Another case of Toyota not honoring their warranty *Transmission*

yeah id definetly like to know what the actual history of the truck. all i can do is tell you what i have head other people do in a similar situation. id also like to know exactly what part of the trans failed. like was said earlier these arent dainty little trannys but that doesnt mean they cant be broken, all it takes is one good overwieghted load to do damage. it all depends on the details behind the original owner and use. as far as lawyers and courts you haved to be sure your completely in right about it. as far as the lift, tires, ect.. on the truck would have to know the specifics to know whether they were an issue, but i agree if they looked past them and went straight to another cause you might wanna find out what the previous owner honestly did with it.

 

OK so, if Toyota said the failure is due to "“towing way too much weight”, how can they prove that? That's really the only question here since no mention was made of any of this other stuff some of you guys are bringing up like the lift or off roading. What criteria did they use to come up with that reason? THAT is what they would have to prove in court if it ever came to it.

 

Did they know that you weren't the original owner?

If so then I could see where they would be thinking they have the ball in their court with whatever excuse they choose as reason to deny responsibility.

It's pretty hard for you to accurately state how much abuse the truck previously received.

 

I'd say you're better off paying your half and going on.

With all the facts that they have combined, the lift and bigger than stock tires, the damaged tow receiver, and the fact that you're not the first owner and have no history on what has happened before you owned it, there's now way you'll win a court case. In any court case, the burden of proof is on the plaintiff (you in this case). You don't seem to have any proof that none of this caused the trans issue.

 

They can probably tell by the pressures the tranny has reached. The great, or not so great things about computers is they store a bunch of information. I would think that if it got hot enough and had high enough pressures, it would record that info. The other thing that will burn a tranny out in no time is doing burnout's for an extended period of time.

 

wow i would be livid. i would not pay half of shit. you paid your half when you purchased the truck bro. i am sure there are plenty of lawyers that would jump all over this.

 

X2.

 

Actually you have it backwards. If he were to sue Toyota, they don't have to prove anything. Do a little research on how courts work. The burden of proof is on the plaintiff. He would be required to show proof that nothing he or the previous owner did would of caused what happened. If Toyota thought his case was weak enough, they could sit back and not cross examine, not show anything and still win the case if he didn't convince a jury that he was right.

 

Do you have the old transmission? Have you thought about having a metallurgist and/or mechanical engineer examine to determine the cause of the failure? It shouldn't be difficult to figure out why it failed (fatigue, brittleness, impurities, excessive load, etc.), and what forces were involved. That might give you a serious hand up on Toyota in the arguing process.

 

I agree with Munkey, you need to just man up and pay half. Be glad Toyota offered to pay the other half. If you go to court you cannot trestify that the truck has never been overloaded because in reality, you don't know because you are not the origional owner. You don't know what the origional did to it. As it may turn out, it may not be your fault at all, but that's the risk of buying a used vehicle.

 

Dude, just get a lawyer. Seriously.

Call up a lemon law firm in your state. It's not going to cost you anything out of pocket because they'll take your case in a contingency basis, which means they take their cut (probably 1/3) from whatever you recover (unless they also win attorney's fees on top of your recovery, in which case you should get the entire recovery amount).

You're in Cali, right? Here's one I found with a quick google search. I'm sure there are similar ones in your area that are dying for business.

Good luck.

 

It really is this simple.

The case against Toyota is weak and all he is doing is wasting time and money if he bothers with lawyers and other opinions.

The smart move is to eat the 1/2 and to understand this is the chance one takes when buying a pre-owned vehicle.

It won't be the last lesson he will learn along the way.

 

This situation has nothing to do with lemon laws. The issue here is the dealership is saying the truck was overloaded, or used out of Toyota's specifications. In every automobile warranty book it says something to the effect of if the automobile was overloaded, abused, or many other things, the warranty is void.

Here is a quote straight from my Toyota warranty book, page 11:

"This warranty does not cover damage or failures resulting directly or indirectly from any of the following:
Fire, accidents, theft, abuse, negligence, misuse-example: racing or overloading, improper repairs, alteration or tampering including installation of non-genuine Toyota accessories, Lack of proper maintenance, Installation of non-genuine Toyota parts, airborne chemicals, tree sap, road debris, rail dust, salt, hail, floods, wind storms, lightening or other environmental conditions, water contamination. "

In any event, if this is taken to court, what's going to happen when a lawyer asks the owner if the truck has ever been overloaded? All he can say is "I've never overloaded it". But the fact is he can't be sure the truck has never been overloaded because he has not owned it it's whole life.

 

Lemon law firms also handle warranty claims (i.e. claims under Magnusson-Moss or similar state provisions), which is why I pointed him in that direction.

That a disclaimer exists in the warranty is fine and well. However, the burden is on Toyota to prove that one of those exclusions actually caused the failure. Can they? Who knows. I don't, and you don't either. But I sure as heck wouldn't trust a dealership's word on it.

What will happen in court? Again, neither you nor I has enough information to know. And you seem to be assuming his claim ever gets to court. Very little of what lawyers do goes on in a court room. And I'm pretty sure that one specializing in this area is going to give better advice on this matter than any of us.

 

Any suing of Toyota would be a waste of time on this matter for reasons mentions.
Besides,you don't agree to pay half and get the work done and then try to sue.
Once you pay,it's even tougher to get that cash back.
If you sue before the repair,the truck will sit for months.
Be happy you got the 50-50 deal.I'm actually surprised Toyota agreed to that.

 

I'm sorry, this perspective just doesn't make sense to me.

He has a truck that is under warranty and his transmission went out. Toyota claims it was due to excessive towing; he has no knowledge of excessive towing. Toyota "graciously" offers to pay half towards a new transmission. He goes through their internal processes and they don't budge. They say there's nothing else he can do.

Cut out the noise and you have a transmission failure under warranty that Toyota refuses to cover. Should he be OK with that? Damned if I wouldn't give it another swing to recover the balance of the transmission cost, and taking it to small claims on your own isn't going to get you anything.

 

Bingo! There has already been an agreement reached, and work has been done. If the origional poster wanted to persue legal action, he should not have had the work done and should have not entered into an agreement. As far as Toyota is concerned, the situation has been taken care of.

 

He has no knowledge of excessive towing because he's not the original owner.Is that Toyota's fault?
He can try to fight it but he'll most likely lose.If he hires an attorney it will cost over the money he spent already.Toyota can drag this out for a long time.
Small claims court is about the only avenue he can take and with Toyota paying half the repair under all the circumstances,he'll lose,IMO.

 

1) Attorney would be free, unless he recovers something. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contingent_fee.

2) He'll definitely be out $2,400 if he does nothing, and I've seen what happens to pro se plaintiffs in small claims court. Not pretty.

So anyway, I don't think you and I are going to see eye to eye on this one. But that's ok, as more viewpoints are almost always better, and now OP has at least two.

 

Here are the facts:
-Origional Poster bought a used truck
-Used truck's transmission broke
-Toyota has their technician examine the truck and the technician finds damage he believes is concurrent with excessive towing.
-Origional poster cannot prove the vehicle has not towed excessive weight because he is not the origional owner.
-Excessive towing is one of the items listed in the Toyota warranty book that will void the warranty
-Toyota does not deny warranty fully, but offers to pay half.

Sounds like he got a pretty good deal.