
Ahmed of seaside heights, NJ on March 22, 2010
I leased a 2010 Toyota Camry on 7/27/09 from Hudson Toyota, Jersey City, NJ. In December 2009, my vehicle accelerated by itself and by applying the brakes the vehicle went back to normal. In January 2010, Toyota reported a recall announcing that my vehicle fell under their recall campaign. I have not received any notice letter from Toyota regarding the recall fix. On 2/16/10, when I took my vehicle to my local dealer for 5,000 miles service, I was told then that my vehicle was under the recall campaign and it will take longer to perform the fixes.
Now with all the news has been coming out regarding the lack of Toyota's safety and credibility, and whole other facts: Toyota Manufacturer leased me the 2010 Camry, with full knowledge about the vehicle defect (sudden acceleration) since 2007. An internal memo from the Toyota company showed $100 M savings neglecting the quality and the safety of the American drivers. Toyota's negligence about safety and quality led to 52 deaths. Toyota's to perform recalls on 8.5 million Toyota products are not going to fully solve the sudden acceleration problem according to Toyota's top officials when testified on Capitol Hill.
Toyota's resale values dropped down according to KBB and Edmunds. Toyota's used car value dropped down in the month of February according to Edmunds. Over 60 complaints have been filed to NHTSA about Toyota sudden acceleration for vehicles that the recall campaign has been performed on it.
Over 160 complaints have been filed to NHTSA about 2010 Toyota Camry. Toyota does not know the main reason for the sudden acceleration. It claimed it is not an electronic problem by performing a demonstration to proof Dr. Gilbert test was incorrect but have not submitted any scientific analysis to identify the problem and how it will be overcome.
After Toyota's announcement that it is not electronic, we all watched the 2 Prius and Lexus that accelerated suddenly and the Prius was only recalled for the floor mat. It is obvious that Toyota has no knowledge as to where the problem started and where it will end. More than 90 class-action lawsuits have been filed against Toyota.
The Attorney general of Ocean County, CA is suing Toyota over consumer protection lawsuit. Toyota's US share fell 12 cents on Friday's afternoon trading. Former Toyota's attorney is accusing Toyota of fraud and misleading to the American consumers over Toyota's safety. I am surprised that Toyota never responded when it is calling it false allegations.
On 3/18/10, I sought resolution for my case by trying to exit my fraud lease agreement. I had my arbitration hearing through National center of dispute settlement at Hudson Toyota, Jersey City. I'm trying to have Toyota buyback the vehicle (2010 Camry) and refund me the payments I did since 7/27/09. The gentleman-represented Toyota (Mr. Jose B) claimed he is the region district manager, have no business card and refused to answer safety questions about their product. He was spending most of the hearing time on his Blackberry, the arbitrator (Mr.Elliot N. K) from national center for dispute settlement never commented on Toyota's representative behaviors.
According to NCDS rules and procedures, there shall be no direct communications between any party or representative of a party and any arbitrator other than at the hearing etc. The procedures been violated 3 times at the beginning, during the break that the arbitrator announced for no reason and finally at the end of the hearing where Toyota representative stayed at the hearing room after I walked out. Mr. B claimed that he holds a title of Toyota region district manager and when Mr. K asked him for a business card to proof his identity and the title he holds, Mr. B claimed that he did not has one. In reference to Toyota's BIOS record, the title claimed by Mr. B was not in his name.
When Mr. B had his time to answer my question related to Safety assurance, he made an irrelevant comparison between Toyota vehicle and lightning (nature phenomena). When I commented on his irrelevant answer to my question and then looked at Mr. K, he then decided to divert the discussion to a different topic by asking Mr. B to explain to us the recall. I respected the hearing from the moment I walked in and complied with all the jurisdiction system requirements by turning off my cellular phone and devote my time to an honest and fair debate but unfortunately Mr. K never commented on Mr. B's behavior inside the hearing room where he spent most of his time on his Blackberry. Where Mr. K had to ask Mr. B the same question twice Do you have copy of that paper? as he was busy on his device.
Mr. B refused to answer question about their safety department and when asked to comment on Mr. L's (president and chief operating officer of Toyota Motors Sales, USA, Inc.) testimony on Capital Hill, Mr. B claimed that he is not aware of what been said and he was not prepared for it. I'm still waiting for a decision, which most likely will be in Toyota's favor as the NCDS lacked the transparency in conducting that hearing. Are there any further actions I should take to exit my lease and get a complete refund, as I don't feel safe driving their vehicle?