Toyota Must Face Warranty Claims Over Allegedly Rusty SUV Frames

A South Carolina man may pursue corrosion-related warranty claims against Toyota Motor Corp. on behalf of a proposed class of SUV owners, even though his express warranty expired long before his vehicle became undriveable, a federal court in the state ruled.

Gary Weinreich adequately pleaded that the express warranty’s time limits are unconscionable, given his allegation that the automaker and its U.S. affiliate knew about inadequate rust protection when he bought his 4-Runner Sport in 2005, the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina said.

His claims are also timely under state law, the court said.

Weinreich alleges mechanics saw “severe” undercarriage rust on his SUV in 2011 and 2013 but didn’t indicate “structural or safety” concerns, according to the court. In 2017, a mechanic told him his vehicle had frame corrosion and that Toyota had a customer support program for corrosion issues in other models, he says.

He was driving the 4-Runner in May 2018 when the front right control arm, which is part of the suspension system, broke off the corroded frame, causing him to lose control, he alleges. A mechanic “declared the vehicle unrepairable and inoperable,” he says in the complaint.

Toyota sought to have the case dismissed under the state’s six-year statutes of limitations for warranty claims, and its three-year SOL for tort claims, respectively.

But it was only in 2017 that Weinreich learned he had rust on the frame of the vehicle, the alleged defect involved, the court said.

The express and implied warranty claims may proceed based on his allegation that Toyota “knew, at the time of sale, that the defect existed and would not manifest until after the warranty expired, and that Toyota was on notice based on issues with the frames of prior car models,” Judge Richard Mark Gergel said.

The court threw out a claim for negligent misrepresentation and declined Weinreich’s request to add negligence and strict liability claims, all based on South Carolina’s economic loss rule, which bars tort claims for a product’s damage to itself.

Bell Legal Group represented Weinreich.

Bowman and Brooke LLP represented Toyota.

The case is Weinreich v. Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc., 2019 BL 420582, D.S.C., No. 2:18-3294-RMG, docketed 11/1/19.