Toyota Says It Is Time To Move Past Recalls And Quality Issues - But Will You Ever Trust Them Again?

re: recalls "...for a range of problems including... sticky gas pedals..."

This article just shows you how Accusation + Hype = "Truth", or more accurately, one's beliefs. I just want to point out, yet again, that Toyota's alleged "unintended acceleration" fiasco was finally attributed to "pedal misapplication" (AKA driver error), just like in Audi's famous fiasco. Crime Scene Investigators (CSIs), multiple investigations, multiple government inquisitions, and even NASA themselves (yeah, the rocket scientist guys, who I understand are as smart as... well... rocket scientists) could not find any fault in Toyota vehicles, both in hardware and computer software (NASA personally inspected all the code), that could cause a runaway car. Toyota's agreement to do a recall for the alleged runaway cars was a condition for the Feds to call off their successive witch hunts, which, by the way, never found ANY problem (yet the witch hunts persisted because the feds were sure witches existed, as was the public mob with pitchforks and torches).

In the end, no defect relating to unintended acceleration was ever found (like the Audi story), and the reports of runaway cars suddenly went away (like the Audi story). Still, many people continue to believe an actual problem existed (like the Audi story).

As a parallel, we all know about that one study that proved childhood vaccinations cause autism, right? That's why so many celebrities and laypeople are against vaccinations. How many of us know (a) numerous doctors raised their eyebrows after reviewing the study, (b) it was discovered that the peer review was severely flawed, (c) they discovered the data has been fudged and the methodology was invalid, (d) the medical journal that originally published the paper, once becoming aware of these severe irregularities, retracted the paper from publication and reported on its incredibility (i.e., the study was not credible), (e) deeper investigation showed something far, far beyond human error and incompetence -- the paper was an outright fraud, (f) the doctor who published the paper was discovered to have corporate financial ties that supported the study's completely wrong conclusion (link between childhood vaccinations cause autism). In laymen's terms, the study and the doctor who did it were 100% fraudulent and wrong. And yet, many people today hold the belief that childhood vaccinations cause autism. Their belief is based entirely on this one fraudulent paper and all that has been said about it that supports it.

Meh!

BTW, I'm not a Toyota fan. One of my areas of study is human thought systems, how we come to believe what we believe, and how it determines our perception, choices, and experiences.

Very well written, a tad long but well written. There is this expectation of perfection in corporations, which are made up of people, by people who are imperfect themselves and make mistakes. And they believe anything that is on the net or in the press without thinking it through.

People trust Toyota. End of discussion.

Just a little note on building trust: People don't start by putting a corporation on a "Trust Pedestal" and leaving them there until someone proves they should be toppled. Quite the opposite! Toyota, like every other car company, started many years ago from humble origins. In fact, being from Japan meant they had the extra onerous chore of having to overcome the old "Made In Japan" stigma from the 1960s.

Toyota BUILT trust, slowly, over many years, by working obsessively to create "high quality" products and to provide a superior customer experience. Are they perfect? Are they the best? I'd say probably not. But I, like many people, believe Toyota is a "good" company who creates "good" products and supports them well.

Many people trust Toyota because of their good reputation, not the other way around.

I do trust Toyota and most will continue trusting.

It is going to be on the road longer than anything else except maybe a Honda. So yes I trust them.

@TheSteve Sorry, but I have a very hard time believing that the California Highway Patrol officer - driving his family in a Lexus - would have exhibited 'Driver Error' in causing the horrible crash that took four lives.

The evidence? The 911 cell phone call from his brother in-law, moments before final impact, confirmed that the driver tried EVERYTHING to stop the vehicle.

It is incomprehensible - and grossly ignorant of the facts - to think that the driver alone was at fault.

Certainly, this may have been the case in some of the other crashes. But there is a smoking gun in some of them that simply cannot be ignored.

Regardless of what the defense lawyers argued.

@MBguy: There is a huge difference between what is reported, or what is said, and all the facts. When you assert the driver "tried EVERYTHING", can you provide us with a complete and accurate list of all the things they tried? Of course not, because "I tried everything" is merely a figure of speech, and not a literal description of facts.

I can easily picture a scenario in which a panicked driver *believes* they are standing on the brake pedal, making every effort to slow a runaway car. I can easily picture that driver being frightened out of his mind and not thinking calmly, rationally, methodically. I can easily picture this scenario in which it doesn't occur to the driver that he might be mashing the gas pedal, and so the thought never occurs to him to look down and confirm that his foot is on the brake, or to release the "brake pressure" to see what will happen (because he believes the car will go even faster). Similar things have even happened in aviation when a commercial pilot is so fixated on an instrument, believing it's delivering accurate information (when unknown to him, it's not), that he unwittingly ignores other instruments that are telling the story, and desperately applies "corrective" control input all the way to the crash. This kind of fixation on one's belief, and not being receptive to alternatives, is well known and well documented. It happens!

When there is only an allegation of a fault (the car accelerated all by itself), and there is no (none, nada, zero) physical evidence to support that belief, and all physical data (100%, everything) says the allegation does not match up with the physical evidence, them insisting the allegation must be true because someone believes so, is an extreme case of denial.

Police, CSIs, and all other investigators know if there is ever a conflict between an eyewitness account and they physical evidence, you always go with the physical evidence.

Bland is always trustworthy.