I am filing a formal complaint regarding a known paint defect on my 2012 Toyota Sequoia, painted in Blizzard Pearl (paint code 070). The paint is peeling and delaminating from multiple areas of the vehicle, including the roof, hood, and rear panels, down to the primer and in some cases bare metal. This is not a cosmetic or age-related issue — it is the result of a manufacturing defect that Toyota has already acknowledged in multiple models and years through Customer Support Program ZKG. This issue affects vehicles painted in Blizzard Pearl and Super White, due to poor adhesion between the basecoat and primer. It is a systemic defect that poses a long-term corrosion and safety concern, particularly as bare metal becomes exposed and vulnerable to rust. Toyota refuses to take responsibility, citing expiration of the CSP in December 2022. However, this defect is not time-sensitive—it emerges gradually and unpredictably over the life of the vehicle. It is unfair to place the burden of repair on consumers when the issue is clearly the result of poor materials and workmanship. I have contacted Toyota and provided photographic evidence. They acknowledged the vehicle is affected by the exact problem covered by the CSP, but declined to offer assistance because the program has technically ended. This is unacceptable, as the issue is part of a known national defect, not an isolated case. There are thousands of documented complaints for this exact same issue on forums, social media, and Toyota owner sites. I am requesting that Toyota: •Acknowledge this as an ongoing manufacturing defect regardless of warranty expiration, •Provide goodwill repair coverage or reimbursement for repainting, •Prevent further corrosion that could compromise vehicle safety and resale value. I am submitting this complaint so the issue can be formally documented and investigated, with the hope that Toyota will be held accountable and other owners will not be left to absorb the
The worst 2012 Toyota Sequoia problems
Ranked by number of owner complaints. Mileage and cost come from what owners wrote.
- Brakes6
- Electrical5
- Driver assistance4
- Body3
- Engine3
Problems by type
Tap a problem to see which part fails, at what mileage and in which other years.
- Brakes6
- Electrical5
- Driver assistance4
- Body3
- Engine3
- Fuel system3
- Acceleration2
- Steering1
- Suspension1
- Transmission1
- Visibility1
- Wheels1
Recalls 3
Steering: hydraulic power assist system
- What is wrong
- Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing (Toyota) is recalling certain 2008-2022 Sequoia and 2007-2021 Tundra vehicles. The power steering gear assembly may have been manufactured incorrectly, which can result in an oil leak.
- Risk
- An oil leak may cause a sudden loss of power steering assist, increasing the risk of a crash.
- Remedy
- Dealers will inspect and replace the power steering gear assembly as necessary, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed on January 21, 2022. Owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1‑800‑331‑4331. Toyota's numbers for this recall are 21TB10 and 21TA10.
Recall number 21V920000 · Recall details
Equipment: other: labels
- What is wrong
- Southeast Toyota is recalling certain model year 2008 and 2010-2013 Toyota Tundra, 2010-2012 Rav4, 2012 Toyota Sequoia, 2010-2011 Toyota Corolla, 2010-2011 Toyota Camry and Camry Hybrid, 2010-2013 Toyota Highlander and Highlander Hybrid, 2010-2013 Toyota FJ Cruiser, 2011 Toyota Land Cruiser, 2010-2013 Toyota Venza, 2010-2011 Toyota 4Runner, 2010-2013 Toyota Tacoma, 2011-2012 Toyota Sienna, 2012 Toyota Prius, 2013 Scion FR-S, 2011 Scion XD, 2011 Scion XB, and 2012 Scion TC vehicles. These vehicles were sold with labels that were outside the allowable one percent of accuracy of actual weight added. Thus, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) Number 110, "Tire Selection and Rims."
- Risk
- An inaccurate label could lead to owners overloading their vehicles and tires. An overloaded vehicle can result in a tire failure which may result in a vehicle crash, personal injury, or property damage.
- Remedy
- Southeast Toyota will notify owners and provide a corrected label with instructions concerning its installation. A small group of the affected vehicles will need additonal remedies which are still being developed. The recall began on May 28, 2013. Owners may contact Southeast Toyota at 1‑800‑301‑6859.
Recall number 13V123000 · Recall details
Seats
- What is wrong
- Southeast Toyota Distributors, LLC (SET) is recalling certain models interspersed through model years 2009 through 2013 as follows: model year 2009-2012 Tacoma, 4Runner, Camry, Camry Hybrid, Prius, and RAV4; model year 2009-2010 Avalon, FJ Cruiser, and Highlander Hybrid; model year 2010-2013 model year Corolla, Sienna and Tundra; model year 2009-2013 Highlander and Venza; model year 2012 Prius V; and model year 2010-2012 Sequoia. During modification by SET to include accessories such as leather seat covers, seat heaters or headrest DVD systems, these vehicles may not have had the passenger seat occupant sensing system calibration tested. Without passing the calibration test, the occupant sensing system may not operate as designed.
- Risk
- If the front passenger seat occupant sensing system is out of calibration, the front passenger airbags may not deploy or they may deploy inappropriately for the passenger's size and position. This could increase the risk of personal injury during the event of a vehicle crash necessitating airbag deployment.
- Remedy
- Southeast Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will test the sensitivity of the occupant detection sensors, and recalibrate them as necessary. The recall began on March 21, 2013. Owners may contact Southeast Toyota at 1‑800‑301‑6859.
Recall number 13V014000 · Recall details
See all 3 recalls for the 2012 Toyota Sequoia
Defect investigations
Electrical overstress
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened this investigation to determine if the failure of airbags to deploy during severe crashes, in certain vehicles, was the result of a safety related defect. During the investigation a complex failure was studied that can result in non-deployment of subject vehicle air bags and other restraint system devices in severe crash events. The subject vehicles may be equipped with an airbag control unit (ACU) for the supplemental restraint system (SRS) Electronic Control Unit (ECU) manufactured by ZF-TRW.  The ECU receives signals from crash sensors mounted in the vehicle and deploys the vehicle air bags and seat belt pretensioners in accordance with manufacturer design specifications.  The ECU in the subject vehicles contains a model DS84 application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) which controls the communication of the crash sensor signal, firing commands (i.e., when to deploy the airbag(s) and/or pretensioners), and fault information (e.g., diagnostic trouble codes). In September 2016, FCA announced recall 16V‑668 for certain model year (MY) 2010 to 2014 Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep products manufactured with the subject ZF-TRW ACU.  In this recall, FCA discussed an EOS condition that resulted in a failure of the subject DS84 ASIC, which caused air bag non-deployment. FCA noted that the defect condition had only been observed in vehicles equipped with sensor harnessing routed across the front of the vehicle.  Other FCA vehicles that also used the subject ACU, but were not equipped with cross-car harnessing, had not experienced EOS failures, despite similar time in service. During the course of this investigation, ODI sent two separate Information Request (IR) letters to six vehicle manufactures (including FCA, Hyundai, Honda, Kia, Mitsubishi, and Toyota) and one IR letter to ZF-TRW. These IR letters resulted in ODI receiving comprehensive data from these manufacturers and suppliers. Studies of this data found that the DS84 ASIC does not have sufficient protection against negative electrical transients or electrical overstress (âEOSâ) that can be generated in certain severe crashes. An electrical transient occurs when the electrical power supplied to a circuit changes momentarily over a short duration of time.  In these severe crash cases, the crash sensors and other powered wiring can be damaged and short circuited so as to create a negative electrical transient of sufficient intensity and duration (that are outside the vehicle manufacturer's specification) to damage the ASIC before the restraint device deployment signal is received by the SRS ECU. This damaged signal can lead to incomplete or nondeployment of the air bags and/or pretensioners.  Airbag non-deployment and/or lack of pretensioner operation can increase the risk or severity of injury in a crash.A total of 8 fatalities and 14 injuries were associated with known EOS events. The common element in all investigated manufacturers vehicles is the SRS ECU containing a DS84 ASIC manufactured by ZF-TRW. The risk associated with the ASIC is equally shared among all OEMS involved in the investigation. The actual real-world risk can be mitigated by other factors which were assessed by ODI during this investigation. The first mitigating factor involves protections built into the ACU design which protect the DS84 ASIC from damage. There are multiple strategies and levels of protection employed by different OEMs that provide effective EOS mitigation. The two most common strategies at the ACU level are circuit protection diodes on the remote senor signal lines, and current limiting resistors that protect critical components. The second mitigating factor is found at the vehicle level and involves the location and routing of the wires leading from the crash sensors to the SRS ECU. If the wires are well protected in a crash and are not routed with other power wires carrying large currents, the risk for an EOS event is significantly reduced or eliminated. These design specific factors combine to produce a spectrum of risk for the vehicles equipped with ACUs using the DS84 ASIC. Given the many of years of field exposure, it is possible to divide the subject population into two groups; vehicles which have experienced EOS events, and vehicles which have not experienced EOS field events. Four of the six OEMs involved in this investigation have experienced EOS field events on at least one of their models equipped with a DS84 ASIC. All vehicle models (including the Toyota models identified in the Failure Report Summary of the opening resume for this investigation) with field events have been recalled. In an abundance of caution, ODI kept this investigation open five years to monitor field performance and did not identify any field events on vehicles not included in existing safety recalls. Given the spectrum of risk identified in this investigation and that all vehicles with a demonstrated unreasonable risk have been recalled, ODI is closing this investigation. ODI is closing this investigation with the following manufacturer safety recalls: 16V‑668, 18E-043, 18V‑137, 18V‑363, and 20V‑024. With the recall actions taken by the subject vehicle and equipment manufacturers, this investigation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by the federal safety agency that a safety-related defect does not exists on other model or model year vehicles outside of the recall scopes. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.
EA19001
Technical service bulletins for the 2012 Toyota Sequoia 322
Bulletins tell dealers how to fix known problems. A warranty extension means the manufacturer pays for that repair for longer.
- Some 2005 – 2026 Toyota vehicles that have undergone water intrusion may exhibit a condition in which a...
- Acid rain results from rainwater or other airborne moisture that become acidic due to industrial chemical...
- To prevent brake rotor rust from forming during transportation and storage, wheel film will be used...
- The condition known as acid rain is caused by airborne chemicals or particles in the atmosphere, which mix...
- Toyota vehicles are currently protected with RapgardTM protective film designed to protect the horizontal...
- Vehicles may occasionally be subjected to contamination by airborne iron particles shed from railroad...
- Some 2005 – 2024 Toyota vehicles that have undergone water intrusion may exhibit a condition in which a...
- This Service Bulletin provides updated non-electric water pump leak inspection and diagnostic tips for...
- Toyota vehicles are currently protected with RapgardTM protective film designed to protect the horizontal...
- This is to advise of various price adjustments that will affect Toyota Genuine Motor Oil and Long Life...
2012 Toyota Sequoia fuel economy
Official EPA estimates in miles per gallon (MPGe for electric). Ranges cover trims that share the same engine.
| Engine | Drive | City | Highway | Combined |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4.6L 8‑cyl | RWD | 14 | 20 | 16 |
| 5.7L 8‑cyl | RWD | 13 | 18 | 15 |
| 4.6L 8‑cyl | 4WD | 13 | 18 | 15 |
| 5.7L 8‑cyl | 4WD | 13 | 17-18 | 14-15 |
What 2012 Toyota Sequoia owners say
Most recent owner complaints, unedited.
Toyota had a recall on fuel pumps in 2020 mine was not part of the recall even though mine went bad and had to be replaced in February 2020. Now with another fuel pump recall issued in January 2025 I am also told mine is not part if the recall however I am having issues related to the fuel pump once again causing my engine to stall. Can someone please look into this as I feel my car should be part of that recall for another failing fuel pump. I do have receipt of repair in 2020 by First Class HALT I can provide if needed. My engine is stalling, not cycling fuel properly and has left me stranded. Then other times fires up normally.
The rear door latch for the lift gate malfunctioned and wouldn’t release. The power motor for the lift gate continued to work, trying to lift the rear gate. The result was bending the left gate hinge and hinge mounting area. The gate latch was corroded, but is supposed to be protected from the elements! The lift gate had to be taken apart from the inside with a number of parts having to be damaged/destroyed to open it as there was no other way to release the rear door latch (no manual release). The dealer didn’t have the rear door latch in initially in stock when I needed it because they’ve never replaced one for corrosion until now. The damage occurred after I left the dealership, but before I could get the part ordered and scheduled back in the dealership. Toyota has provided $400 of “goodwill” for what turned out to be a $1,400 repair for an item that shouldn’t ever need to be replaced!
Lower ball joint on drivers side sheared off.
Vehicle has been rusting only on the rear hatch since 2019. It's rusting around the wiper assembly and near the latch assembly. We had it repaired once but it's worse now. I've noticed many owners on line complaining of this
Toyota has developed what is becoming an infamous oil leak on their 5.7 v8 engines that is coming from the camshaft tower (camshaft housing sub assembly). Apparently in production they use a silicone where this attaches to the head and in many cases they did not get enough silicone. Research has shown me that many, many of these have this issue and that when the vehicle is fairly new that toyota will stand behind it in limited cases. My vehicle has 150,000 miles on it so they will not do anything to stand behind it and claimed to not be aware of the problem. I have contacted several dealerships and all of them stated they were well aware of the problem. I believe this to be a safety issue as mine has started to leak, it does so on to the exhaust manifold and has a strong burning smell each time I drive even if only a short distance. This could easily cause a fire. While I am not aware of any of these causing a fire it is a very common issue to the point that I found a law firm that was looking to do a class action lawsuit because of it. I can provide pictures if needed but they can be seen all over the internet.
I have a safety issue with my vehicle that toyota is not covering under warranty and I think it should be a recall. I have had 3 door lock actuators fail and the doors will not lock or unlock automatically. You can not open the door. In the event of a crash you cannot open the door safely to exit the vehicle in a timely manner. This is not safe. The vehicle is less than 5 years old and I don't think this kind of safety part should be that prone to fail.
Electric door locks failed on all 4 doors. Two were replaced by toyota under warranty. They made me pay to replace one and they refused to replace the other. Now the drivers door lock has failed again. The drivers door will not lock or unlock when using the fob. The rear drivers side door will not lock or unlock using the fob or any other lock / unlock switch in the car. This means the car cannot be opened using the fob at all. It's a safety hazard and toyota will not take responsibility to replace them.
Tl* the contact owns a 2012 toyota sequoia. The contact stated that the wiring on the vehicle was chewed due to rodents. The side air bags were also chewed out. The vehicle was taken to a dealer where it was diagnosed that the wiring contained soy products and needed to be replaced the vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 70,000. The VIN was not available. Updated 03/01/17*lj
Tl* the contact owns a 2012 toyota sequoia. While driving at approximately 15 MPH, the brake pedal was depressed but the vehicle accelerated without warning. While driving 60 MPH, the accelerator pedal was depressed and the vehicle decreased in speed. The contact pulled over and turned the ignition to the off position. The vehicle was towed to a dealer where it was diagnosed that the throttle body failed and needed to be replaced. The vehicle was repaired. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 65,000.
Compare the 2012 Toyota Sequoia
Sequoia vs Chevrolet TahoeSequoia vs Ford ExpeditionSequoia vs Chevrolet SuburbanSequoia vs GMC YukonSequoia vs Nissan Armada
Other model years
2001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
Questions about the 2012 Toyota Sequoia
Is the 2012 Toyota Sequoia reliable?
Owners have filed 20 complaints about the 2012 Toyota Sequoia, close to a typical Sequoia model year.
What is the 2012 Toyota Sequoia year score?
The 2012 Toyota Sequoia scores 74 out of 100 (average). The score compares it with the other model years of the Toyota Sequoia: 75 is a typical year, 50 means twice the usual complaints, and serious complaints and recalls lower it.
What is the most common problem with the 2012 Toyota Sequoia?
Brakes, with 6 complaints, typically around 58,000 miles. Next is electrical (5).
How many recalls does the 2012 Toyota Sequoia have?
3 recalls, covering steering, equipment and seats.
What year does the Toyota Sequoia have bad brakes?
The Toyota Sequoia model years with the most brakes complaints are 2002 (192 complaints), 2001 (170 complaints) and 2003 (155 complaints).
What gas mileage does the 2012 Toyota Sequoia get?
Official estimates for the 2012 Toyota Sequoia range from 14 to 16 mpg combined. The most efficient version (4.6L 8-cyl, RWD) gets 14 city and 20 highway.
VIN decoder
See the problems and recalls for an exact car
Buying a used 2012 Toyota Sequoia?
Check the exact car before you pay: accidents, salvage or flood titles, odometer readings and previous owners.
Check its history