Lexus ES330 Problems by year

standard operating resistance, causing the outer ring of the pulley to immediately begin slipping against its internal torsional rubber damper. This resulted in a chronic, severe rotational squeak during startup and accessory engagement due to the structural failure of the pulley's vulcanized rubber layer. Why this needs federal review: NHTSA Campaign 11V539000 strictly cuts off coverage for the 2005 Lexus ES 330 at a production date of late March 2005. My vehicle was manufactured in May 2005 - mere weeks outside the boundary - and features the identical 3.3L 3MZ-FE V6 powertrain and pulley assembly. The vehicle has only 82,750 miles and a meticulously documented 5-to-7-year service history showing proper maintenance. Because this component failed identically under standard operating loads, it is clearly the defective batch of adhesive extended past the manufacturer's assumed cutoff. The campaign must be expanded to cover later 2005 production dates.

later admitted via text message: "I did not do your rear links... you didn't pay for rear links." The dealership has refused to refund this money despite the written confession. 2. PROPERTY DESTRUCTION During the attempted repair, the technician used excessive force and bent the vehicle's "wheel rod" (Tie Rod), destroying the steering geometry. The technician later admitted to a witness that he was fired for "bending the wheel rod" on my vehicle. 3. RECKLESS ENDANGERMENT (SAFETY VIOLATION) The dealership released the vehicle to my family on Oct 26, representing it as "safe." After a near-miss incident on [[redacted]] where the steering failed at highway speeds, Management admitted to my wife that they knew the vehicle "might be lucky to make it to the North Side" before failing. They knowingly released a vehicle with a critical safety defect onto a public highway. 4. RETALIATION When I contacted Toyota Corporate to complain, the technician texted me: "You blew up the spot coming through Toyota... they can't help you." The dealership then revoked a "cure offer" (towing/rental) purely as retaliation for my consumer complaint. ATTACHED EVIDENCE: Please see the attached "Master Case Brief" and "Exhibit A" (PDFs). These contain the full legal timeline and the Text Message Logs where the employee confesses to the theft and damage. I have served the dealership a Notice of Intent to Sue. I am requesting an immediate investigation into this franchise's billing fraud INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

about to test drive and bring it up"Screenshot from "Got the rear brakes done" through "bring it up."Text 3 - Apology and refund offerFind this [[redacted]] ciah: "[redacted] bro it was smooth when I test drove it. I can't do anything until 5 tomorrow. I'll send your money back too, I apologize about that."I definitely got everything tight... If you can pull up at 5 tomorrow I'll check it over."Screenshot that entire message.Text 4 - "Through me not Toyota / blew up the spot / arm and a leg"Find the long message from later:"At home, brother you did work through me not Toyota. They can't help you with anything..."You blew up the spot coming through Toyota. I can't even have your car in the shop now without you going through them first and charging you an arm and a leg."I tried to do something nice for you... you ha [[redacted]] -old vehicle..." INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)