1996 Toyota Tacoma Structure

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE'S FRAME WAS CORRODED WITH HOLES NEAR THE REAR PASSENGER SIDE WHEEL. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN UNKNOWN DEALER FOR THE MANUFACTURER WARRANTED FRAME REPAIR. WHEN THE CONTACT ARRIVED AT THE DEALER, THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE FRAME WAS NOT CORRODED AND THE VEHICLE DID NOT QUALIFY FOR THE BUY BACK PROGRAM. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT CONTACTED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 115,310. *TT*JB

THE FRAME ON THE PASSAGER SIDE OF THE TRUCK HAS RUSTED OUT? WILL NOT PASS STATE INSPECTION.

ONLY 114,000 MILES, FRAME RUSTED THROUGH. UNSAFE.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS BEING REPAIRED, THE MECHANIC WAS ABLE TO PUSH HIS FINGER THROUGH THE VEHICLE'S FRAME. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE CONTACT REFERENCED MANUFACTURER COMMUNICATION NUMBER: LSC-90-D. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS UNKNOWN.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE AT AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC FOR ROUTINE REPAIRS, THE TECHNICIAN INFORMED THAT THE SUB FRAME WAS CORRODED AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE AND INFORMED THAT THERE WAS A VOLUNTARY CAMPAIGN RELATED TO THE FAILURE BUT HAD EXPIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 73,000. UPDATED 01/27/17*LJ

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS UNDERGOING AN OIL CHANGE BY THE DEALER, THE TECHNICIAN STATED THAT THE FRAME FAILED DUE TO CORROSION. IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE FRAME NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE CONTACT RECEIVED AN EXTENDED WARRANTY IN 2011. AT THAT TIME THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER WHERE IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE FRAME WAS FINE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 122,000.

1996 TOYOTA TACOMA FRAME RUST ISSUES. WAS NEVER NOTIFIED BY TOYOTA OF THE "PROGRAM" OFFERS TO FIX. TOYOTA CASE #1607184527 CREATED 6/2016. TOOK VEHICLE TO WELDER TO FIX FRAME TO MAKE ROAD WORTHY.

OUR TRUCKS FRAME IS RUSTING AWAY. I'M WORRIED THE TRUCK IS GOING TO BREAK INTO AND KILL MY HUSBAND. I KNOW THERE WAS A RECALL ON THE FRAME BUT I NEVER RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE. I HAVE ALREADY TALKED TO YOUR PEOPLE AND THEY SAID THEY ALLOWED 15 YEARS EXTENSION ON THE RUSTED FRAME . WE BOUGHT OURS USED YEARS AGO. WE HAD NO CLUE THIS WAS A PROBLEM UNTIL I FOUND IT TODAY. I THINK U SHOULD MADE IT GOOD FOR US. WE R POOR AND WE CANNOT AFFORD TO GET IT FIXED. IT SHOULD B FROM THE TIME WE BOUGHT IT. IT IS SO BAD MY HUSBAND S FINGERS WENT THROUGH THE METAL. THIS IS SO UNFAIR. I ALSO FOUND OUT THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH THE BALL JOINTS AND THAT WAS A RECALL WE HAVE ALREADY SPENT HUNDREDS OF DOLLAR GETTING IT FIXED. IT'S SAD, U SAY U BACK UP YOUR PRODUCT. HOW R WE SUPPOSE TO KNOW WHEN THERE IS S RECALL . IT'S NOT FAIR, AND IF SOMEONE GETS HURT OR KILLED I WILL HOLD ALL OF U RESPONSIBLE . WE SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED A NOTICE IN THE MAIL, BUT WE RECEIVED NOTHING. U KNOW THAT THE ONLY AUTOMOBILES WE BUY ANYMORE IS TOYOTAS. PLEASE CONSIDER HELPING MY HUSBAND. WE CAN'T AFFORD ANOTHER AND HE IS HANDICAPPED SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE R GOING TO DO. THANK U ,[XXX] , EMAIL IS [XXX]. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE DRIVER SIDE FRAME RAIL WAS COMPLETELY CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER. THE TECHNICIAN ADVISED THE CONTACT THAT THE VEHICLE WAS NO LONGER ELIGIBLE FOR REPAIRS UNDER A MANUFACTURER RECALL RELATED TO CORROSION OF THE FRAME. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 170,000.

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.

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. WHILE DRIVING AT 55 MPH, THE VEHICLE BECAME DIFFICULT TO MANEUVER. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHO DIAGNOSED THAT THE ENTIRE FRAME WAS RUSTED AND WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO REPAIR. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE CONTACT MENTIONED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS PREVIOUSLY REPAIRED UNDER A MANUFACTURER RECALL IN 2011 WHERE THE DEALER SPRAYED THE FRAME, BUT FAILED TO PREVENT IT FROM RUSTING. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS THE RECALL NUMBER WAS UNKNOWN. 314,000.

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.

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. 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 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.

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.

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 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 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 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.

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.

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