Three times a year AutoFinanceNews.net and sister publication Auto Finance News conduct the Auto Finance Forecast, which gauges activities and sentiments in the automotive lending and leasing market. How much will originations grow this year? Which direction are delinquencies headed? Are profits on track to climb?
Complete the short survey by Jan. 21 and you’ll be entered into a drawing for a $50 giftcard to Amazon.com.
I’m wondering how long it will take for some enterprising reporter, or politician, to connect these current issues with the 2007 class action settlement for engine sludge in Camry, Solara, Avalon. Ceclica, Highlander, Lexus ES and Lexus RX and the braking system problems in the 2001 and 2002 Sequoia. In all of these instances, the new issues and the older issues, Toyota has aggressively fought to quash liability for fixing the issues.
For example, in the 2001 Sequoia cases, after conistent complaints about the breaking system not stopping the Sequoia in a safe distance, Toyota finally issued a TSB (Technical Service Bulletin) to their dealers about the problem but never advertised it to their customers. The TSB was only to be applied if the customer continued to complain after three visits to the dealership. At that point, part of the front braking system was to be replaced. The entire front braking system was only to be replaced if the customer continued to complain. In many cases, Toyota dealers would only replace the braking system if the customer paid for it. Those customers were subsequently reimbursed only if they found out about the TSB and demanded a refund. The issue turned out to be caused by Toyota using a Tundra braking system in the much heavier Sequoia, resulting in an inabilbity for the system to handle the heavier vehicle, particularlly under heavy braking. Very little about this made it into the media at the time.
There was a little more media coverage about the engine sludge problem becuase it resulted in a settlement of a class action lawsuit. Again, years of customer complaints about excessive oil consumption, smoking and complete engine failure. Again, Toyota attempted to put the liability back on the customer, saying the customers clearly hadn’t changed oil as required, used sub-standard oil and filters, etc. However, it came out in the lawsuit that a plug was not being removed after the engine casting process, preventing the free flow of oil throughout the engine.
Now to your question — one big investigative report showing a decade of quality problems combined with an aggressive corporate ‘blame it on the customer’ campaign, and I think Toyota’s vaunted reputation for quality could be mortally wounded — and along with that, its resale values and new vehicle sales.