Are you the Owner of this Business? ×
BBB® Accredited Business Seal

Are you...?

If yes, click here to login.

Are you...?

BBB Accredited Business since

I-79 Honda Mazda

Additional Locations

Phone: (724) 324-5631 Fax: (724) 324-5292 View Additional Phone Numbers Interstate 79 Exit 1, Mount Morris, PA 15349 http://www.i79hondamazda.com/


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

Description

This company offers sales & service of new Hondas & Mazdas.


BBB Accreditation

A BBB Accredited Business since

BBB has determined that I-79 Honda Mazda 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 I-79 Honda Mazda include:

  • Length of time business has been operating
  • Complaint volume filed with BBB for business of this size
  • Response to 5 complaint(s) filed against business
  • Resolution of complaint(s) filed against business


Customer Complaints Summary Read complaint details

5 complaints closed with BBB in last 3 years | 2 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 4
Total Closed Complaints 5

Customer Reviews Summary Read customer reviews

0 Customer Reviews on I-79 Honda Mazda
Customer Experience Total Customer Reviews
Positive Experience 0
Neutral Experience 0
Negative Experience 0
Total Customer Reviews 0

Additional Information

BBB file opened: August 23, 1991 Business started: 11/01/1984
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:

Pennsylvania Department of State
206 North Office Building, Harrisburg PA 17120-0029
http://www.dos.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/licensing/12483
Phone Number: 717-787-8503
RA-BPOA@pa.gov
The number is VD022842L.

Business Management
Mr. Joe Romeo, Secretary Treasurer Ms. Donna Gamble, Office Manager Mr. Garry McKinney, President Mr. John Walker, Operations Manager
Contact Information
Principal: Mr. Joe Romeo, Secretary Treasurer
Customer Contact: Mr. John Walker, Operations Manager
Business Category

AUTO DEALERS - NEW CARS AUTO DEALERS - USED CARS TIRE DEALERS ALTERNATORS & GENERATORS-AUTO REPAIR AUTO BODY REPAIR & PAINTING AUTO DIAGNOSTIC SERVICE AUTO ELECTRIC SERVICE AUTO INSPECTION STATIONS AUTO REPAIR & SERVICE BRAKE SERVICE AUTO OIL CHANGE & LUBRICATION SERVICE MUFFLERS & EXHAUST SYSTEMS RADIATORS - AUTO TRANSMISSIONS - AUTO AUTO REPAIR - WINDSHIELD, GLASS SHOPS


Additional Locations

  • Interstate 79 Exit 1

    Mount Morris, PA 15349 (800) 633-2556 (724) 324-5631 (724) 324-5631

  • PO Box 37

    Mount Morris, PA 15349

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)

1/26/2015 Advertising/Sales Issues | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: I purchased a used 2014 Dodge Durango R/T from the dealership on 4-15-2014. Their salesperson told me that the vehicle was all-wheel drive when it was, in fact, rear-wheel drive. I told them that I only wanted an AWD vehicle and relied upon their representations in purchasing the vehicle. The price I paid was for an AWD vehicle. I overpaid for the vehicle and did not receive what I thought I was purchasing. The dealership violated the Automotive Industry Trade Practices regulations of the Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, 73 P.S. 301-1, etc. (UTPCPL). The deal for the vehicle was made over the phone from my residence and falls under the provisions of the Door-to-Door Sales provisions of the UTPCPL. I did not receive a 3-day notice of my right to rescind the deal. On 12/9/2014 I notified the dealership that I was cancelling the contract and demanded a full refund. The dealership has refused to refund any portion of my money and said that I should have checked out the VIN number to verify for myself that the vehicle was AWD. I have calculated my actual damages as a result of the dealerships misrepresentations at $21,022.53.

Desired Settlement: I would like to receive the actual damages as a result of the dealership's misrepresentations at $21,022.53

Business Response: On behalf of I-79 Honda Mazda this office has been asked to respond to the BBB complaint of ***** *****.  It should be noted that these responses were also provided to Ms. *****’s personal attorney who investigated this matter on her behalf.

At the outset, it should be noted that my client is disappointed that Ms. *****’s customer experience did not meet her expectation; however, at no time was the type and quality of this vehicle misrepresented.  In support of those facts and conclusions, please note the following:

         1.     This vehicle was offered for sale on the Internet.  At no time did any statements on the Internet advertising the listing of this vehicle indicate that it had the AWD or four WD option. 

          2.     In order to list the vehicle on the Internet, the dealer was required to provide information identifying all equipment on the
vehicle.  At no time was the AWD or four WD transmission option checked off when the vehicle was listed for sale on the Internet. 

         3.     This vehicle had an FTC sticker on the window at the time that the vehicle was offered for sale at the dealership which lists
all of the equipment.  At no time did the FTC sticker indicate that the vehicle was equipped with AWD or four WD.  In fact, the sole reference to transmission was that it was “automatic.” The vehicle itself had no placards or signage indicating that it was either an AWD or four WD vehicle. 

Additionally, my client disputes the customer’s contention that this was a door-to-door sale as she personally appeared at the dealership and conducted the transaction. 

In summary, the disclosure to the Internet listing agency, the listing on the Internet of the vehicle’s equipment, the Buyer’s Order, and the FTC sticker contained no reference or implication that this vehicle was an AWD or four WD.  The vehicle itself did not contain any
placards anywhere on the vehicle or within the vehicle indicating that it was an AWD or four WD.

Lastly, at no time did any representative of my client make a representation inconsistent with the numerous public disclosures regarding this vehicle’s equipment. As such, I-79 Honda Mazda must decline the customer’s request for restitution.

****** ** *******
Attorney for I-79 Honda Mazda
**** ******* ****** *** ******* ******* **** ***** *********** **  *****
###-###-####
###-###-#### [fax]

 



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

The dealer is correct that the vehicle was not listed as AWD.  What they don't say is that the advertisement for the vehicle did not clearly disclose whether it was RWD or AWD.  The ad gave no information about that at all.  Because I couldn't figure it out from the ad, I asked the salesman.  I told him specifically on at least two occasions that I wanted an AWD vehicle.  I asked that when I made the deal on the phone with the dealer from my home and asked again when I came to the dealership to sign the papers that had been prepared for the deal we reached one the phone.  Both times I was assured that it was an AWD vehicle.  The price I was charged was for an AWD vehicle.  I did comparisons on Edmunds and Kelly Blue Book for the same vehicle, one RWD and the other AWD.  The price I paid was closer to the price comparison for an AWD version of the vehicle (I paid more than the comparison!).  I was trading in a 4-wheel drive vehicle.  It would make no sense for me to switch from a 4-wheel drive to a RWD vehicle. 

I had at least two other problems -- there was no spare tire in the car (the space for it was empty).  The dealer did not tell me about that until AFTER I drove the vehicle off the lot and discovered it myself.  I had a problem with the stereo as well.  I feel that I've been completely taken advantage of by the dealer.   

Regards,

***** *****

7/10/2014 Problems with Product/Service
8/14/2013 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: I took my Mazda5 2006 model to i79 Mazda this Monday for a leaky shock replacement. Since the part needs to be ordered, I was asked to come back today (Friday) and finish the replacement. The car was in the garage for no more than 30 min. but I understand I will be charged on their hourly rate ($76 per hour). What I don't understand is that I got charged TWICE for this replacement job - according to their manager, the Monday appointment was diagnosis only ($76 labor) and the Friday one another $76 labor. This is not acceptable because they simply could not do the job on Monday (without the needed part).

Desired Settlement: Give me back the $76 labor fee for the Monday appointment (they did nothing).

Business Response:

To whom it may concern:

 

We charge a diagnostic fee to determine the cause of the customers concern. The fee was authorized by the customer or we would not have performed the diagnosis. We did have to order a part and charged to install the part. All the repairs were authorized by the customer or we would not have done the work. We do not perform diagnosis or repairs for free. We have to pay to have expert employees to diagnosis and repair vehicles. If the customer did not want to pay for our expertise they should have fixed it themselves.

 

Sincerely,

 

**** ******

Manager

Consumer Response:

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

When the manager gave me the cost estimate, it was around $200 (part+labor) - he wrote down the number on a piece of paper and that is why I authorized the go-ahead. I could not recall his exact words; but my understanding is that extra charge will occur if the actual repair last over 1 hour (but in fact the total time for diagnosis and repair is around 30 min). I did not know that they would charge a separated diagnosis fee (the point of misunderstanding). 


Just for the reason of fairness, I would like to point out similar experience I had in other local repair shops. If diagnosis and repair are done at the SAME place, the labor cost for these two steps is always calculated together. This is the first time I ran into the situation where a 10-min diagnosis and a 20-min repair were charged twice at the hourly rate. The manager even said he could have asked his repair person to idle for 40-50 min. in order to charge me the full hourly rate, which sounds absurd to me (do they really do that to their customers?). 


Anyway, it is my personal and biased opinion that the diagnosis/repair fee policy of this shop is unfair to customers.

Regards,

*** **

 

 

7/31/2013 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: I purchased a vehicle from I-79 on May 3, 2013. Fifty five days later I still do not have a title. I have called the dealership several times and am always avoided and told they are working on it. The temporary tag is expired and the vehicle is not legally drivable. I returned the vehicle to the dealership and was told this was not their problem that they could not produce a title and not their problem that the tag was expired. I was refused any compensation and was told to leave. I left a letter with them stating I was leaving the vehicle and no longer wanted it since it did not have a title in a timely manner. I left all of the keys with the dealership. I was called and told the vehicle would be towed and put in storage at my expense. This dealership needs to be out of business. Worst customer service ever. Refused any compensation or help and was told it was my problem that they couldn't give me a title and wasn't their problem that the tag was expired.

Desired Settlement: Vehicle has been returned since the title was not produced in a timely manner. I was treated so badly I have no desire to have any dealings with them.

Business Response:

To whom it may concern:

The title for Mr. and Mrs.  **********'s ******** ******** had an clerical error on the mileage. We sent back to the original dealer and had it corrected as fast as possible.  A corrected Pennsylvania title was overnighted to Mr ********** on 7/2/13. He was advised of the situation and would not accept the answer he was given. Please call or email me if you have any questions.

Sincerely,
**** *******
###-###-####

3/15/2013 Problems with Product/Service