1996 Toyota Tacoma Body & Structure Problems

Your truck's frame has rusted completely through in areas, even though it only has 114,000 miles on it. This is a structural integrity issue that makes the vehicle unsafe to drive. The frame will likely need to be inspected by a professional, and rusted sections may need to be welded, reinforced, or replaced depending on the extent of the damage.

Your truck's frame has developed severe rust or corrosion that's eaten through the metal — a mechanic was able to push a finger through it during repairs. This is a structural integrity issue that affects your truck's safety and strength. Toyota was notified but the vehicle wasn't repaired under this complaint. Fixing this would likely require frame reinforcement, welding, or replacement of the affected section.

Your truck's frame is severely rusted, with corrosion so extensive that metal is breaking through. There was a recall on this frame issue, but you didn't receive a notice when you bought the truck used. Your husband also had ball joint problems that required costly repairs. You're concerned about the structural integrity and safety of the vehicle.

You noticed your truck vibrating and discovered severe rust damage to the frame with only about an inch of steel remaining. The frame has rusted completely through in spots, which is a structural safety issue. Toyota has declined responsibility, and the vehicle cannot be safely driven. Fixing this would likely require frame repair or replacement, which is a major structural repair.

Your truck's frame has developed corrosion with holes near the rear passenger wheel. When you took it to a dealer for a warranty repair, they said the frame wasn't corroded and the vehicle didn't qualify for a buyback program, so no repairs were made. The frame corrosion will likely continue to worsen and could eventually affect the structural integrity of your truck.

The frame on the passenger side of your truck has rusted through, and the damage is severe enough that your vehicle will not pass state inspection. This is a structural integrity issue that needs professional assessment and repair.

During a routine oil change at the dealership, a technician discovered that your truck's frame had failed due to rust and corrosion and needed to be replaced. However, the vehicle was never repaired. Interestingly, when you brought the truck back to a dealer in 2011 under an extended warranty, they determined the frame was actually fine. This happened at approximately 122,000 miles.

Your truck's frame has developed rust, which affects its structural integrity and road safety. You weren't notified about Toyota's repair program for this issue, even though Toyota has a case file on it. You had to pay a welder out of pocket to repair the frame and make the truck safe to drive.

Your mechanic discovered that your truck's sub frame has corroded and needs to be replaced. Toyota was notified and indicated there was a voluntary recall campaign for this issue, but it has expired. The repair will likely involve removing and replacing the corroded sub frame component.

Your truck's driver-side frame rail has completely corroded and is no longer structurally sound. The dealer informed you that your vehicle is no longer eligible for Toyota's recall repair program for frame corrosion, likely due to age or mileage. This is a serious structural issue that affects the integrity of your truck's chassis.

Your 1996 Tacoma became hard to steer while driving at 55 mph. A mechanic found that the entire frame has rusted severely and would be very difficult to repair. Toyota had previously treated the frame under a recall in 2011, but the rust protection didn't prevent the problem from happening again. Fixing this will likely require professional frame repair or replacement, which is a major undertaking.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME AND AROUND THE REAR PASSENGER SIDE OF THE VEHICLE ARE CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 183,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THERE WAS EXCESSIVE RUST AND CORROSION THAT PROGRESSED WITHOUT WARNING. THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR SHOP WHERE IT WAS RUST PROOFED, BUT THE FAILURE RECURRED YEARS LATER ON THE UNDERCARRIAGE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN BACK TO A REPAIR SHOP AND THE TECHNICIAN STATED THAT THEY WOULD NEED TO RUST PROOF THE VEHICLE AGAIN AND WELD A PLATE TO PREVENT HOLES AND THE FRAME FROM FRACTURING. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED MORE THAN THREE YEARS AGO AND PROVIDED NO REMEDY. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 210,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRONT AND REAR OF THE VEHICLE HAD EXTENSIVE RUST AND CORROSION ON THE UNDERBODY AND FRAMING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER, WHO DIAGNOSED THAT THE FRAMING OF THE VEHICLE NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT INCLUDED IN NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 96V129000 (SUSPENSION). THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 135,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS IN PARK, THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE SUBFRAME NEAR THE REAR PASSENGER SIDE CORRODED AND FRACTURED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 152,000.

THE FRAME IS RUSTED TO THE POINT WHERE THE LEAF SPRING MOUNTS ARE CRUSHING THE FRAME AND THE FRAME HAS HOLES RUSTING THROUGH. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME FRACTURED DUE TO EXCESSIVE CORROSION. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 163,000.

FRAME FAILURE: THE FRAME BROKE, BETWEEN THE LEAF SPRINGS, DURING NORMAL USAGE. AFTER FURTHER INSPECTION, THE FRAME IS RUSTING THROUGH IN MULTIPLE PLACES. TOYOTA DEALERSHIP TOLD ME 5 YEARS AGO THAT MY TRUCK DIDN'T QUALIFY FOR THE TOYOTA FRAME RUST RECALL, THAT IT WAS MOSTLY NORTHERN (COLDER CLIMATE) STATES. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 45 MPH, THE REAR OF THE FRAME FOLDED IN HALF AND THE STEERING BECAME DIFFICULT. IN ADDITION, THE REAR END OF THE VEHICLE SWAYED FROM SIDE TO SIDE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A PRIVATE MECHANIC WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE ENTIRE FRAME WAS RUSTED AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND STATED THAT THERE WAS A MANUFACTURER RECALL RELATED TO THE FAILURE BUT IT WAS EXPIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 120,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 200,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE CHASSIS, FRAMING AND SUB FRAME WERE COMPLETELY RUSTED WITH CORROSION TO THE POINT OF DETERIORATION. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN FOR AN INSPECTION AND WAS NOT ABLE TO PASS. THE INSPECTION SHOWED THAT THERE HAD BEEN SO MUCH CORROSION THAT THE PARTS COULD POTENTIAL DETACH FROM THE FRAMING. THE VEHICLE WAS TO BE INSPECTED, DIAGNOSED AND REPAIRED BY AN AUTHORIZED DEALER. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS UNKNOWN. UPDATED 08/11/14*LJ THE CONSUMER STATED THE VEHICLE DID NOT PASS THE NEW YORK STATE INSPECTION. NO BUY BACK WAS AVAILABLE. TOYOTA DID NOT OFFER ANY ASSISTANCE. UPDATED 08/12/2014 *JS

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE EXHIBITED SEVERE RUST AND CORROSION ON THE FUEL TANK AND FRAME. THE VEHICLE WAS INCLUDED IN A MANUFACTURER'S LIMITED SERVICE CAMPAIGN HOWEVER, A LOCAL DEALER ADVISED THE CONTACT THAT THE CAMPAIGN HAD EXPIRED. THE VEHICLE REQUIRED EXTENSIVE REPAIRS TO CORRECT THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE AND PROVIDED NO REMEDY. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 80000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT NOTICED CRACKS NEAR THE FRONT AREA OF THE SUB FRAME. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER AND AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC, BOTH OF WHICH DETECTED THAT THE ENTIRE FRAME WAS COMPLETELY RUSTED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE PROBLEM. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS UNAVAILABLE. UPDATED 10/24/13*CN

1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO SEVERE CORROSION AND RUST ON THE VEHICLE REAR PASSENGER SIDE FRAME. *SMD TOYOTA INFORMED THE CONSUMER THE 15 YEAR WARRANTY HAD EXPIRED, AND THERE WAS NOTHING THEY COULD DO TO HELP.

THE MAIN BODY FRAME ON MY OTHERWISE VERY NICE TOYOTA TACOMA JUST BROKE COMPLETELY IN TWO WHILE DRIVING DOWN THE STREET. AFTER INVESTIGATING HOW THIS COULD HAPPEN, I LEARNED THAT TOYOTA ADMITTED THAT THEY MANUFACTURED AND SOLD UNSAFE TOYOTA'S DURING THE MID-90S. THEY CLAIM TO HAVE FIXED THIS BY OFFERING OWNERS OF THESE DEFECTIVE VEHICLES A BUY-BACK OPTION OF 150% VALUE FOR 15-YEARS FROM THE DATE THE VEHICLE FIRST SOLD. MY COMPLAINT IS THAT TOYOTA NEVER ATTEMPTED TO NOTIFY ME THAT I HAD PURCHASED AN UNSAFE VEHICLE AND I HAD NO IDEA THAT THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH THIS TRUCK UNTIL THE MAIN FRAME BROKE. I HAD JUST INVESTED $1,000 THE SAME WEEK IN A NEW CLUTCH AND OTHER NEEDED REPAIRS AND WHEN I NOTIFIED TOYOTA THEY TOLD ME THAT I WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY REPAIRS BECAUSE THE 15-YEARS ALREADY PASSED. SINCE TOYOTA ALREADY ADMITTED WITH A BUY-BACK PROGRAM THAT THESE TRUCKS WERE FAULTY AND BUILT WITH A LOW QUALITY METAL, HOW CAN THEY NOT BE RESPONSIBLE WHEN THE VEHICLE PREMATURELY FAILS? WAS MY TRUCK TO SUDDENLY BECOME SAFE AT 15-YEARS OLD? I UNDERSTAND THAT NO MANUFACTURER WARRANTIES THEIR VEHICLES FOREVER, BUT SINCE TOYOTA ADMITTED THAT THEY SOLD US JUNK, AND THE FACT THAT THEY MADE NO ATTEMPTS TO CONTACT ME AS AN OWNER OF ONE OF THESE PIECES OF JUNK, AND THAT THE VEHICLE'S MAIN FRAME SNAPS WHEN THE VEHICLE IS IN OTHERWISE GREAT CONDITION, TOYOTA SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE AND CONTINUE TO BUY-BACK EVERY VEHICLE THAT IS INCLUDED IN THE FAULTY MANUFACTURING. WHEN I CALLED TOYOTA, THEY TREATED ME LIKE DIRT AND EVEN REFUSED TO HAVE SOMEONE REVIEW MY CASE AND GIVE ME A CALL BACK. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING AT VARIOUS SPEEDS, THE VEHICLE STARTED TO VIBRATED. THE CONTACT MENTIONED THAT AFTER INSPECTING THE VEHICLE HE NOTICED THAT THE REAR PASSENGER SIDE OF THE FRAME WAS CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO A DEALER FOR INSPECTION OR REPAIR. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE WHO DID NOT OFFER ANY ASSISTANCE SINCE THE VEHICLE WAS NOT UNDER WARRANTY. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 200,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 296,000.

1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. ATTORNEY WRITES ON BEHALF OF CLIENT IN REGARDS TO A RUST CORROSION PERFORATION PROBLEM *TGW THE CONSUMER NEVER RECEIVED A NOTICE STATING THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH THE VEHICLE. THE CONSUMER LEARNED ABOUT THE PROBLEM IN NOVEMBER 2001, AND HAD THE VEHICLE INSPECTED, WHERE IT WAS CONFIRMED THAT RUST WAS PRESENT. *JB THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED AND THE CORROSION PROBLEM WAS FOUND IN NOVEMBER 2011, WELL BEFORE THE CUTOFF DATE. UPDATED 08/28/12 UPDATED 10/15/12

I HAVE A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA THAT WAS PART OF A RECALL FOR A FAULTY FRAME. I RECEIVED TWO LETTERS INFORMING ME OF THIS PROGRAM. THE FIRST ONE WAS IN 2009, AND THE SECOND IN 2010. I BROUGHT MY TRUCK IN FOR ITS FREE CHECK FOR FRAME CORROSION. THERE WAS A GRAVEYARD OF TRUCKS LIKE MINE. I DON'T KNOW IF THEY COULD HAVE FIT ANOTHER UNSAFE TRUCK IN THE LOT, THEY COULDN'T CRUSH THEM FAST ENOUGH. I WENT ON MY OWN AND UNFORTUNATELY I FEAR AS A WOMAN I WAS TREATED DIFFERENTLY. I WATCHED THE MECHANIC BANG MY FRAME OVER AND OVER, ENOUGH TO PUT IT OUT OF ALIGNMENT. MY NAME WAS CALLED AND THEY INFORMED ME THAT MY TRUCK PASSED THE TEST. RECOMMENDED ME TO FIX A BUNCH OF THINGS, SO AFTER WAITING ALL DAY FOR THEM TO REPAIR MY TRUCK AND SPEND 2000 DOLLARS THAT I DIDN'T HAVE, I WAS SENT ON MY WAY. MY TRUCK DID NOT FEEL SAFE TO DRIVE. LUCKILY I LIVE ON MARTHA'S VINEYARD WHERE THE HIGHEST SPEED LIMIT IS 45 MPH. THIS WAS AT FALMOUTH TOYOTA, AFTER THE SECOND NOTICE I WENT TO HYANNIS TOYOTA. THEY FAILED ME, SAID THERE WAS NO REPLACING THE FRAME, NO UNDER CARRIAGE TREATMENT, MY TRUCK WAS DEEMED UNSAFE TO DRIVE. I SIGNED A CONTRACT STATING THAT I WAS TO RECEIVE 150% MINT CONDITION BLUE BOOK VALUE OF MY TRUCK. I WAS LOOKING AT 9000.00, 10,000 DOLLARS OR MAYBE MORE IF I PUT THE MONEY AS A DOWNPAYMENT ON A NEW TOYOTA. I LOVE MY TRUCK, BUT I HAVE NEVER FELT SAFE IN IT. I WAS READY TO GOTO SALES AND FIND A NEW TRUCK. I HAD TO WAIT FOR A PHONE CALL FROM CECH, YOU KNOW THE BIG GUY,TOYOTA USA. AND AFTER THAT HAND OVER MY TITLE AND START THE TRANSACTION. I WENT BACK A LITTLE OVER A WEEK LATER TO DROP OFF MY TITLE AND GET THE RENTAL CAR THEY PROMISED ME. THEN THE DOOR SLAMMED IN MY FACE. I AM THE THIRD OWNER OF THIS VEHICLE. THE FIRST OWNER BOUGHT THE TRUCK IN 1995, JUST BEFORE THE NEW YEAR. NOW I AM LEFT WITH AN UNSAFE TRUCK THAT I CANT INSPECT, SELL OR DRIVE. $300.00 IS ALL THEY ARE OFFERING ME NOW. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR AN UNKNOWN FRAME CORROSION RECALL. THE DEALER INSPECTED THE VEHICLE AND STATED THAT THE FRAME WAS SEVERELY CORRODED. THE DEALER ALSO STATED THAT THE FRAME COULD NOT BE REPLACED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 103,000. UPDATED 05/21/12 *BF UPDATED 06/04/12

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THERE WAS SEVERE FRAME RUST NEAR THE REAR WHEELS. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER, WHO DIAGNOSED THAT THE FRAME WAS FINE. THE FAILURE PROGRESSED OVER THE FOLLOWING TWO YEARS AND HOLES BEGAN TO FORM IN THE FRAME. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED AND OFFERED TO ASSIST WITH SPRAYING A COATING OVER THE RUST TO PREVENT FURTHER DAMAGE. THE CONTACT DENIED ASSISTANCE AND THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 140,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 150,000.

1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO FRAME RUST CORROSION *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED HE RECEIVED A LETTER IN THE MAIL REGARDING FRAME RUST. THE CONSUMER MADE AN APPOINTMENT TO HAVE THE VEHICLE INSPECTED. THE CONSUMER STATED IT APPEARED THE DEALER NEVER PERFORMED ANY INSPECTION IN REGARDS TO THE FRAME OF HIS TRUCK. THE DEALER INFORMED THE CONSUMER THAT EVERYTHING LOOKED GOOD AND THERE WERE NO MAJOR PROBLEMS AND THE BODY SHOP WOULD TREAT THE FRAME, BY TREATING ANY BAD SECTIONS, THEN UNDER COAT AND CONDITION THE FRAME. TWO DAYS LATER, THE CONSUMER RECEIVED A CALL STATING THE BODY SHOP FOUND A FEW MAJOR PROBLEMS, AND THEY WERE UNABLE TO CONTINUE AND TOYOTA WOULD COME AND TALK TO THE CONSUMER ABOUT A BUY BACK AS THE VEHICLE WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. THE CONSUMER STATED IN TWO DAYS, THE VEHICLE WENT FROM BEING OK TO UNSAFE TO DRIVE. *JB

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THERE WAS FRAME DAMAGE IN THE REAR OF THE VEHICLE. THE DEALER MADE THE CONTACT AWARE OF A POSSIBLE SILENT RECALL, BUT THE VIN WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT CONTACTED AND THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 203,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME WAS FRACTURED UNDER THE PASSENGER SIDE OF THE VEHICLE. THE FRACTURE BEGAN FORM THE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE OF THE VEHICLE TO THE REAR OF THE PASSENGER SIDE. THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER AND THE FAILURE WAS CONFIRMED BUT THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 176,000. THE CONSUMER WAS INFORMED THAT RUST HAD PERFORATED THE FRAME OF THE VEHICLE IN SEVERAL PLACES AND THE VEHICLE WAS NOT SAFE TO DRIVE. UPDATED 03/14/12

THERE IS AN ACTUAL HOLE RUSTED THROUGH THE STRUCTURAL FRAME OF THE TRUCK. IN DECEMBER OF 2010, WHILE INSIDE OF THE 15 YEAR WARRANTY PERIOD, TOYOTA CLAIMED THERE WAS NO RUST ON THE FRAME OF THE VEHICLE OTHER THAN "SURFACE RUST." IN SEPTEMBER OF 2011, AFTER THE 15 YEAR WARRANTY HAD EXPIRED, TOYOTA CLAIMED THERE WAS RUST, CORROSION, AND AN ACTUAL HOLE IN THE FRAME OF THE VEHICLE. TOYOTA IS CLAIMING TO HAVE ISSUED A VOLUNTARY RECALL FOR THEIR RUSTED FRAMES, BUT IS PASSING THE FRAMES UNTIL THEY ARE JUST OUTSIDE OF THEIR 15 YEAR WARRANTY PERIOD AND THEN FAILING THEM. THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR HAVING STEEL RUST COMPLETELY THROUGH ON THE FRAME OF A VEHICLE THAT HAS BEEN CARED FOR AND MAINTAINED. IT IS A SAFETY HAZARD, AND IT IS AMAZING TO THINK THAT THESE VEHICLES COULD BREAK IN HALF WHILE ON THE HIGHWAY AT HIGH SPEED. TOYOTA NEEDS TO STEP UP AND TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR SUBCONTRACTERS CUTTING CORNERS DURING THE MANUFACTURING PROCESS. THEIR SELF-IMPOSED PROGRAMS ARE NOT EXTENSIVE ENOUGH, FEDERAL PENALTIES NEED TO BE ENACTED. THANK YOU. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THE DEALER CONFIRMED THAT THE FRAME WAS COVERED WITH RUST AND CORRODED DURING AN INSPECTION. THE DEALER WILL NOT REPAIR THE VEHICLE SINCE THE WARRANTY EXPIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE AND OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 90,000. UPDATED 09/27/11 *BF UPDATED 10/11/11

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME WAS RUSTED. THE DEALER ADVISED THE CONTACT THAT THEY WOULD BUY THE VEHICLE BACK BUT LATER RETRACTED THE OFFER. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE BUT DID NOT OFFER ANY ASSISTANCE. THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED BY A PRIVATE MECHANIC WHO INFORMED THE CONTACT THAT SHE WOULD NEED TO REPLACE THE ENTIRE FRAME. NO REPAIRS WERE PERFORMED. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 243,000. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 240,000.

I OWN A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. I RECEIVED A "LIMITED SERVICE CAMPAIGN" LETTER IN THE MAIL ON JULY 18TH 2011. THE NOTICE STATED THAT TACOMA MODEL YEARS 1996-2000 NEED TO BE INSPECTED FOR FRAME RUST AND POSSIBLE PERFORATION. IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE FRAMES IN A NUMBER OF THESE VEHICLES MAY NOT HAVE CORROSION-RESISTANT PROTECTION SUFFICIENT FOR AREA WITH HIGH ROAD SALT USE. THIS CONDITION IS UN-RELATED TO NORMAL SURFACE RUST COMMONLY FOUND ON METALLIC SURFACES AFTER YEARS OF USE. I LIVE IN NORTHERN ILLINOIS AND WITH MY VIN, MY TRUCK CERTAINLY FALLS INTO THIS CATEGORY. THE NOTICE, WHICH WAS MY FIRST AND ONLY ONE RECEIVED, CAME TO MY HOUSE 90 DAYS PAST THE 15 YEAR IN SERVICE DATE THAT TOYOTA EXTENDED THE CAMPAIGN FOR. AFTER SPEAKING WITH TOYOTA, I WAS ABLE TO HAVE MY TRUCK INSPECTED. THE FRAME HAS SEVERE RUST BUT SOMEHOW MANAGED TO "PASS" THE PERFORATION TEST. THE RESULTS OF THE TEST WERE IN MY OPINION MARGINAL AT BEST. I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO HAVE TOYOTA SEND A FACTORY REPRESENTATIVE TO MY LOCAL DEALERSHIP TO FURTHER INSPECT MY TRUCK FRAME. THIS HAS NOT HAPPENED AS OF YET (JULY 27TH,2011) AND TOYOTA SEEMS TO BE PLAYING A BACK AND FORTH GAME TO GET THIS DONE. CORPORATE TOYOTA IS WELL AWARE OF THIS FRAME CORROSION ISSUE BUT IS FAILING MISERABLY BY NOT STANDING BEHIND THE PROBLEM. DURING THIS CAMPAIGN, TOYOTA HAS REPLACED NUMEROUS FRAMES AND HAS "RE-PURCHASED" MANY TRUCKS FROM CONSUMERS IN THE AFFECTED STATES. ONCE MY TRUCK WAS DEEMED "PAST 15 YEARS FROM IN SERVICE DATE", THEY ARE TURNING THEIR BACKS ON THIS ISSUE. AS STATED BEFORE, MY NOTICE WAS NOT RECEIVED UNTIL JULY 18TH 2011, PUTTING THE TRUCK LITERALLY 90 DAYS PAST. I STARTED TRYING TO RESOLVE THIS ISSUE WITH TOYOTA JULY 19TH 2011. I WILL NO LONGER ALLOW MY FAMILY TO RIDE IN THIS VEHICLE AS I HAVE NO CONFIDENCE THAT THE FRAME WILL HOLD UP. I'M FILING THIS COMPLAINT TO MAKE SURE TOYOTA DOES WHAT IS RIGHT IN THIS CASE AND STAND BEHIND THEIR PRODUCT AS THEY SO OFTEN PROMOTE IN THEIR ADDS. THANK YOU. *TR

RUSTED TRUCK FRAME.

I OWN A 96 TOYOTA TACOMA AND IT HAS DEVELOPED FRAME ROT. TOYOTA WILL NOT DO THEIR BUYBACK AS I BROUGHT IT FOR ITS SECOND INSPECTION 68 DAYS BEYOND THE 15 YEAR BUYBACK OFFER. THE TRUCK HAS BEEN CONDEMNED AND REPORTED TO CARFAX, TOYOTA CORPORATE AND THE MA RMV RENDERING THIS VEHICLE INSTANTLY UNFIT TO DRIVE AND ILLEGAL TO OPERATE FOR SAFETY ISSUES..YET TOYOTA DENIES ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR THIS AND THE DEALER SERVICE REP SAID, YOU CAN STILL TAKE THE TRUCK, ITS YOURS AFTER ALL. HOW CAN A SAFETY RECALL FOR FAULTY FRAME CONSTRUCTION INVOLVING POOR QUALITY STEEL AND ABSENCE OF RUST INHIBITOR NOT BE A TOTAL RECALL OF ALL VEHICLES ON LIST DEMANDING BUYOUT OR FRAME REPLACEMENT FOR THE LIFE OF THE VEHICLE? WHY WAS TOYOTA GRANTED A 15 YEAR BACK-END TO THIS RESPONSIBILITY? FURTHER, TOYOTA PERFORMS THE INSPECTIONS AND YOU ARE ONLY ALLOWED 1 INSPECTION PER YEAR. I HAD MANCHESTER NH TOYOTA INSPECT MINE ABOUT 1 1/2 YEARS AGO AND THE TECH INSPECTING COMMENTED, "..THIS ONE WAS ONE OF THE BEST HE'S SEEN YET." I DISCOVERED A BROKEN LEFT REAR UPPER SHOCK MOUNT WITH A CHUNK OF FRAME TWO WEEKS AGO AND ARRANGED AS EARLY AS POSSIBLE TO GET THE TRUCK TO TOYOTA IN FALMOUTH, MA. WHERE THEY IMMEDIATELY CONDEMNED THE TRUCK DETERMINING IT UNSAFE TO DRIVE, THEN INFORMED ME THAT I HAD EXCEEDED THE BUYBACK TERM BY 68 DAYS PAST THE 15 YEAR OLD MARK. THEN THEY TOLD ME I COULD TAKE THE VEHICLE BACK BECAUSE AFTER ALL, IT IS STILL MY TRUCK. YOU'VE ALLOWED TOYOTA TO CONDUCT THEIR OWN SAFETY INSPECTIONS AND ALLOWED THEM TO BACK-END THEIR RESPONSIBILITY FOR SYSTEM-WIDE PRODUCTION DEFICIENCY? HOW IS IT THEY GOT TO CALL THAT SHOT? TALK ABOUT ALLOWING THE FOX TO GUARD THE HEN HOUSE! I BOUGHT A TOYOTA AT A MUCH HIGHER PRICE THAN THEIR COMPETITORS BECAUSE OF THEIR ADVERTISED QUALITY ENGINEERING. "EIGHT OUT OF TEN COROLLAS SOLD SINCE 1985 ARE STILL ON THE ROAD TODAY" WELL, THEY FAILED MISERABLY WITH THE TACOMA, PROVEN BY THE HUGE NUMBER OF TRUCKS THEY'VE HAD TO BUY-OUT OR PERFORM A FRAME REPLACEMENT. WHY? *TR

FRAME ON 1996 TACOMA HAS RUST HOLE THROUGH FRAME. DID NOT RECEIVE A NOTIFICATION OF WARRANTY EXTENSION FROM TOYOTA AND WARRANTY EXPIRED 11 DAYS BEFORE I UNCOVERED THE WARRANTY COVERAGE. TOYOTA WILL NOT HONOR THE WARRANTY AND TRUCK IS UNSAFE . *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT AFTER HAVING A REAR LEAF SPRING REPLACED ON HER VEHICLE, SHE NOTICED THAT THE FRAME WAS SEVERELY RUSTED AND DAMAGED. THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED BY THE DEALER AND ADVISED HER THAT THEY COULD NOT ASSIST HER SINCE THE VEHICLE WAS NO LONGER UNDER WARRANTY. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 259,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. HE STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 20 MPH AND ATTEMPTING TO MAKE A LEFT TURN LEFT THE VEHICLE CONTINUED DRIVING STRAIGHT AND HE LOST CONTROL OF VEHICLE. HE WAS ABLE TO PULL OVER AND HAD THE VEHICLE TOWED TO A DEALER. THE DEALER STATED THAT HE NEEDED TO REPAIRE THE FRAME. THERE IS A RECALL OUT FOR THIS VEHICLE WHERE THEY WILL HAVE TO REPLACE THEM BUT THIS VEHICLES FRAME CAN BE REPAIRED AT THE OWNERS EXPENSE AT $480.00 DOLLARS. THERE WILL BE REPAIRS DONE TO THE VEHICLE . THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 211000 AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 211800.

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT TOYOTA WILL NOT ACCEPT HIS VEHICLE FOR THE VOLUNTARY CUSTOMER SUPPORT PROGRAM. THIS PROGRAM IS IN REGARDS TO THE REAR FRAME CORROSION ON THE 1995 AND 1996 TACOMAS. TOYOTA IS OFFERING 1.5 TIMES THE BLUE BOOK VALUE FOR THESE VEHICLES. THE MANUFACTURER INFORMED THE CONTACT THAT HIS VEHICLE HAS A SALVAGE TITLE; THEREFORE, THEY WERE UNABLE TO BUY HIS VEHICLE BACK. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 179,171 AND FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 178,000.

TOYOTA TACOMA RUSTED FRAME RE-CALL. TOYOTA IS SENDING ALL OWNERS A TRADE-IN **ONLY** TOWARDS A TUNDRA PURCHASE OFFER ON 95-04 TACOMAS. THESE VEHICLES POSE A SAFETY-HAZZARD TO THEIR OWNERS, AS THERE ARE THOUSANDS OF AFFECTED VEHICLES WITH * * HEAVILY - ROTTED * * FRAMES. THERE ARE NO BUY-BACK OFFERS OR TRADE-INS ALLOWED TOWARDS ANY OTHER TOYOTA PORODUCT, JUST TUNDRA. WHEN THE TACOMAS ARE BROUGHT IN THEY ARE INSPECTED, MOST ARE NOT ALLOWED TO LEAVE!!!!!!!! *TR

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE REAR FRAME HAD ROTTED. WHILE DRIVING 30 MPH, THE REAR FRAME FELL OFF THE VEHICLE BECAUSE IT WAS RUSTED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A LOCAL REPAIR SHOP AND THEY PLACED A PIECE OF METAL ON THE VEHICLE TO HOLD IT TOGETHER TEMPORARILY. NO PERMANENT REPAIRS WERE MADE AND THE VEHICLE REMAINS PARKED. THE VIN, ENGINE SIZE, AND NUMBER OF CYLINDERS WERE UNKNOWN. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 66,000.

TOYOTA TACOMA 1996 HAS EXTREME FRAME RUST MAKING VEHICLE UNSAFE. *TR

PREMATURE FRAME DETERIORATION. ENGINE IS GOOD AND STILL GETS 24 MPG, NO OIL BURNING. REAR FRAME OVER TIRES FAILED AND HAD TO BE WELDED WITH NEW FRAME PIECES. BOTH SIDES. ABOUT 5 MONTHS LATER, COULD NOT REGISTER VEHICLE DUE TO ADDITIONAL, UNREPAIRABLE FRAME FAILURES. REPAIR SHOP SAID HE HAS WELDED ABOUT 100 TOYOTA TACOMA TRUCKS. KNOWN TO HAVE PREMATURE FAILURES IN THE CHASIS. *TR

SEVERLY RUSTED FRAME. *TR

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE DRIVERS SIDE DOOR DOES NOT HAVE A SAFETY CRASH BAR. WHEN REPAIRING A BROKEN LOCK, THE REPAIR SHOP STATED THAT THE VEHICLE HAD NO SAFETY CRASH BAR INSTALLED IN THE DOOR. PRESENTLY, NO FAILURE HAS OCCURRED. THE ENGINE SIZE WAS UNKNOWN. THE CURRENT MILEAGE IS 190,000 AND FAILURE MILEAGE WAS INAPPLICABLE. UPDATED 02-01-08. *KB

ABOUT TWO WEEKS AGO THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO DEALER BECAUSE FRONT LEFT TIRE WOBBLED WHILE DRIVING. THE DEALER STATED THAT FRAME RAIL WOULD BE REPLACED PER RECALL #96V129000. *AK

CONSUMER STATES WHILE DRIVING, NOTICED FRONT LEFT WHEEL WAS CAVED INWARD. TOOK VEHICLE TO DEALER, WHO DIAGNOSED THAT THE VEHICLE'S FRAME RAIL WAS DEFECTIVE.*AK

POOR DESIGN OF THE FENDERS ALLOW DIRT AND DEBRIS TO BE THROWN ONTO VEHICLE. FENDER DOES NOT COME OUT FAR ENOUGH TO COVER THE TIRES.

DOOR PANEL IS VERY NOISY.

DRIVER'S SIDE DOOR DOES NOT CLOSE PROPERLY.