Toyota Frame Settlement Postcard

Sounds like we can bring the trucks in whenever and have them inspected now. I highly doubt my frame will have a 10 mm hole in it, so not sure I want to wait for that to happen (still not likely in the course of a year) or just have them coat the frame and be done with it. I am moving to Reno at the end of august, so I probably want them to coat it before I leave. Nevada is not a CRC state I dont think.

 

Until Toyota provides dealers with the policies and procedures regarding the "Frame Inspection & Replacement Program" (as it is called in the Settlement Agreement"), and more importantly the service and reimbursement codes, I would not be surprised to have a dealer tell someone "never heard of it", or "oh yeah, I heard something about that but we have not yet been notified.

With the possibility of 225,000 vehicles needing frames at a potential cost of $3.5 billion I doubt Toyota will be all "gung ho, oohrah!" to get this rolling...

 

So today I dropped my truck off at the dealer since I was due for my first oil change (1st one is free) and I wanted to have a Clutch Squeak TSB done. While I was there, I wanted to get a feeler on what they would say about the lawsuit settlement and I asked if they were aware of the Class Action Lawsuit. The service advisor said "yes, however, they have not been informed or instructed to do anything in regards to it yet. So they will not be doing any inspections yet." He also said that Toyota would start doing it by model year and they will be instructing the owners on when to bring them in.

I'm not sure if he was blowing steam or if this is actually the case. Either way, I'll probably wait another month before I start pushing them to do the inspection. I might also call the class counsel and see what their recommendation is. Just thought I would share this information with everyone here and get your opinion.

 

Thank you for the update...

 

Thanks for the news, my frame failed the state inspection due to many rust holes and my local dealer was vaguely aware of the settlement but that's about it. Hopefully Toyota will hurry up as right now I have an undrivable vehicle.

 

Class Action Lawsuit
http://www.toyotaframesettlement.com/

 

That is the very first line, in the very first post of this thread...

 

This thread has sure been educational. Brings back memories also. Does anyone here remember the issues with Japanese sheet metal used on GM bodies back about 1973? Huge rust issues. " a 10 mm penetration.." I wonder how they settled on that criteria, considering Toyota has some serious engineers on staff. Any penetration is too much, so damage control in action! I am of the opinion this frame problem is caused by bad steel alloy composition. Dissimilar corrosion in micro form, that takes off running with water electrolyte. Hard to believe the cost savings of the simple action of dipping the frames in production was worth the cost of the corrections! I see rust on my CA frame, not bad actually, but it likely would get bad in a different US location.

 

I know it was from the first post. But the post was from January 2017. Advising about the upcoming hearing in May 2017.
The results of the hearing were May 21,2017 (Was court was in session on a Sunday? Or results released on Sunday?)

 

I agree with all you have said. I suspect the 10 mm thing had a lot more to do with lawyers (settlement negotiations) than engineers; and agree 110% that the alloy used in these frames appears more susceptible to lamellar corrosion than are others. Most, maybe all, rusted Taco frames I've seen exhibit the flaking, layered rust characteristic of lamellar corrosion.

This of course means that applying any corrosion resistant coating without aggressive removal of scale is largely eyewash so as to make the customer feel like something positive has been done...

 

The hearings have been happening since 2014 when this was filed, may 21 was the judge putting the final approval on the deal. Now we wait for toyota/heffler claims group to get moving on codes and procedures so I can get my rust ball of a frame replaced without spending 11k

 

Nevada is not a CRC state, so get it coated before you leave.
Am I correct that all states get the inspection, but only CRC states get the coating?

 

That is correct. The settlement agreement language is:

"For vehicles registered in CRC States, the application of the CRC is available for a two (2) year period:
(a) for the Tundra and Sequoia subject vehicles; and, (b) for those Tacoma subject vehicles
for which CRC has not been previously applied and the frame was not previously replaced."

The "two (2) year period" language is interesting as it seems to indicate CRC application will only be available for two years (though I cannot find anything indicating when that clock starts (started) ticking.

"The CRC States, which have high road salt use, are defined as Connecticut, Delaware, the
District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Maryland, Maine, Michigan,
Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island,
Virginia, Vermont, Wisconsin and West Virginia."

If improperly applied argument could be made that doing nothing (or better yet paying to have it done properly) would be a better option.

 

I really hope they would spend the time to apply the coating correctly, and make sure the surface rust has been scraped off. I plan on asking a lot of questions about application of the coating, and if they dont plan on scraping, then I will do that first.

A frame with coating will have a higher resale value, so when I dump the truck after 60k miles I can still get a decent amount for it.

 

I doubt he minds .. I'm a service tech and I would love to have a backlog of frame swaps .. It pays good if it's wrote right .. But then again I do collision work .Not sure how a recall pays .

 

When I talked with the Class Counsel, they said the dealers will want to do the work...Sounds like they were right.

 

This is not a recall.

It is a program Toyota <i>agreed to conduct </i>as part of a settlement so as to avoid the expense of an actual trial, and if they lost having a court tell them what they were going to do. For a number of legal, technical, and practical reasons it is a different activity...

 

splitting hairs . What I meant is that as a tech it seems like a internal dealership job doesn't quite pay as well when the manufacturer is paying .. Its the side of the biz not many see. It still would be good to have all the frame swap backlog though.

 

It is not actually, there are large corporate fiscal and legal differences--and as the remainder of your comment points out there seem to be a significant empirical distinctions...