BBB Logo

Better Business Bureau ®
Start With Trust®
In The Snake River Region

BBB Business Reviews may not be reproduced for sales or promotional purposes.

BBB Accreditation

A BBB Accredited Business since

BBB has determined that Bronco Motors Nissan meets BBB accreditation standards, which include a commitment to make a good faith effort to resolve any consumer complaints. BBB Accredited Businesses pay a fee for accreditation review/monitoring and for support of BBB services to the public.

BBB accreditation does not mean that the business' products or services have been evaluated or endorsed by BBB, or that BBB has made a determination as to the business' product quality or competency in performing services.

Reason for Rating

BBB rating is based on 16 factors. Get the details about the factors considered.

Factors that raised the rating for Bronco Motors Nissan include:

  • Length of time business has been operating.
  • Complaint volume filed with BBB for business of this size.
  • Response to 2 complaint(s) filed against business.
  • Resolution of complaint(s) filed against business.
  • BBB has sufficient background information on this business.

Industry Ratings Comparison | Chart


Customer Complaints Summary Read complaint details

2 complaints closed with BBB in last 3 years | 0 closed in last 12 months
Complaint Type Total Closed Complaints
Advertising/Sales Issues 1
Billing/Collection Issues 0
Delivery Issues 0
Guarantee/Warranty Issues 0
Problems with Product/Service 1
Total Closed Complaints 2

Customer Reviews Summary Read customer reviews

0 Customer Reviews on Bronco Motors Nissan
Customer Experience Total Customer Reviews
Positive Experience 0
Neutral Experience 0
Negative Experience 0
Total Customer Reviews 0

Additional Information

top
BBB file opened: January 10, 2003 Business started: 09/01/1971 Business started locally: 09/01/1971
Licensing

This business is in an industry that may require professional licensing, bonding or registration. BBB encourages you to check with the appropriate agency to be certain any requirements are currently being met.

These agencies may include:

Department of Motor Vehicles
ID

Business Management
Mr. Grant L. Petersen, President/CEO Mr. Brian Mitchell, General Manager
Contact Information
Principal: Mr. Grant L. Petersen, President/CEO
Business Category

AUTO DEALERS-NEW CARS


Additional Locations

  • 15885 Idaho Center Blvd.

    Nampa, ID 83687 (208) 345-8510 (208) 459-8511

  • 1
X

What is a BBB Business Review?

We offer free reviews on businesses that include background, licensing, consumer experience and other information such as governmental actions that is known to BBB. These reviews are provided for businesses that are BBB accredited and also for businesses that are not BBB accredited.

X

About BBB Business Review Content & Services:

Some Better Business Bureaus offer additional content & services in BBB Business Reviews.
The additional content & services are typically regional in nature or, in some cases, a new product or service that is being tested prior to a more general release.
Not all enhanced content & services are available at all Better Business Bureaus.

Professional AffiliationsX
X

Types of Complaints Handled by BBB

BBB handles the following types of complaints between businesses and their customers so long as they are not, or have not been, litigated:

  • Advertising or Sales
  • Billing or Collection
  • Problems with Products or Services
  • Delivery
  • Guarantee or Warranty

We do not handle workplace disputes, discrimination claims or claims about the quality of health or legal services.

X

BBB Complaint Process

Your complaint will be forwarded to the business within two business days. The business will be asked to respond within 14 days, and if a response is not received, a second request will be made. You will be notified of the business's response when we receive it (or notified that we received no response). Complaints are usually closed within 30 business days.

X

What is BBB Advertising Review?

BBB promotes truth in advertising by contacting advertisers whose claims conflict with the BBB Code of Advertising. These claims come to our attention from our internal review of advertising, consumer complaints and competitor challenges. BBB asks advertisers to prove their claims, change ads to make offers more clear to consumers, and remove misleading or deceptive statements.

X

What government actions does BBB report on?

BBB reports on known significant government actions involving business' marketplace conduct.

X

Thank you for your feedback!

Help us improve by taking our survey.

X

BBB Reporting Policy

As a matter of policy, BBB does not endorse any product, service or business.

BBB Business Reviews are provided solely to assist you in exercising your own best judgment. Information in this BBB Business Review is believed reliable but not guaranteed as to accuracy.

BBB business Reviews generally cover a three-year reporting period. BBB Business Reviews are subject to change at any time.

X

Additional Phone Numbers

  • (208) 345-8510(Phone)
X

Additional Email Addresses

Find a LocationX

  Change Location
Show Only Accredited Locations

This survey does not collect personally identifiable information

Complaint Detail(s)

10/3/2012 Advertising/Sales Issues | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: On June 6th 2012 the drive shaft of our 2004 Escalde that we bought through Bronco Motors Nissan broke as we pulled into the doctors office. We did NOT drive the vehicle from that spot and had it towed. The tow company forced it to drive and after they backed up and straightened back up the wheel it started leaking fluid badly. It sat at Bronco Motors for 10 days withtout them being able to say what exactly was wrong with it and what if any damage the towing company did in addition to the drive shaft being broken. After not getting any word or any info what so ever from Bronco Motors we had the vehicle towed to Edmark where within 2 days it was fixed and at least driveable, they were not able to state that the two company caused extra damage because they did not know what was all done with it while it was at Bronco Motors, after they called them several times and wherent given any information at all, they said because of that they could only say the extra damage to the sensor might have been done by the tow company. We have had several damages noted on the car but have not been able to get any documenttation from Bronco Motors. When we originaly bought the vehicle we asked for a ******, where given another report and told it said the same as what the ****** would. After pulling the ****** ourself found that infact it was NOT. It had been in an addicent and was only ever sold from dealer to dealer in auctions from MA to ID. We are told by our salesman the vehilce was in excellent shape but that since the repair department was closed at the time the inspection reports were not available. We took his word on it as he promised the vehicle was in excellent shape and would last years. We have had nothing but problems with it since 2 weeks after we bought it In 2/1/2 years we have only put just over 18k miles on it because we have never felt safe in it with out kids and only drive it when we have no choice.

Desired Settlement: Federal law requires dealers to keep all repair orders and correspondance for 3 years. On the tech notes it shows that he inquired about a repair order and was told they dont keep them that long. It was withing the 3 years required by federal law. It is in our opinion that Bronco Motors wasnt honest with us from the beginning. We had good faith in them since we have been loyal customers since 2004

Consumer Response: we would like Bronco Motors to COMPLETELY fix anything that they were aware of according to any pre-sale inspections. To have the vehcile have a full inspection from ****** as Mr. Petersen said he would do when they Brnoco Motors werernt able to determine the cause the vehicle wasnt workikng in the first place two weeks after sale. To fix any damage that was caused by the tow company when the drive shaft was broken other then the parts of the drive shaft themself. Or to get us into a vehicle that work properly with no mechanical problems as the one they tried to help us get into would cost us 80 dollars more a month and had major issues, the pitman aim needed replaced, the shocks and struts were in need of replacement according to the mechanic we took it to , to have it inspected prior to sale and causing extensive wear and damage on the tires. The brake fluid was comtaninated so badly that brake failure would be likely to happen soon if it wasnt replaced, the transmission fluid was almost as bad. When I asked ***** ****** what he could tell  me of the vehicle and its statehis only response was that it was inspected, (which these things would have  been found out even if just a minor inspection was done) the name , age, and city of the previous owner and that it was a trade in. It is in my firm opion that they do just resell vehicles without disclosing major damage. If we would have bought that vehicle we would have been 8k more in debt and would have had approx 3k in repairs bills just to make it safe to drive.  If they wish to get us into another vehicle it cant cost us anymore then what we currently owe on the vehicle we now have $10,500, can not be over 100,000 miles and must come with some sort of warrenty.  We have had to spend hundreds of dollars on repairs, rental vehicles to get to doctors appointments and pay many other people to get us to importand appointments that cant be missed. We have several people in the family that have severe medical issues that we havent always been able to get transportation to doctors and two of our children have not been able to go to therapy as needed because of lack of safe relaible transportation. We have spent almost $2000 in repairs since Feb 2012 , that if you look at the tech note invoice seem to be the same things that were present as sale and promised where not of issue. Not to mention almost as much fo rcar  rentals and paying others for gas to get us to appointments and an out of town function that had been planned for almost a yeaer and couldnt be missed. We have gone wihtout a vehilcle since June 6th 2012.

Business Response: Customer satisfaction has been the top priority for Bronco Motors in our forty two year history as a family owned business. Our dealings with the *** ****** were no exception.
On January 30, 2010 the **** purchased a 2003 Cadillac Escalade from Bronco Motors with an odometer reading 104,207 miles. The vehicle was sold “AS IS – NO WARRANTY” and the customer signed the Customer Guide required by federal law, reflecting the absence of a warranty.
The customer also purchased a Vehicle Service Contract which covered certain repairs for twenty four months or twenty four thousand miles.
In February 2010, the **** brought the vehicle in, complaining of problems with starting. Despite having no legal obligation to do so, Bronco Motors replaced the fuel pump and had Edmark replace a fuse block, at no cost to the ****. Bronco Motors paid the $200 deductible under the ***** Vehicle Service Contract and paid****** $620.24 for their work. The **** were advised Bronco Motors undertook these repairs simply as a measure of goodwill, and the **** were given documentation advising them of this fact.
In June of 2010, the **** brought their vehicle in for routine servicing. They were advised the power steering fluid was in need of replacement, but they elected not to have the service performed.
In the ensuing two years, Bronco Motors did not service the ***** vehicle.
In June of 2012, without notice to Bronco Motors, the **** had their vehicle towed to Bronco Motors and requested repair of a drive-line issue. While inspecting the vehicle, Bronco Motors determined the power steering was not functioning properly.
The **** requested that Bronco Motors write a statement that the towing company had caused the steering problems. Because Bronco Motors had no way of verifying that was the case, Bronco Motors was unwilling to do so. The customer was agitated and made various threats, including making a complaint with the Better Business Bureau. At that point Bronco Motors requested the customer to have their vehicle repaired elsewhere.
The **** bought a car with over a hundred thousand miles on it. After fixing the fuel pump and electrical issue over two years ago, Bronco Motors has not worked on the vehicle since. The customer drove the car for two years with no problems. To assert that the driveline and/or steering issues are the responsibility of Bronco Motors makes no sense, particularly when they claim the steering issue was caused by the towing company. Similarly, their claims regarding Bronco Motor’s record keeping are baseless.
Bronco Motors has repeatedly offered to help the **** trade for a newer vehicle that will be less likely to require ongoing repairs, and remains committed to this means of resolution. Bronco Motors values the **** business, but simply cannot be responsible for the cost of maintaining a nearly ten year old vehicle with one hundred and twenty thousand miles of wear and tear, two years after the sale.


Respectfully,
Grant L. Petersen, Jr.

Business Response: This letter is in response to your request for additional information in to the above referenced complaint.
Bronco Motors does not routinely provide automobile research reports on its vehicles. These reports are assembled by for-profit companies, based upon a mix of public and private information, which is not comprehensive. We have severe misgivings on the reliability of the information contain. We have discovered many instances where these reports contain inaccurate information or omit information. We are particularly leery of ****** reports. Instead, we recommend that buyer’s of pre-owned vehicles have the vehicle inspected by a mechanic choosing.
 
Our files do not reflect whether we provided a report to the **** To the extent we did, we would most likely have provided an ********* report. I have attached a copy of both an ********* report and a ****** report the **** vehicle which we just obtained. You will note no accidents are reported on the *********, but the ****** indicates an accident in August of 2006, six years and 40,000 miles ago.  Notwithstanding this discrepancy in the reports both the ****** and ********* reports reflect there was no structural damage to the vehicle nor were the airbags deployed, which seems to indicate any accident would have been minor. The inconsistency between the reports is not unusual, and is one reason Bronco Motors is not wildly enthusiastic about their use.

****** itself notes that 7% of the U.S. vehicle fleet is involved in an accident every year, with 75% characterized as minor or moderate.  In many instances one vehicle involved in the accident is undamaged, while damage occurs only to the other vehicle. In Massachusetts, where the accident took place, if the combined damage to the vehicles exceeds S1000 a report is made. See Page 7 of the ****** report. This sum is not significant in the context of a luxury SUV.

The ****** report contains extensive information related to this vehicle, yet it contains no reflection of significant body, frame, or transmission repair in the 6 years since the accident allegedly occurred. This is despite multiple routine repairs and inspections. It is difficult to comprehend how the **** have concluded this accident,  if it took at place at all had anything to do with the mechanical problems they experienced 6 years and 40,000 miles later.
 
It also appears the **** believe the vehicle was a “lemon” of sorts passed from dealer to dealer this is inconsistent with the ****** and ********* information. Both services indicate 5 owners, over ten years. This is not unusual. Per the ****** report the vehicle has been extensively maintained and serviced during its life, prior to the ***** purchasing it. It does not appear that regular maintenance was ignored nor was it returned to any dealer with complaints of it being a “lemon”.
  
You have requested our intake inspection. A copy is attached hereto.  As you can see, nothing in our inspection suggested driveline or steering issues at the time, but instead the normal wear-and-tear that would be expected on a 6-year aid, 100,000+ mile vehicle.  As you can see we did do the inspection, however when we inspect a vehicle we have no intention, nor would it be financially feasible to make a vehicle age perfect in all forms and manners. We repaired many items prior to offering it for sale.  Also attached are the sale documents, that clearly state they purchased the vehicle as-is and that we want them happy and comfortable with the vehicle, and clearly articulate all the terms and conditions under which we sold them the vehicle.  You will notice on the FTC Buyers Guide they signed that we disclose the deficiencies that can exist in ANY used car. While once again we want the **** happy, we are unclear how we could have done any to try to satisfy them in regards to the product they purchased, or make it any more clear the terms and conditions under which they purchased the vehicle.

We would Iike to see the ***** service records as the last time we saw the vehicle was June 2010 when we recommended the power steering flush. The **** declined this service. We are unaware of how the vehicle has been maintained over the last two years, nor have we had complaint with it reported to us since February 2010. It is difficult for us to ascertain how the current drive shaft issue could be related to something we did not do during our initial inspection.
  
To further our commitment to customer satisfaction, noting the terms and conditions attached in these documents, you will see that the **** had a breakdown shortly after purchase that was problematic.

Even though the vehicle was sold as-is, Bronco Motors replaced the fuel pump and paid the entire bill for ****** ******** to repair the vehicle at no charge to the **** but in the spirit of goodwill and customer satisfaction.  They were very pleased and happy with this solution, and expressed this at the time.
 
We hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions please feel free to contact

Respectfully,
Grant L. Petersen. Jr. President & CM)

BBB's Final Determination: After reviewing the information provided by all parties, BBB determined that the business handled the matter appropriately, and no further action was needed.

9/28/2012 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: My husband and I bought a car from this dealership. We have a 90 day warranty through the dealership and also purchased a 60,000 miles extended warranty. The day we drove it off the lot we noticed the brakes squeaked. After days of being told somebody would call me from the service department for an appointment they finally called me. They told me nothing was wrong with the brakes. I had them inspected by another mechanic and there is a problem, it needs new rotors and brake pads for the two front tires to make the squeaking go away. The sales manager told me since they gave us a $500 discount on the extended warranty (they gave the discount otherwise the bank wouldn't finance the loan) they weren't "wasting" anymore money on this car. When 2 days prior their finance lady I had been dealing with said herself "You have triple warranty, there is no way this shouldn't get taken care of at no charge to you". I was told by the Sales manager she had no authority approving what will be covered and what wont be. In the end I was told they will clean and turn the rotars and if that doesn't fix it they will not help us any further. If the car was returnable I would no longer have it. This is by far the worst service I've ever had, and I can't believe the Sales "manager" could be so rude and so unprofessional. I will never recommend this dealership and I will do a review everywhere possible on their terrible customer service skills, lack of communication between departments, and the rudeness of their store manager. I was told by more than one employee there that my problem would be taken care of, and I was lied to. I hope buyers will be very cautious when looking at vehicles here. They are very good at selling but after that they could care less if you're happy, or you have warranties that should very well cover the issue, especially when you've only owned the car for a week. I have contacted and discussed the issue with everybody possible at this dealership.

Desired Settlement: I have had the car seen by two different mechanics, they both say this:"Front brake rotors are extremely hot. Calipers are not releasing properly. Need a caliper service. Pad life is about 50%. The squeak from the rotors may not go away with just a caliper service. Everything has been heated up. New front rotors and pads may be necessary." cost of rotor service $49, pads and rotars replaced $90. I think they should replace them if the rotor service doesnt fix the issue.

Business Response: I just spoke with **** ***** 

She will meet me at the Boise location on Wednesday the 12th and we will repair brakes on her vehicle. We will machine the rotors and replace the front

Pads. She is happy and follow up with the BBB upon completion of the repairs. I have already ordered the brake pads so we will have them in stock when she arrives.

  

Thanks

  *** ****** * ******* ********* ********* ******** * ************ * * ************ * * ************

Consumer Response:

Better Business Bureau:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID *******, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. They fixed my brakes which is all I wanted from day 1.*** was very nice and handled the situation how it shouldve been handled from the beginning. I will never recommend this carlot as they shouldve been professional in the first place.  Its sad their customet had to experience something so horrible for nothing.  Hopefully they retrain the nampa location on Customer Service.

Regards,

**** *****

 

 

 

 

BBB's Final Determination: Consumer accepted resolution offered by the business.

1