BBB Accredited Business since

Hare Auto Group

Phone: (317) 773-1090 Fax: (317) 770-2118 View Additional Phone Numbers 2001 Stoney Creek Road, Noblesville, IN 46060 http://www.hareauto.com


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


BBB Accreditation

A BBB Accredited Business since

BBB has determined that Hare Auto Group 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 13 factors. Get the details about the factors considered.

Factors that raised the rating for Hare Auto Group include:

  • Length of time business has been operating
  • Complaint volume filed with BBB for business of this size
  • Response to 6 complaint(s) filed against business
  • Resolution of complaint(s) filed against business


Customer Complaints Summary Read complaint details

6 complaints closed with BBB in last 3 years | 3 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 5
Total Closed Complaints 6

Customer Reviews Summary Read customer reviews

1 Customer Review on Hare Auto Group
Customer Experience Total Customer Reviews
Positive Experience 0
Neutral Experience 0
Negative Experience 1
Total Customer Reviews 1

Additional Information

BBB file opened: May 13, 2008 Business started: 01/18/1847 in IN Business started locally: 07/01/1847 Business incorporated 09/01/1927 in IN
Licensing, Bonding or Registration

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:

Bureau of Motor Vehicles
100 N. Senate Avenue, Indianapolis IN 46204
http://www.state.in.us/bmv
Phone Number: (317) 233-6000

Type of Entity

Corporation

Business Management
Ms. Monica Peck, Vice President Ms. Courtney Cole, Co-owner
Contact Information
Principal: Ms. Monica Peck, Vice President
Business Category

Auto Dealers - New Cars Auto Dealers - Used Cars AUTO REPAIR & SERVICE New Car Dealers (NAICS: 441110)

Alternate Business Names
Hare Chevrolet W. Hare & Son, Inc.
Industry Tips
As Is Vehicle Purchasing Auto Repair Tips

Additional Locations

  • 2001 Stoney Creek Road

    Noblesville, IN 46060 (317) 773-1090

X

BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating Overview


BBB Customer Reviews Rating represents the customers opinions of the business. The Customer Review Rating is based on the number of positive, neutral and negative customer reviews posted that are calculated to produce a score.

Customer Review Experience Value
Positive Review 5 points per review
Neutral Review 3 points per review
Negative Review 1 point per review

BBB letter grades represent the BBB's opinion of the business. The BBB grade is based on BBB file information about the business. In some cases, a business' grade may be lowered if the BBB does not have sufficient information about the business despite BBB requests for that information from the business.
Details

BBB Letter Grade Scale

BBB Rating Value
A+ 5
A 4.66
A- 4.33
B+ 4
B 3.66
B- 3.33
C+ 3
C 2.66
C- 2.33
D+ 2
D 1.66
D- 1.33
F 1
NR -----
Star Rating scale

  Average Score
5 stars 5.00
4.5 stars 4.50-4.99
4 stars 4.00-4.49
3.5 stars 3.50-3.99
3 stars 3.00-3.49
2.5 stars 2.50-2.99
2 stars 2.00-2.49
1.5 stars 1.50-1.99
1 star 0-1.49

BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating is not a guarantee of a business' reliability or performance, and BBB recommends that consumers consider a business' BBB Rating and Customer Review Rating in addition to all other available information about the business. If the BBB Rating is NR then only Customer Reviews are used for the Star Rating.

Complaint Detail(s)

12/20/2014 Problems with Product/Service
9/2/2014 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: I purchased a care from Hare, the car had to be returned. I was harassed (being called 19 times in a one hour time frame) Inappropriate messages were left on my voicemail, and after returning the car my down payment has not been returned, nor have any phone calls or emails.

Desired Settlement: I would like my down payment returned

Business Response:

This customer was approved with the stipulation that her open auto was traded or proof paid in full. She stated that it was totaled and had GAP Insurance and would produce documents that it would be paid in full.  After a couple of weeks without the documents, we began to call her, left her messages stating this information was needed ASAP for the bank to do the loan. After repeated calls, and our salesman stopped by her house, she would not respond to us or provide the documents to complete the loan, all the while, she was driving our car. She eventually brought the car back with excessive miles on it as well as kept both sets of keys thus the reason not to return her deposit.  

7/27/2014 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: I've owned a 2009 Chevy Malibu since 2011. On 5/31 took my car up to Hare Chevy to report a problem of a strong vibration coming from the hood, which is similar to driving over speed strips when approaching a toll booth. I diagnostic test was performed and concluded a solenoid malfunction. Upon receiving this information I also received two additional recommendations of preventative maintenance (loose/leaky transmission fluid hoses, and fuel emissions). Given the price of each repair, I opted to get the solenoid repair worked on first, which occurred the following Thursday on 6/5/14. I picked up my car and still noticed the original problem of shaking as well as noticing error messages on my dash. On 6/13/14 my car would not start up and left me stranded at work. I called the dealership once they opened and explained that my car would not start and that since the repair it had been operating differently in regards to the error messages. They tow the car the same day and later conclude the computer had fried which is why I was unable to start the car and proceed to quote me a price on the repair. I waited a week to pay since I didn't have the funds for it and rented a car in the process. When I picked the car up on 6/19/14, it started but I still noticed my original issue of the vibration. Within two days I had error messages on my dash again and the car would not start again. This was on 6/22/14. I called the dealership on 6/23/14 and they took the car in for examination. I did not receive a call to know what the findings were. I had to call up there. When I did get ahold of someone, I was told that nothing was wrong with the car and that it kept starting up but they were going to keep the car overnight, drive it and put some miles on it. I said okay to that and asked that the car be driven at speeds in excess of 60mph because that is when I noticed the issue that I originally brought the car in for. I had to call up there again on 6/24/14 to be enlightened on the findings of my car. I was told again that there were no findings of any error messages and that the car had no problems starting up. I proceeded to ask about the vibrations and was told it had not been checked yet and that I would get a call later in the afternoon. I get a call two hours later stating that the vibration was due to my wheels being bent and that the other finding was a loose battery cable. Then I was asked if I wanted to get a quote on the wheels, to which I declined. I was infuriated because I paid for two separate issues of which were not what I went expecting or wanting to have fixed. The money that should have been allocated towards the repair of the wheels has been applied towards these other two repairs. I strongly believe the computer issue was a result of the engine work done that did not necessarily need to be completed at this time. I was told the reason my computer went bad is because water had got in it. I immediately saw a red flag because up until this point, I have never had any issues of this extent. I questioned how such a thing would and could happen and was told it was possibly due to corrosion over time or somehow water got on it. I was never given a specific reason and still do not know why it happened. I have taken my vehicle to this location numerous times and have never been told about any corrosion! Again, none of these issues occurred until I had the solenoid repaired. (which was not what I came to the dealership to get fixed) Today, 6/24/14, I just got my car back but I've had to call of work because of a lack of having a car. I've spent $1,015.13 in fees directly associated with this ordeal, which basically cleared out my bank accounts! It is highly frustrating that it took up to three weeks and that much money just to find out the issue I originally brought the car in for 1. was completely unrelated to what I paid for and 2. was still not fixed. The dealership, as experts, should have been able to pinpoint the issue based off of my description, which was explained the exact same way as is in this complaint. Another thing that was highly skeptical to me was the fact that I was told, "If the car not starting is a result of what we did while working on the solenoid we will take ownership of it and split the tow fee." The tow fee was indeed split and even the price of the computer repair was lowered yet, it was not their fault. Again, none of these issues occurred BEFORE I had taken my vehicle in for examination and repair. My original request was basically ignored until today, 6/24/14, when I specifically asked about it.

Desired Settlement: I am unable to fix the issue that I wanted to have fixed due to improper evaluation. I paid for the first repair in belief that I would resolve my issue of vibration as I drove the car. The second repair was made and paid for because the car would no longer function for driving, which I along with others I have explained the situation to, strongly believe was due to the engine work that was completed. My desired result would be having my original request repaired, which is the vibration that is caused by the wheels. To put this in another perspective, if someone goes in for surgery for a heart transplant but they receive a blood transfusion and breast implants instead, they are going to be highly upset and confused as to why they did not receive what they went in for. I did not receive any benefit from this situation. My car did not drive any differently and still does not and the vibrations because of the wheels are still prevalent but I did lose my money. I spent $249.13 for the solenoid repair, $572.21 for the computer repair, and $193.79 for a rental car because I did not have my car to drive. I also missed out on three days of work which is roughly $650.52 in net dollars. This means I am at a $1,600 loss just to find out my original issue is still prevalent.

Business Response: On 06/03/2014, Mr. ******s brought in his 2009 Malibu with 136,745 miles.  The customer stated the "Service Engine Soon" light was on and the vehicle misses out when above 50 MPH, seems like the engine shakes.  We diagnosed the vehicle, what gave us a code of "P0014" stating Internal Failure in the exhaust cam solenoid assembly.  The customer was quoted $225.21 to do the repairs.  He declined, so he was just charged the diagnosis fee of $49.75.

 
On 06/05/2014, Mr. ***** returned to have the repairs completed.  The exhaust cam solenoid assembly was replaced and codes were reset.  Mr. ***** was charged a total of $249.13, including tax, etc.
 
The exhaust cam solenoid fixed the issue of the vehicle "missing out" and the "engine shaking".  We never heard anything back from the customer about a "vibration not being fixed" or anything until the vehicle was towed in 8 days later and had been driven about 500 miles.  No phone call, nothing from the customer.
 
On 6/13/2014 -  137,323 on the odometer, the vehicle was towed in.  Mr. ***** stated the vehicle won't crank or start, the traction control and esc lights are coming on.  The vehicle was diagnosed with an internal failure in the electronic control module.  We removed and replaced the electronic control module assembly and reset the codes.  Mr. ***** was charged $572.12 including the tow bill of $116.00.
 
On 06/23/2014, the vehicle was towed back in with 137,398 miles on it.  Mr. ***** stated the vehicle "cranks but won't fire".  We were unable to duplicate the concern at all.  The car was having no issue starting.  The only thing we could find was a loose / corroded battery cable.  We replaced the cable and told the customer to inform us if anything happens again.  We replaced the cable at NO CHARGE to the customer and we paid for the tow bill.  
 
The customer has been charged a total of $871 for the previous 4 repairs.  We took care of one of the tow bills and replacing the battery cable at no charge.  I guess where we feel there is a miscommunication is that the customer states we never fixed his "vibration problem coming from the wheels" and we were focused on fixing the missing out and engine issues, as well as the Service Engine Soon light and what the vehicle codes were telling us as to why the Service Engine Soon light was on.  When we didn't hear back from the customer after the fix on 6/5/2014, we assumed we had fixed the vehicle.  Again, when it was towed, we fixed the vehicle.  When it was towed again, we started it right up and couldn't find anything wrong, replaced a corroded battery cable at no charge AND paid for the tow.  

Consumer Response:

Better Business Bureau:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.

Regards,

**** *****

 

I absolutely agree with the very first paragraphed response.  As far as the exhaust cam solenoid assembly repair is concerned I can only go by the word of the dealership that the job was actually completed.  What I can confirm is that I paid $249.13.  Again, this repair was one of THREE repairs initially recommended upon inspection when the vehicle was brought in for questioning.  Yes, the shaking still existed and I did not speak upon it because I was under the impression that maybe that wouldn't go away until every recommended repair was taken care of.  I spoke to ****** directly inquiring if the quote would still hold true to price if I brought the car in at a future date.  This is a common practice of process of elimination that people tend to use because the average consumer does not have that kind of money to put towards repairs!  I was told yes I can bring it in later (which was a week later for the solenoid repair)  I intended on waiting another week for the second repair for a couple of reasons: 1.  At the time I worked six days a week at twelve hour shift intervals.  That is 72 hours per week and I was working nights.  2.  I get paid weekly, which I also addressed to ******.  So that should have signaled to him that, of course, there would be a time frame in between repairs.  To assume the issue was corrected is unwise in my opinion considering I was given a list of three repairs and had, at that point, only had ONE repair done.
 
"The exhaust cam solenoid fixed the issue of the vehicle "missing out" and the "engine shaking".  We never heard anything back from the customer about a "vibration not being fixed" or anything until the vehicle was towed in 8 days later and had been driven about 500 miles.  No phone call, nothing from the customer." -Hare Chevy
 
I disagree with this because as stated above I had been working nights for 6 days a week.  The exact mileage on my car would have been 337 miles.  I had not driven my car anywhere besides work and daycare for my son which is 6 miles from my home.  Work is 23 miles from my home.  23*2=46 (to and from work) 46*6=276miles  Daycare is 6.1 miles from my home.  6.1*2=12.2.  Daycare is open mon-friday (5 days)  12.2*5=61.  The total milage from work and daycare equal 337 miles which is a difference of 163 miles of the stated 500 miles.  So to reiterate, Hare would not have heard anything back from me until the next scheduled repair, which would have been the following thursday, the day I was paid.  Of course if the car is unable to function before then I will contact.  I need the car.
 
"On 6/13/2014 -  137,323 on the odometer, the vehicle was towed in.  Mr. ***** stated the vehicle won't crank or start, the traction control and esc lights are coming on.  The vehicle was diagnosed with an internal failure in the electronic control module.  We removed and replaced the electronic control module assembly and reset the codes.  Mr. ***** was charged $572.12 including the tow bill of $116.00." -Hare Chevy

This was NOT apart of the original three recommended repairs.  Again I cannot confirm that anything was replaced, I can only confirm that I paid $572.12.  I was also told by ****** that the tow bill would be split so I should have only paid $58 NOT $116.  
 
"On 06/23/2014, the vehicle was towed back in with 137,398 miles on it.  Mr. ***** stated the vehicle "cranks but won't fire".  We were unable to duplicate the concern at all.  The car was having no issue starting.  The only thing we could find was a loose / corroded battery cable.  We replaced the cable and told the customer to inform us if anything happens again.  We replaced the cable at NO CHARGE to the customer and wepaid for the tow bill." -Hare Chevy

This "repair" was slightly frustrating considering I was left without a car for three days.  During this time I did NOT receive any calls from Hare Chevy.  I had to call repeatedly to find out the status on my vehicle.  The car was towed from the Walmart parking lot which is less than half a mile from the dealership.  It could have been put into neutral and pushed, it was that close.  I was not even called regarding a tow amount, of which i would have declined to tow because it was literally so close to the dealership.  This was the "repair" that clued me in that a proper diagnosis had not been performed!  I brought up the issue of my car still "shaking" (which is the ONLY reason I came for repair) and was told it would be checked out but first they wanted to duplicate the car not being able to start up.  Two days later I called and was told about the battery cable replacement.  I said okay, what about the shaking when the car reaches over 50mph.  I was told that had still not been checked on and that I would receive a call later that after noon.  This was roughly at 2pm when I was told that.  I get a call around 5pm stating that the wheels were bent and that was the reason for the shaking, was asked if I wanted a quote on the repairs and I declined because I have already spent $871 in repairs I did NOT want.  Other than the shaking from the wheels, my car has driven the exact same as it had been driving since I bought it in 2011!

The main problem is this,  why would I need to pay $871 BEFORE a proper diagnosis was taken?  The only time the car had been tested for the "shaking" is when I specifically told them to drive the car at speeds up to and passed 50mph.  I'm not the expert in this situation but if someone says they have an issue with the car at certain speeds, would you not need to duplicate the situation in order to gather a proper analysis?  I have a small understanding of machinery and recognize there can be more than one issue, however, you can rate them from major to minor with major being something that needs high priority.  
I even stated when I FIRST brought the car in that the car was not driving abnormally besides the shaking that seemed to come from the engine.

"The customer has been charged a total of $871 for the previous 4 repairs.  We took care of one of the tow bills and replacing the battery cable at no charge.  I guess where we feel there is a miscommunication is that the customer states we never fixed his "vibration problem coming from the wheels" and we were focused on fixing the missing out and engine issues, as well as the Service Engine Soon light and what the vehicle codes were telling us as to why the Service Engine Soon light was on.  When we didn't hear back from the customer after the fix on 6/5/2014, we assumed we had fixed the vehicle.  Again, when it was towed, we fixed the vehicle.  When it was towed again, we started it right up and couldn't find anything wrong, replaced a corroded battery cable at no charge AND paid for the tow." -Hare Chevy  

I'm confused, I should have only paid for TWO repairs (the solenoid and the fried computer) Please tell me what the other two repairs are that I paid for and provide an invoice that shows the pricing for parts and labor.  It is wrong that the issue I wanted fixed was not fixed.  You, Hare Chevy, said in plain bold words that you completely disregarded my request.  "we were focused on fixing the missing out and engine issues, as well as the Service Engine Soon light and what the vehicle codes were telling us as to why the Service Engine Soon light was on." (Hare Chevy)
I do not know how to further explain that I brought the car in for the shaking issue.  I will restate that the car drove normal besides the shaking. I will restate that while under the impression that the vehicle needed three repairs done for the shaking to cease that I was in belief the problem still would exist until such repairs were completed. 
As experts in car repairs, why is it assumed that a problem is fixed when only ONE of THREE repairs have been made?  Why are customers issues not being properly addressed and communicated?  Why do the customers have to pay a substantial amount of money before a proper diagnosis is performed to isolate the malfunction addressed by the customer?  

Business Response:

There has been 4 service visits, the original one for the diagnosis, the second visit was for the replacement for the cam shaft actuators, the third visit was for replacement of the electronic control module, (these three invoices are ones that the customer has paid for) and the fourth invoice for the tow and the replacement of the battery cables we, Hare Chevrolet, took care of the cost.

Back on June 3 that was the only time that the customer has ever said anything about engine shaking/car shaking. We were under the impression that with the drivability concern with the engine missing out and engine shaking was all one concern considering the fact that the check engine light was on and the car was  running poorly.  We have on file that on 6/3 the customer concern was that the "check engine light is on and the vehicle misses out when above 50 mph seems like engine shakes, check and advise".  We were not aware that there were any addition issues that the customer had at that time. The vehicle came back on 6/5, 6/7/, 6/13 and there was never any mention of there being any issues with the car vibrating, until 6/23 when the customer picked the vehicle up from us for replacing the battery cables. The customer has signed off on all repair work that has been completed and has never said anything to the service advisor about additional concerns. As part of our 27 point safety inspection, we noticed that the tires on the vehicle were extremely warn and needed replaced, so as a courtesy we had one of our GM technicians inspect the car upon the advisors request and found that the vehicle needed 4 new tires, 3 wheels, and realigned for a total of $1150.85. When the service advisor told the customer that this is what his car needed, the customer told us that he did not have the money to fix this.

We have advised the customer of the repairs that were needed at the time of service, but unfortunately with the mileage and age of the vehicle it is unclear of what may happen with the vehicle in the future.

5/7/2014 Problems with Product/Service
3/7/2013 Problems with Product/Service
11/9/2012 Advertising/Sales Issues