the gas tank support—a clear safety defect in a salt state like Maryland. The undercoating failed prematurely; I need goodwill frame replacement or buyback per the $3.4B settlement’s spirit.” (reference the 2017 class action, case no. 3:14-cv-03538). Toyota Brand Engagement Center has refused my request for repair or replacement or buy back. They also refused to provide written refusal. They admitted to recording the conversation, but refused my request for a copy or to record the call myself. There is literally no rust on any other portion of my truck as it is garage kept. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)