Reports submitted to NHTSA by owners and drivers, shown in full
Data refreshed
Complaints on fileComplaints are reports submitted to NHTSA by owners and drivers. NHTSA does not verify most reports before publishing them, and a complaint does not establish that a defect exists. Volume is influenced by how many of a vehicle were sold, how long it has been on the road, and how much attention an issue has received.
6
Latest Oct 6, 2013
Crash or fire reportedComplaints whose submitter recorded that a crash or a fire occurred. These are the reporter's own answers on the NHTSA form, not verified findings.
1
Filed in the last 12 monthsReports filed with NHTSA in the trailing 365 days. Recent volume reflects attention and vehicle age as much as anything else.
0
Reports on file since Oct 17, 2002
What this page shows
Our database holds 6 NHTSA owner-reported complaints for the 2002 Toyota Prerunner. Each one is a report filed by an owner or driver and published by NHTSA without most of them being verified. A complaint is not a confirmed defect, not a recall and not a manufacturer bulletin. Narratives are shown exactly as filed.
Complaints are reports submitted by owners and drivers to NHTSA. They are not verified and do not establish that a defect exists.
Complaints, most recent first
Showing 1–6 of 6
Body & structure
Filed Oct 6, 2013
I HAD MY VEHICLE IN FOR SERVICE ON 30 SEPTEMBER 2013 AT WHICH TIME THE VEHICLE FRAME WAS INSPECTED AND DETERMINED TO HAVE PERFORATIONS DUE TO RUST. TOYOTA INFORMED ME THAT THE VEHICLE IS UNSAFE TO DRIVE AND THAT THEY WOULD NOT REPAIR/REPLACE THE FRAME BECAUSE I HAD NOT HAD RUST PROOFING APPLIED DURING A CUSTOMER SUPPORT PROGRAM THAT BEGAN IN LATE 2008 AND ENDED SEPTEMBER 2011. THE PURPOSE OF THE CUSTOMER SUPPORT PROGRAM WAS TO INSPECT THE FRAME OF THE TRUCK AND REPLACE IT IF RUST CAUSED PERFORATIONS OR TO APPLY RUST COATING IF IT PASSED INSPECTION. I NEVER RECEIVED NOTICE OF THE CUSTOMER SUPPORT PROGRAM. HOWEVER, BY CHANCE, I DID HAVE THE FRAME INSPECTED BY TOYOTA ON NOVEMBER 25, 2009 AT WHICH TIME THE FRAME PASSED INSPECTION, BUT TOYOTA FAILED TO APPLY THE REQUIRED RUST PROOF COATING OR TO INFORM ME OF THE ONGOING CUSTOMER SUPPORT PROGRAM. HAD I KNOWN ABOUT THE CUSTOMER SUPPORT PROGRAM, I WOULD HAVE DEMANDED TOYOTA APPLY THE COATING. SUBSEQUENTLY, I HAD MY TRUCK IN FOR MAINTENANCE AT TOYOTA ON APRIL 7, 2010 AND MAY 24, 2010 AT WHICH TIME THEY ONCE AGAIN DID NOT INFORM ME OF THE CUSTOMER SUPPORT PROGRAM. TOYOTA HAD THREE CHANCES TO INFORM ME OF THE CUSTOMER SUPPORT PROGRAM WHILE I HAD MY VEHICLE IN FOR MAINTENANCE AND THEY DID NOT DO SO. NOW I HAVE A TRUCK THAT IS UNSAFE TO DRIVE AND THAT I CAN'T GET REPAIRED BECAUSE TOYOTA BLAMES ME FOR NOT ADHERING TO THE CUSTOMER SUPPORT PROGRAM RULES OF WHICH I NEVER HAD ANY KNOWLEDGE. TOYOTA HAD MY CURRENT ADDRESS AND TELEPHONE NUMBER DURING THE ENTIRE PERIOD OF THE CUSTOMER SUPPORT PROGRAM AND NEVER BOTHERED TO NOTIFY ME. IN MY OPINION, THEY DID NOT DO THEIR DUE DILIGENCE IN INFORMING CUSTOMERS OF THE PROGRAM AND SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE TO REPLACE THE FRAME ON THE TRUCKS. I DID FILE A CUSTOMER COMPLAINT WITH TOYOTA BUT THEY REFUSED TO PROVIDE ANY ASSISTANCE IN REPAIRING MY TRUCK. *TR
NHTSA ID
10546948
Incident
Sep 30, 2013
Mileage
81,859 mi
Body & structureSeat beltsSuspension
Filed Sep 14, 2013
I RECEIVED NOTICE FROM TOYOTA OF POSSIBLE EXCESSIVE FRAME RUST YEARS AGO . (ABOUT 2007) I DID THE INSPECTION MYSELF AND THOUGHT FRAME WAS GOOD. DID NOT TAKE TO DEALER FOR INSPECTION . IN SEPTEMBER OF 2013 I FIND OUT THAT TOYOTA IS NOT RESPONSIBLE AND I MISSED THE DEADLINE. I THINK I UNDERSTAND THAT SINCE IT WAS NOT A NHTSA ISSUED RECALL, THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO PUT A EXPIRATION DATE ON THE RECALL . THE BOTTOM LINE IS I GOOFED UP . BUT THERE STILL EXISTED THOUSANDS OF TACOMAS AND TUNDRAS ON THE ROADS TODAY THAT ARE A HAZARD TO THE DRIVER AND ALL OTHERS AROUND THEM . WHY DIDN'T THE NHTSA ISSUE A MANDATORY RECALL ? *TR
NHTSA ID
10543571
Incident
Sep 2, 2013
Mileage
104,000 mi
AirbagsSeat belts
Filed Dec 22, 2003
Crash reported1 injury reported
CONSUMER LOST CONTROL OF VEHICLE AND HIT A TREE HEAD ON. UPON IMPACT, NEITHER DRIVER'S SIDE NOR PASSENGER'S SIDE AIR BAGS DEPLOYED. ALSO DRIVER'S SIDE SEAT BELT DIDN'T RETRACT. AS A RESULT, CONSUMER'S HEAD HIT THE WINDSHIELD. CONSUMER RECEIVED 17 STITCHES. *AK
NHTSA ID
10051895
Incident
Dec 3, 2003
Mileage
43,000 mi
Transmission
Filed Jun 24, 2003
VEHICLE SURGES AS IF AUTO TRANSMISSION IS DOWN SHIFTING ABRUPTLY WHEN COASTING TO A STOP AT AN INTERSECTION AND WHILE CREEPING IN TRAFFIC (AFTER REMOVING FOOT FROM BRAKE PEDAL ALLOWING VEHICLE TO ROLL AFTER COMING TO COMPLETE STOP). PROBLEM ALSO OCCURS INTERMITTENTLY WHEN PROCEEDING FROM A STOP AT INTERSECTIONS. PROBLEM OCCURS W/IN THE 1 TO 5 MPH RANGE. TRANSMISSION SHIFTS SMOOTHLY UP THROUGH ALL GEARS AS VEHICLE ACCELERATES WHEN DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY. MULTIPLE DEALERSHIPS STATED THAT THEY ARE UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM AND THAT NO TROUBLE WAS FOUND. PROBLEM OCCURRING MORE FREQUENTLY NOW. CONCERNED ABOUT POSSIBLE TRANSMISSION FAILURE. *JB
NHTSA ID
10023680
Incident
Jun 24, 2003
Mileage
3,000 mi
Transmission
Filed Dec 29, 2002
500 MILE SERVICE REPORTED TRANSMISSION JUMPING FROM FIRST TO SECOND. FIRST MACHANIC SAID NEEDS NEW TRANSMISSION. GOT TRUCK BACK TRUCK WAS JUMPING ALL OVER THE ROAD ON BUMPS, MECHANIS SAID NEEDS TWO SHOCKS ONE FRON AND ONE BACK., AND NOW IT DOESN'T NEED TRANSMISSION, TRUCK STILL JUMPS FROM FIRST TO SECOND.
NHTSA ID
10000419
Incident
Dec 17, 2000
Transmission
Filed Oct 17, 2002
CONSUMER NOTICE WHEN COMING TO A COMPLETE STOP SHIFTING UNDER VEHICLE. DEALER HAS BEEN CONTACTED AND SERVICE BUT CANT FIX PROBLEM. PLEASE PROVIDE FURTHER INFORMATION.
NHTSA ID
8020994
Higher-selling and older vehicles accumulate more reports. Counts are not failure rates and are not directly comparable between vehicles that sold in very different numbers.