Consumer Complaints
| Fail date | miles | occurences | Purchase date |
|---|---|---|---|
| SUSPENSION | |||
| 02/13/2013 | 56000 | ||
| Tl* the contact owns a 2011 toyota camry. the contact stated that while having routine service performed on the vehicle, he was informed by an independent mechanic that the front struts were leaking. the dealer was notified and advised that they could possibly assist with the repair costs. the vehicle was not repaired. the failure and current mileage was 56,000. | |||
| 02/13/2013 | 56000 | ||
| Tl- the contact owns a 2011 toyota camry. the contact stated while getting routine service on his vehicle he was informed by an independent mechanic that his front struts were leaking. the dealer was notified and stated that they might be able to assist on the repair cost. the vehicle had not been repaired. the failure and current mileage was 56,000. dt | |||
| 06/07/2012 | 41000 | ||
| Tl-the contact owns a 2011 toyota camry. the contact stated that while replacing the tires, the mechanic advised that the struts were leaking oil. the vehicle was not taken to dealer or a repair shop for inspection of the struts or any repairs. the dealer was made aware of the failure and stated that the struts were supposed to leak. the manufacturer provided the same information as well. the current mileage was 44,800. the failure mileage was 41,000. kmj | |||
| 06/07/2012 | 41000 | ||
| Tl-the contact owns a 2011 toyota camry. the contact stated that while replacing the tires for the vehicle, the mechanic stated the struts on the wheels were leaking oil. the contact was concerned that there was a leak. the vehicle was not taken to dealer or repair shop for inspection of struts or repair. the dealer was made aware, and they stated that the struts were supposed to leak, and the manufacturer provided same information as well. the current mileage was 44,800. the failure mileage was 41,000.yn | |||
| 10/07/2010 | 13 | ||
| Vibration @ various spds: 10/7/10 (mge 16): purchased (misconstrued vibe for road conditions). 10/8/10 (mge 49) all spds, brought to dealer. per dealer: flat spots on tires due to car sitting to long. solution: over-inflate & instructed to drive. also, disc were out of round. 10/11 (mge 89) discs serviced, vibe still present. dealer denies presence. 11/15 (mge 975) dealer acknowledges vibe, tires replaced, vibe still present @ highway spds. 2/19/11 (mge 5160) 5k maint., vibe still present, car pulling left when braking/accelerating. service rep claims to have driven the car in addition to mechanic. denied presence of vibe, exact quote it drives like a camry. 2/21/11: car hit in rear driver tire, wheel assembly replaced, new rim, new bumper needed. no change in vibe, still present at highway spds. 7/12 (mge 10127) 10k maint., vibe still present. again dealer denies presence of vibe. 11/4 (mge 15355) 15k maint. advised vibe still present. again dealer denies presence of vibe. 3/22/12 (mge 19973) 20k maint., vibe still present, now severe pulse when braking. pulse acknowledged, rotors resurfaced. again dealer denies presence of initial vibe. 06/8 (mge 24949) vibe now felt at lower spds 50+ w/ increases intensity with spd & @ 19-25mph. per dealer unable to validate low spd, but noted slight pulse at highway spds. dealer called factory rep. 6/10: dealer advised they went over car's hx with rep, no further action, tires too warn to evaluate. (lf uneven wear; other 3 ok). instructed to buy tires for eval. 6/12 (mge 25087): called toyota; case # 1206120145. 6/13/12 toyota rep advised do not warranty tires, factory rep can't assess w/defective equipment. but, call dealer to see if temp tires could be used for eval since complaint was noted upon taking ownership. immediate options: wait for dealer response, buy tires to see if the vibe is present or contact bridgestone. | |||
| 05/04/2012 | 56000 | ||
| Tl- the contact owns a 2011 toyota camry. while traveling 60 mph, the contact noticed that the ride comfort had began to decline, especially when driving over any type of road bump. the vehicle was taken to the dealer where all four struts were replaced due to a leakage. the current and failure mileages were 56,000. kmj | |||
| 05/04/2012 | 56000 | ||
| Tl- the contact owns a 2011 toyota camry.while traveling 60 mph and occasionally over small bumps in the road the contact noticed that the vehicles ride comfort had began to decline. the vehicle was taken to the dealer where all 4 struts were replaced due to leaking. the current and failure mileages were 56,000. bml | |||
| 11/18/2010 | 1324 | ||
| 1. defective car was delivered by toyota & its dealer to me (customer). ----------- 2. car was not tested by toyota/dealer on tires & vibration/shaking before delivery to customer. ----------- 3. when i complained to toyota, then toyota found the evidence that tires were defective. ----------- 4. because of defective tires fitted by toyota & not tested properly by toyota, damages happened on the overall life span of car - suspension & steering systems. ----------- 5. customer - driving safety was also put on huge risk, as untested car was delivered by toyota. ----------- 6. when i complained to toyota, then toyota found the evidence that tires were defective. ----------- 7. by having that defect in tires, it is obvious that overall life span of car's suspension, struts & steering system has been reduced, because of running with this vibration & shaking. ----------- 8. with this existing defect in car (it was present before delivery & couldn't be fixed by toyota service dealer for 6-months), customer's comfort & driving experience is totally ruined. toyota is responsible for this damage to the customer's driving discomfort & the safety risk of customer's life (while driving the shaking & vibrating car). ----------- 9. now, as your supervisor offered one year of extended warranty on this car. it shows that toyota know it very well that car is so much impacted & now has shorten the life span of car (because of these damaged tires & impacted parts in the car) so toyota is only offering one year of extended service to cover up their mistakes / defects in their quality. ============== - car's shaking (vibrations at both - slow and higher speed), - impacts/damages the life span of steering, suspension and struts, - tires not in balance (wheel balancing was not done by toyota). ============== | |||
| 11/18/2010 | 1324 | ||
| - car's shaking (vibrations at both - slow and higher speed), - impacts/damages the life span of steering, suspension and struts, - tires not in balance (wheel balancing was not done by toyota). ============================= 1.defective car was delivered by toyota & its dealer to me (customer). 2.car was not tested by toyota/dealer on tires & vibration/shaking before delivery to customer. 3.when i complained to toyota, then toyota found the evidence that tires were defective. 4. because of defective tires fitted by toyota & not tested properly by toyota, damages happened on the overall life span of car - suspension & steering systems. 5.customer - driving safety was also put on huge risk, as untested car was delivered by toyota. 6.when i complained to toyota, then toyota found the evidence that tires were defective. 7.by having that defect in tires, it is obvious that overall life span of car's suspension, struts & steering system has been reduced, because of running with this vibration & shaking. 8.with this existing defect in car (it was present before delivery & couldn't be fixed by toyota service dealer for 6-months), customer's comfort & driving experience is totally ruined. toyota is responsible for this damage to the customer's driving discomfort & the safety risk of customer's life (while driving the shaking & vibrating car). 9.now, as your supervisor offered one year of extended warranty on this car. it shows that toyota know it very well that car is so much impacted & now has shorten the life span of car (because of these damaged tires & impacted parts in the car) so toyota is only offering one year of extended service to cover up their mistakes / defects in their quality. | |||
| 12/16/2011 | 1 | 04/01/2010 | |
| 2011 toyota camry. consumer writes in regards to problem with vehicle tires *tgw the consumer stated while having his 25,000 mile service check-up, the dealer informed him the tires needed to be replaced. the dealer stated the tires were showing signs of wear and indicated there was tire cupping as well, which was due to the vehicle being out of alignment. *jb | |||