2002 Toyota Tacoma
Problems, recalls and owner-reported issues
Structure is the leading concern among 360 owner complaints filed for this model year. This is the 9th highest complaint count among 26 Tacoma model years with reports.
Of the 2002 reports, 30 involved a crash and 3 involved a fire. 23 people were injured.
What owners report most often
Recalls and investigations
Tires, temporary/emergency spare tireNov 23, 2012
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2001 through 2004 Tacoma light trucks manufactured from August 28, 2000, through August 27, 2004, and originally sold, or currently registered, in the following cold climate states with high road salt usage: Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia. The spare tire in the subject vehicles is located underneath the rear of the vehicle and held by a spare tire carrier. A lift plate on the carrier is used to help raise, lower and retain the tire. During its manufacture, the lift plate may not have been sufficiently coated with anti-corrosion materials. If the plate is insufficiently coated and the vehicle is operated in cold climate regions where road salts are frequently used, road spray can reach the carrier assembly and corrode the lift plate.
Corrosion of the plate could cause it to break, which could result in detachment of the spare tire from the vehicle. Detachment of the spare tire could result in a road hazard which may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.
Toyota will notify owners, dealers will inspect the vehicle and replace the spare tire carrier lift plate as necessary, free of charge. The recall began in February 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Campaign 12V542000 on NHTSA.gov
Exterior lightingJul 17, 2006
CERTAIN AJ MOTORSPORT COMBINATION LAMPS SOLD AS REPLACEMENT LAMPS FOR USE ON THE ABOVE LISTED PASSENGER VEHICLES. COMBINATION LAMPS NOT EQUIPPED WITH AMBER SIDE REFLECTORS FAIL TO CONFORM WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 108, LAMPS, REFLECTIVE DEVICES, AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT.
LACK OF AMBER SIDE REFLECTORS IN THE LAMPS WILL DECREASE LIGHTING VISIBILITY TO OTHER DRIVERS AND MAY POSSIBLY RESULT IN A VEHICLE CRASH.
AJ MOTORSPORT WILL NOTIFY OWNERS AND OFFER REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE LAMPS. THE RECALL BEGAN ON JULY 31, 2006. OWNERS MAY CONTACT AJ MOTORSPORT AT 626-618-2026.
Campaign 06E065000 on NHTSA.gov
Exterior lightingMar 23, 2006
CERTAIN PRO-A MOTORS CORNER LAMPS, TURN SIGNALS, AND HEADLIGHTS SOLD AS REPLACEMENT LAMPS FOR USE ON CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES LISTED ABOVE. SOME COMBINATION LAMPS THAT ARE NOT EQUIPPED WITH AMBER SIDE REFLECTORS FAIL TO CONFORM TO FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 108, LAMPS, REFLECTIVE DEVICES, AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT.
WITHOUT THE AMBER REFLECTORS, THE VEHICLE WILL BE POORLY ILLUMINATED, POSSIBLY RESULTING IN A VEHICLE CRASH WITHOUT WARNING.
PRO-A MOTORS WILL NOTIFY OWNERS AND OFFER TO REPURCHASE THE LAMPS. THE RECALL BEGAN ON APRIL 3, 2006. OWNERS MAY CONTACT PRO-A MOTORS AT 323-838-2988.
Campaign 06E026000 on NHTSA.gov
Suspension, front, control arm, lower ball jointMay 17, 2005
ON CERTAIN SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, DUE TO A MANUFACTURING ISSUE IN THE FRONT SUSPENSION LOWER BALL JOINT, THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT THE SURFACE OF THE BALL OF THE JOINT MAY HAVE BEEN SCRATCHED. THE BALL JOINT MAY EVENTUALLY EXPERIENCE EXCESSIVE WEAR AND LOOSENESS, RESULTING IN INCREASED STEERING EFFORT.
THE LOWER BALL JOINT MAY SEPARATE FROM THE KNUCKLE CAUSING LOSS OF STEERING CONTROL AND A CRASH COULD OCCUR.
DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE FRONT SUSPENSION LOWER BALL JOINTS FREE OF CHARGE. THE RECALL BEGAN ON JULY 5, 2005. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331.
Campaign 05V225000 on NHTSA.gov
Fuel system, gasoline, delivery, hoses, lines/piping, and fittingsMay 19, 2003
ON CERTAIN PICKUP TRUCKS, DURING SIDE IMPACT NCAP TEST (I.E. LINCAP TEST), A FLANGE AT THE REAR END OF THE DOUBLE CAB BODY DEFORMED AND INTERFERED WITH THE FUEL INLET HOSE THAT CONNECTS THE FUEL FILLER PIPE AND FUEL TANK, RESULTING IN DAMAGE TO THE FUEL INLET HOSE.
THIS DAMAGE COULD RESULT IN FUEL LEAKAGE, WHICH COULD RESULT IN A FIRE IF IN THE PRESENCE OF AN IGNITION SOURCE.
DEALERS WILL INSTALL A FUEL HOSE PROTECTOR ON THE BODY FLANGE. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN JUNE 3, 2003. OWNERS WHO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER ON AN AGREED UPON SERVICE DATE AND DO NOT RECEIVE THE FREE REMEDY WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME SHOULD CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331.
Campaign 03V189000 on NHTSA.gov
Representative owner complaints: structure
181 reports, newest first. Show all
Structure, Oct 14, 2015
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. UPON INSPECTING THE VEHICLE, IT WAS NOTICED THAT THE FRAME WAS PREMATURELY RUSTED TO THE POINT THAT THE FRAME DETERIORATED WITH HOLES AND COULD FRACTURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE VEHICLE WAS INCLUDED IN NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBERS: 12V542000 (TIRES) AND 05V225000 (SUSPENSION), BUT THE CONTACT NEVER RECEIVED RECALL NOTICES. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 300,000.
Structure, Oct 7, 2015
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE SUBFRAME WAS SEVERELY CORRODED AND WITH HOLES DUE TO CORROSION, WHILE AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC PERFORMED ROUTINE MAINTENANCE. THE MECHANIC INFORMED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 130,000. .....UPDATED 12/03/15 *BF *JS
Structure, Sep 28, 2015
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THERE WAS EXTENSIVE RUST AND CORROSION ON THE UNDERBODY AND FRAMING OF THE VEHICLE, WHICH PROGRESSED WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A REPAIR SHOP WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE FRAME NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS TO BE TAKEN TO A DEALER FOR INSPECTION AND DIAGNOSIS. THE VEHICLE WAS ALSO INCLUDED IN NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 12V542000 (TIRES) AND WAS UNABLE TO DETERMINE WHEN THE RECALL WOULD BE COMPLETED BECAUSE THE PART WAS NOT AVAILABLE FOR AN EXTENDED PERIOD OF TIME. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE AND PROVIDED NO REMEDY. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS NOT AVAILABLE.
Structure, Sep 22, 2015
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRONT AND REAR SUBFRAME WERE CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE ENTIRE SUBFRAME NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 96,566.
Air bags, Structure, Sep 16, 2015, crash
THERE WAS EXTENSIVE DAMAGE TO THE FRONT LEFT SIDE OF THE VEHICLE FROM A COLLISION. THE RADIATOR WAS PUSHED AGAINST THE ENGINE. MOST OF THE DRIVER SIDE FENDER AS WELL AS THE INNER CORE SUPPORT WAS CRUSHED. BOTH AIRBAGS DIDN'T NOT DEPLOY.
Structure, Aug 28, 2015
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC FOR A ROUTINE SERVICE AND WAS TOLD BY THE TECHNICIAN THAT THE VEHICLE FRAME WAS CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 106,000.
Structure, Wheels, May 29, 2015
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS INCLUDED IN NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 12V542000 (TIRES) AND INDICATED THAT THE DEALER IN NEW YORK WAS NOT ABLE TO DO THE UNDERCOATING PROCESS DUE TO STATE REGULATIONS. IN APPROXIMATELY MID AUGUST 2012, THE DEALER INDICATED THAT THE REMEDY FOR THIS DEFECT WAS NOT AVAILABLE AT THE TIME THE CONTACT TRIED TO SCHEDULE THE RECALL REPAIR. THE CONTACT WAITED FOR YEARS TO DETERMINE WHEN THE MANUFACTURER WOULD FINALIZE THE REMEDY PLAN TO REPAIR THE VEHICLE. THE RUST BECAME EXTENSIVE TO THE POINT THAT THE UNDERBODY, THE CHASSIS, THE LEAF SPRING, AND THE REAR WHEEL WELLS ALL HAD CORROSION TO THE POINT THAT THE COMPONENTS COULD FRACTURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED FOR YEARS OF THE FAILURE AND WAS UNABLE TO PROVIDE A PERMANENT REMEDY. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 150,000.
Structure, May 28, 2015
2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO VEHICLE RUST ISSUES. *SMD THE CONSUMER WAS URGED TO CALL TOYOTA TO SEE IF A RECALL HAD BEEN ISSUED. THE CONSUMER WAS INFORMED A RECALL WAS ISSUED. HOWEVER, SHE NEVER RECEIVED NOTIFICATION. THE CONSUMER WAS INFORMED SIX NOTIFICATIONS WERE MAILED. *JB
Structure, May 12, 2015
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT RECEIVED NOTIFICATION OF NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 12V542000 (TIRES). THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER TO HAVE THE RECALL REPAIR PERFORMED; HOWEVER, THE RECALL REPAIR WAS UNABLE TO BE PERFORMED DUE TO EXCESSIVE RUST ON THE SUBFRAME. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 88,000.
Suspension, Structure, May 4, 2015
HAD A RECALL ON MY TACOMA. I HAD BOUGHT FROM FATHER, HE BOUGHT NEW FROM SPARTAN TOYOTA IN LANSING MI. IT WAS FOR A POSSIBLE FRAME RUST RECALL. I HAVE THE RECORDS OF TAKING IT IN FOR THAT PURPOSE. IT WAS CLEARED BY SERVICE DEPARTMENT. APPARENTLY, THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO SPRAY A PROTECTIVE COAT ON THE FRAME AT NO COST TO ME, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE A 15 YEAR WARRANTY ON FRAME. THEY DID NOT DO THIS. I SOLD TRUCK TO MY SON, APPROXIMATELY JULY 2014. HE TOOK IT IN FOR MUFFLER WORK AND THEY WOULDN'T PUT ON HOIST BECAUSE FRAME IS WEAK FROM RUST. EVERYONE FROM THE DEALER AND TOYOTA NATIONAL HAS SAID IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN SPRAYED, BUT BECAUSE IT WASN'T THEY SORRY BUT CAN'T DO ANYTHING. I FEEL THAT SOLUTION TO THE SERVICE DEPARTMENTS MISTAKE IS NOT ADEQUATE. DO I HAVE ANY OTHER RECOURSE TO HELP MY SON? [XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR
Suspension, Structure, Apr 14, 2015
I BOUGHT A USED 2002 TACOMA FROM A GOOD FRIEND. HE TOOK VERY GOOD CARE OF THE TRUCK, IT WAS MINT. AFTER I BOUGHT THE TRUCK I ASKED ABOUT THE FRAME RECALL, BUT HE SAID WHEN HE TOOK IT IN THAT THEY COULDN'T DO IT AND HE HAD FORGOTTEN TO TAKE IT BACK. NO NEGLIGENCE, JUST DIDN'T SEE RUST AND DIDN'T TAKE IT IN FOR THE UNDER COATING. I TRIED TO GET IT DONE BUT TOYOTA WOULD NOT STAND BEHIND THE WARRANTY. TWO YEARS LATER AND I HAVE A SOME PRETTY BAD FRAME RUST. THIS IS A SAFETY ISSUE AND I REALLY CANNOT AFFORD ANOTHER PAYMENT. THERE NEEDS TO BE A RECALL FOR THIS PROBLEM.
Structure, Apr 12, 2015
TRUCK RECALLED FOR EXCESSIVE CORROSION TO THE SPARE TIRE CARRIER LIFT PLATE!! AFTER REPAIR , SERVICE TECH TOLD ME MY TRUCK ALSO HAD A SMALL HOLE IN THE FRAME WITH EXCESSIVE RUST. TO MY SURPRISE I WAS TOLD THAT THE RECALL FOR THIS PROBLEM HAD PASSED!! I RECEIVED NO RECALL PAPER WORK ON THIS MATTER. NOW NO HELP IS FORTH COMING ! WHAT TO DO?? *TR
Suspension, Structure, Apr 6, 2015
FRAME IS RUSTED THROUGH IN MULTIPLE LOCATIONS AND HAS BEEN TREATED WITH CORROSION RESISTANT COATINGS. THE COATINGS ARE OBVIOUSLY VISIBLE BUT DID NOT PREVENT THE FRAME FROM RUSTING TO AN UNSAFE CONDITION. THE PREVIOUS OWNER BROUGHT THE TRUCK IN FOR OTHER RECALLS THAT ARE RECORDED IN ITS HISTORY. THIS ONE FOR THE FRAME IS NOT RECORDED HOWEVER YOU CAN SEE THE COATING HAS BEEN APPLIED. THE WARRANTY EXTENSION IS LISTED FOR 15 YEARS. THE TRUCK IS 13 YEARS OLD BUT, A PERSON REPRESENTING TOYOTA SAYS IT'S EXPIRED WITH NO EXPLANATION OF HOW THAT IS. SO FAR SHE PUT ME ON HOLD FOR 20 MINUTES WITHOUT BEING ABLE TO FIND THE INFORMATION TO EXPLAIN TO ME. *TR
Suspension, Structure, Apr 3, 2015
I PURCHASED A TACOMA TRUCK DECEMBER 2014 WITH AN UNDERCOATED FRAME, AND WAS UNAWARE THE FRAMES IN THESE TRUCKS ROT OUT, IT IS NOW APRIL I LOOK UNDER THE TRUCK AND SEE THE FRAME IS COMPLETELY ROTTEN OUT TO THE POINT WHERE THERE IS HOLES EVERY WHERE AND YOU CAN POKE YOUR FINGERS HOLES WILL DEVELOP, I CONTACTED TOYOTA THEY DON'T WANT TO EVEN TOUCH THE TRUCK, I FEEL VERY UNSAFE DRIVING THE TRUCK. *TR
Suspension, Structure, Mar 6, 2015
PURCHASED THIS TRUCK 4 MONTHS AGO FOR $10,900. FOUND NO EVIDENCE OF RECALLS ON THIS TRUCK ON CARFAX AND TOYOTAS RECALL WEBSITE. IT IS A GREAT TRUCK IN PRISTINE CONDITION. HOWEVER, AFTER TALKING TO A FRIEND WHO HAS A 2004 TACOMA HE INFORMED ME THAT THERE WAS A RECALL AND THAT HIS FRAME WAS SPRAYED TO PREVENT CORROSION. I CALLED UP TOYOTA TO SEE IF IT HAD BEEN DONE ON MINE AND THEY SAID NO. I ASKED WHY THEY WERE SPRAYING THEM AND THEY SAID IT WAS BECAUSE THE FRAME WILL CORRODE. I ASKED IF IT COULD BE DONE TO MINE AND THEY SAID THAT THEY STOPPED DOING IT AT THE END OF 2011. I HAD JOSEPH TOYOTA INSPECT IT YESTERDAY AND THEY INFORMED ME THAT THE FRAME HAS A HOLE IN IT AND WOULD ONLY HAVE 2 YEARS LEFT. I ASKED TOYOTA IF THEY WOULD REPAIR THE FRAME OR BUY THE TRUCK BACK AS I HAVE HEARD THEY DO AND THEY SAID NO. SO NOW I CAN EITHER PASS THE PROBLEM ONTO SOMEONE ELSE OR WAIT UNTIL THE FRAME FAILS. *TR
Suspension, Structure, Feb 20, 2015
VEHICLE HAS LOW MILES YET THE FRAME HAS RUST HOLES IN IT. TOYOTA WON'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT EVEN THOUGH IT HAS FRAME INSPECTIONS IN IT'S RECENT SERVICE HISTORY. THE FIRST INSPECTION OCCURRED IN 2010, LESS THAN 7K MILES AGO. THEY INDICATED TO ME ON THE PHONE THAT DUE TO AN AGREEMENT WITH NHTSA THAT THEY COULD NOT DO ANYTHING TO HELP ME. THEY WOULD NOT TAKE OWNERSHIP FOR NOT INSPECTING THE FRAME PROPERLY. THIS IS A MAJOR PROBLEM WITH TACOMA'S, TUNDRA'S, SEQUOIA'S AND 4RUNNER'S OF THIS VINTAGE IN COLD CLIMATE STATES. TOYOTA ACKNOWLEDGED THE FRAMES WERE OF POOR MANUFACTURING EVEN SUING THE FRAME MANUFACTURER, YET SOME GET NEW FRAMES, OTHERS LIKE MYSELF WITH A LOW MILE TRUCK ARE TOLD THEY COULD DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING EVEN THOUGH THE VEHICLE WAS TRADED IN LESS THAN 1600 MILES AGO AT A TOYOTA DEALERSHIP IN PA. TOYOTA NEEDS TO OWN UP TO THIS MAJOR SAFETY ISSUE AND ADDRESS IT INSTEAD OF SKIRTING THE ISSUE WITHOUT A PROPER RECALL. I HAVE SEEN VIDEOS OF TACOMA'S WHICH HAVE LITERALLY BROKEN IN HALF DUE TO THIS PROBLEM. NEVER DID I THINK TOYOTA WOULDN'T STAND BEHIND THIS POTENTIALLY FATAL FLAW IN FRAME MANUFACTURING AND CORROSION RESISTANCE. MY FRAME HAS A LARGE 1"X6.5" HOLE ABOVE THE RIGHT FRONT LEAF SPRING MOUNT - A KEY ATTACHMENT POINT FOR THE REAR SUSPENSION. *TR
Structure, Feb 2, 2015
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THERE WAS A HOLE IN THE REAR PASSENGER SIDE OF THE VEHICLE'S FRAME. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 174,000.
Structure, Dec 25, 2014
I PURCHASED THIS VEHICLE FROM MOTORCARS OF LANSING ON 12/5. THE ONLY DISCLOSURE WAS RUST ON BUMPER. EVERYTHING ELSE APPEARED OK UNTIL I HAD IT CHECKED FOR RUST. WHEN HIT WITH A HAMMER THE FRAME FELL APART. I CALLED THE DEALER & THEY SAID "SORRY THE RECALL EXPIRED IN 2011". I CONTACTED TOYOTA DIRECTLY WHO TOLD ME THE SAME THING. BASICALLY I'M STUCK WITH A VEHICLE I CAN'T DRIVE BECAUSE IT'S NOT SAFE. WHAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND IS THIS VEHICLE HAD BEEN SERVICED AT SEVERAL TOYOTA DEALERS DURING THE RECALL TIME & NO ONE REPAIRED THE FRAME. THIS VEHICLES IS NOT DRIVABLE, IT'S NOT SAFE & NO ONE WILL HELP ME GET IT FIXED. HOW CAN A TOYOTA DEALER SEND A VEHICLE TO AUCTION KNOWING THERE WAS A RECALL ON THE FRAME THAT WAS NEVER REPAIRED? *TR
Structure, Dec 23, 2014
I TOOK MY TRUCK T A TOYOTA ANY A DEALER TO FIX SOME EMISSION ISSUES, THEY ASKED IF I WANTED THE FRAME INSPECTED, THEY INFORMED ME ABOUT THE FRAME RUST/PERFORATION ISSUES THAT HAVE PLAGUED TACOMA'S FOR YEARS FROM THE MID 90'S TO 2010 TACOMA,S. THE FRAMES RUST FROM THE INSIDE OUT CREATING HOLES THAT CAUSE A FRAMED TO FALL APART AND RENDER THE VEHICLE WORTHLESS!! A SOME POINT ON 2001-04 TACOMA'S THEY SENT OUT A TSB OFFERING A VOLUNTARY CUSTOMER INSPECTION ON THE FRAMES THIS PROGRAM ENDED 6/11. THEN SOME TYPE OF FRAME REPLACEMENT PROGRAM WAS OFFERED TO PEOPLE THAT DID THE VOLUNTARY INSPECTION UNTIL 7/14. SO IF YOU CHOOSE NOT TO DO OR NEVER RECEIVED A NOTICE YOUR VEHICLE WILL FALL APART AND TOYOTA DOESN'T CARE. MY TRUCK RUN AND ON THE SURFACE LOOKS NEW DRIVES LIKE NEW HOWEVER I CAN'T DRIVE IT BECAUSE IT IS UNSAFE. IT HAS BEEN REDUCED TO A LAWN ORNAMENT. I BOUGHT THE TRUCK FROM THE ORIGINAL OWNER AN HE HAS LIVED AT THE SAME ADDRESS FOR OVER 40 YEARS HE NEVER! RECEIVED ANY NOTICE..TOYOTA .REPLACE MY FRAME BECAUSE YOU KNOW IT'S A SAFETY HAZARD. *TR
Structure, Nov 3, 2014
AT THE YEARLY REQUIRED STATE INSPECTION THE VEHICLE FAILED DUE TO THE FRAME BEING RUSTED OUT WITH HOLES. IT APPEARS TO BE A VERY COMMON ISSUE WITH THIS VEHICLE. *TR
Structure, Oct 17, 2014
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME WAS COMPLETELY CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER FOR DIAGNOSTIC TESTING. THE TECHNICIAN STATED THAT THE FRAME OF THE VEHICLE NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILE WAS 100,000.
Structure, Oct 10, 2014
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS UNDERGOING ROUTINE SERVICE, THE INDEPENDENT MECHANIC DISCOVERED THAT A REAR SECTION OF THE SUBFRAME WAS RUSTED AND CORRODED. IN ADDITION, TWO BRACKETS THAT SECURED THE BODY TO THE SUBFRAME DETACHED DUE TO RUST AND CORROSION. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 123,000.
Structure, Sep 30, 2014
DRIVING AT 35 MPH WENT OVER BUMP LEAF SPRING WENT UP THROUGH FRAME CAUSING VEHICLE TO BECOME OUT OF CONTROL. VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED AT VALENTI TOYOTA IN WESTERLY RI AND VEHICLES FRAME IS ROTTED. *TR
Structure, Sep 17, 2014
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE HAVING ROUTINE MAINTENANCE PERFORMED, THE TECHNICIAN NOTIFIED HIM THAT THE VEHICLE HAD EXTENSIVE RUST AND CORROSION ON THE FRAME CAUSING IT TO WARPED AND CRACKED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE AND INDICATED THAT THE CONTACT WAS NOT INCLUDED IN A THE LIMITED MANUFACTURER SERVICE CAMPAIGN. THE DEALER WOULD NOT APPLY THE CORROSION TREATMENT, BECAUSE THEY CLAIMED THE VEHICLE HAD A SALVAGED TITLE. THE CONSUMER DISPUTED THE DEALERS CLAIM AND PROVIDED PROOF. UPDATED 10/01/14.
Structure, Sep 4, 2014
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE HAVING THE VEHICLE INSPECTED, THE TECHNICIAN MADE HIM AWARE THAT THE FRAME HAD COMPLETED RUSTED AND CRACKED. THE INDEPENDENT MECHANIC DIAGNOSED THAT THE FRAME NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 168,000.