Toyota Motor Sales, Inc
Ripoff sludge - inclined vehicles include 1997 vehicles, Toyota knows this and Not Doing Enough! They Must Do More!

Toyota "Customer Support Program" Enough? You Be the Judge!

In the interest of encouraging open debate and examination of all sides, I'd like to see Toyota owners closely examine the sludge matter and the responses from Toyota. Debate is good; questions are good. Honesty is good.

As you may know, first it was the owner's fault. Well, it still is, according to Toyota, even though test results will not be given to the owners to prove this. BUT, there is a new and improved 'Special Policy Adjustment' in effect for the vehicles in question, only they now call it the "Customer Support Program."

The sludge-inclined vehicles include the 1997 Camry, Sienna, Avalon, Solara, Celica, Highlander, and Lexus ES 300 and RX300 models. The engines involved are the 1MZ 3.0L V-6 and 5SFE 2.2L inline-4.

The 'old' policy said you had to show ONE RECEIPT in a year's time to get a ONE-TIME repair for sludge. The repair was then good for one year.

The 'new and improved' policy as shown to owners now states that you must show receipts which prove regular maintenance was done. This is NOT the liberal policy above which asks that only one receipt be shown. This requirement is the SAME as was ORIGINALLY required when the Toyota dealerships and Toyota Motor Sales, Inc., were DENYING claims made under the new vehicle warranty.

While you must show all these receipts, you are supposedly covered for a period of eight years from the date of purchase of the vehicle.

My question is this... IS this enough for the owners now? Does the policy create enough security for owners to comfortably drive their vehicles without worry?

Having asked this, HOW does this policy benefit those who in desperation SOLD or TRADED-IN their vehicles prior to the initiation of the first SPA policy? Did these owners suffer some financial loss due to the widespread knowledge of the problem within the industry?

Now, the original warranty had been denied often in the presence of oil change receipts. Many owners have argued they do not know what the CORRECT oil change interval is. WHICH interval will Toyota hold its owners accountable for... The one in the owner's manual OR the one that the dealerships say is correct (e.G. Every 3,000 miles)? Since this is a 'policy' and not a warranty, how will the owner's LEGAL rights be preserved? Does the policy SPELL OUT what the required oil change interval is?

What about the oil change facility? Toyota told many owners that the quick lube oil change facilities may not have really changed the oil... Or that there may have been problems with the type of oil and/or filter. What are the requirements under this new policy? Is this spelled out as well?

We know that legally, Toyota cannot require this service to be done exclusively at its facilities. We know that legally, Toyota cannot CHANGE the oil change interval requirements UNLESS it petitions the EPA to do so and recertifies its vehicles (you can get this information from the EPA under the Freedom of Information Act). We know that this places Toyota in a difficult situation.

How about changing the NAME of the problem? We have recently heard that the dealerships are calling this problem 'Engine Oil Build Up' instead of 'oil gelling' or 'sludge.' Remember, it was 'sludge' when the owners were faced with the repair bills and then it became 'oil gelling' when it became a public concern.

IF the name is changed, will the problem STILL be covered under the policy? What if the owner doesn't know about the problem and has not received either letter? This seems to be the case currently... We don't have any indication of how long this will continue.

Since there are so many SECONDARY PROBLEMS related to the oil sludge problem, what will happen if a diagnosis is made regarding a secondary problem? What safeguards are in place to prevent this from happening? I have been told that the dealerships are to blame for the first problem... A matter of communication. What is to prevent this from continuing? Is this a way for TMS, Inc. To escape blame?

How about the issue of reoccurrence? We have been told that if the problem recurs, it will be covered. What if it recurs in a slightly different way... For instance, different components are affected? Does the new policy SPELL OUT how this will be handled? Are the owners STILL faced with a 'hit or miss' case-by-case basis assessment?

Here are the questions for the affected owners to consider in this sludge matter:

1) Is this policy sufficient for the your peace of mind?

2) If not, why? And what would be sufficient for you?

3) Do you think the ORIGINAL WARRANTY should be reinstated? OR the CSP (new SPA) policy extended?

3) Do you want Toyota to show proof that this problem is caused by owner neglect?

4) Do you want to see Toyota's (assuming it has done this) proof of engine testing to rule out mechanical or design problems?

5) Do you think there should be a definitive root cause found?

6) Do you think there should be a permanent fix created for ALL the vehicles in question? (We know there will be changes on the new vehicles.)

7) Do you think that Toyota should put in new engines in ALL the vehicles which show this problem? (We know that currently some repairs are being done with rare engine rebuilding... While engine rebuilding was common when the OWNERS had to pay for the repairs.)

7) Do you think that Toyota should RECALL these vehicles and permanently repair them?

8) Do you think that Toyota should repurchase these vehicles in the event that a permanent fix is not possible?

9) What other questions do you wish to add to this survey? All bases should be covered.

We know that in an ideal world, Toyota would do the same thing for all the owners and put them back in the position they were in when they first purchased their new (or used) vehicles. We are not asking for any more or less than what we are entitled to under the federal warranty laws.

Some have said that Toyota has been overly generous with the announcement of this new CSP (SPA) policy. BUT, as we have seen, the letters for this new policy seem to be scarce. Many haven't even received the FIRST letter. Some owners have had trouble getting repairs done under the new policy, too. Does Toyota deserve the credit BEFORE its actions are verified? Is the jury still out on the implementation of this new policy?

Report your experiences here. Express your concerns. Let Toyota know how you would like it to respond further to ensure that peace of mind it claims it wants you to have.

If you are also a victim of Toyota please e-mail me at cblake@erols.com only after you have filed your own consumer complaints, so we can work together.

Charlene
Vienna, Virginia

Company: Toyota Motor Sales, Inc
Country: USA
State: California
City: Torrance
Address: 19001 S. Western Ave

  <     >