Consumer Complaints
| Fail date | miles | occurences | Purchase date |
|---|---|---|---|
| WHEELS | |||
| 02/01/2013 | 24000 | ||
| Factory-installed tires were completely and dangerously worn thin at below 24k miles. tire air levels routinely fell below normal but toyota dealership (toyota of dallas) failed to notify at regularly scheduled maintenance appointments of tire wear. | |||
| 09/21/2012 | 20130 | 1 | |
| September 21, 2012 i just happened to check the air pressure of the tires (just bought a new tire pressure gauge) when i noticed a large bulge on the front driver side tire. i took it to my toyota dealer in round rock tx as directed by my service advisor. he indicated that the tire was pinched or hit something to cause this bulge and that toyota would not replace it under its original warranty. he told me to take it to the firestone store next door and see if they would replace it under warranty. needless to say they claimed that it was a road hazard and would not replace it. now, my wife and i have been driving a combined 62 years and we've never had a new tire blister like this, granted all the tire that came with the car and the subsequent ones we purchased were michelins. lot of similar complaints on these bridgestone oem tires on the internet. *tr | |||
| 09/21/2012 | 20130 | ||
| September 21, 2012 i just happened to check the air pressure of the tires (just bought a new tire pressure gauge) when i noticed a large bulge on the front driver side tire. i took it to my toyota dealer in round rock tx as directed by my service advisor. he indicated that the tire was pinched or hit something to cause this bulge and that toyota would not replace it under its original warranty. he told me to take it to the firestone store next door and see if they would replace it under warranty. needless to say they claimed that it was a road hazard and would not replace it. now, my wife and i have been driving a combined 62 years and we've never had a new tire blister like this, granted all the tire that came with the car and the subsequent ones we purchased were michelins. lot of similar complaints on these bridgestone oem tires on the internet. | |||
| 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. | |||
| 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. | |||
| 09/05/2011 | 18000 | ||
| September 14, 2011 dear sir, about 10 days ago, my wife had a blowout of her right front tire with tread separation of the sidewall very near the tire tread. at that time, she also noticed on the right rear tire a large blister in approximately the same area that was bulging out several inches. as directed by toyota i took the 2011 camry le to the local toyota dealer (sparks toyota) in myrtle beach, sc. the service manager (chris ?) indicated that he thought we had hit something that damaged the sidewall on the front and rear tires. he showed me a miniscule scratch on the painted alloy rim that he thought may have been an impact area. i could hardly see it and it was too small to be photographed by my camera. he also said the tire was scuffed slightly but of course it was scuffed after the blowout by sudden deflation. the right rear tire he indicated also had been impacted which i could not see any apparent damage. i spoke with firestone by telephone and they indicated that since the technician had reported sidewall damage the warranty was no good due to impact. quite frankly, we have not hit anything with either tire nor run over or scraped the sidewall on curbing. i feel that both of these tires were defective and toyota and firestone are covering up defective tires that need to be recalled. i am filing a complaint with the ntsb and also with the consumer products safety administration in washington d.c. | |||
| 08/14/2011 | 6700 | ||
| Tl* the contact owns a 2011 toyota camry. the contact stated that while driving approximately 65 mph, he drove over a rock and the front passenger side tire blew. as a result of the blowout, the rim on the front passenger side split in half. the contact installed a spare tire as a temporary remedy. the vehicle was then taken to an authorized dealer and the contact was informed that he would have to pay to have the rim replaced. the rim was replaced. the manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. the failure mileage was 6,700. | |||
| 08/14/2011 | 6700 | ||
| Tl-the contact owns a 2011 toyota camry. the contact stated that while driving approximately 65 mph, he drove over a rock and the front passenger side tire blew. as a result of the blowout, the wheel on the front passenger side split in half. the contact installed a spare tire as a temporary remedy. the vehicle was then taken to an authorized dealer and the contact was informed that he would have to pay to have the wheel replaced. the wheel was replaced. the manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. the failure mileage was 6,700. kmj | |||
| 08/14/2011 | 6700 | ||
| Tl-the contact owns a 2011 toyota camry. the contact stated that while driving approximately 65 mph, he drove over a rock and the front passenger side tire blew out. as a result of the blowout, the wheel on the front passenger side split in half. the contact installed a spare tire as a temporary remedy. the vehicle was then taken to an authorized dealer and the contact was informed that he would have to pay to have the wheel replaced. the wheel was replaced. the manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. the failure mileage was 6,700. sm. | |||
| 02/11/2011 | 6500 | ||
| In aug. of `10 i purchased a 2011 toyota camry. it has about 6500 miles on it and after driving it home from niagara falls yesterday, about 100 miles, i ran it through a car wash. i drove it home about a mile and made two stops on the way. parked in the garage i went out to get the car around noon today (19 hours after the wash). the car would not move as the wheels were all tightly locked. i could not get it to go forward or backward. finally one of the front wheels moved slightly and in so doing the back end of the car went sideways into the garage wall doing minor damage. i did not try it any more until around 24 hours after the car wash and it still is tightly locked and will not move. the temperature last night was about zero and 20 degrees today. i fear if i really force it may do damage to the brakes if it hasn't already. i have driven cars for 60 years, washed many in as cold weather and never had this happen. i have been told it is a design flaw. if i was not retired and had to go to work i would not have been able to move the car. thank you for the opportunity to report this problem. john parsons | |||