Are you the Owner of this Business? ×
BBB® - Start With Trust

Are you...?

If yes, click here to learn about BBB Accreditation.

Are you...?

This business is not BBB accredited.

Toyota Bountiful

Phone: (801) 295-3481 Fax: (801) 951-0047 2380 S Highway 89, Woods Cross, UT 84010

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

BBB Accreditation

This business is not BBB accredited.

Businesses are under no obligation to seek BBB accreditation, and some businesses are not accredited because they have not sought BBB accreditation.

To be accredited by BBB, a business must apply for accreditation and BBB must determine that the business meets BBB accreditation standards, which include a commitment to make a good faith effort to resolve any consumer complaints. BBB Accredited Businesses must pay a fee for accreditation review/monitoring and for support of BBB services to the public.

Reason for Rating

BBB rating is based on 13 factors. Get the details about the factors considered.

Factors that raised the rating for Toyota Bountiful include:

  • Length of time business has been operating
  • Complaint volume filed with BBB for business of this size
  • Response to 9 complaint(s) filed against business
  • Resolution of complaint(s) filed against business

Customer Complaints Summary Read complaint details

9 complaints closed with BBB in last 3 years | 2 closed in last 12 months
Complaint Type Total Closed Complaints
Advertising/Sales Issues 4
Billing/Collection Issues 0
Delivery Issues 0
Guarantee/Warranty Issues 0
Problems with Product/Service 5
Total Closed Complaints 9

Customer Reviews Summary Read customer reviews

1 Customer Review on Toyota Bountiful
Customer Experience Total Customer Reviews
Positive Experience 0
Neutral Experience 0
Negative Experience 1
Total Customer Reviews 1

Additional Information

BBB file opened: August 18, 2011 Business started: 01/31/2011 Business started locally: 01/31/2011 Business incorporated 01/18/2011 in UT
Business Management
Mr. Kirk E. Benhtzen, General Manager Ms. Cindy Bradshaw, Company Contact Auggie Wasmund, Business Contact
Contact Information
Principal: Mr. Kirk E. Benhtzen, General Manager
Business Category

Auto Dealers - Used Cars Auto Dealers - New Cars

Alternate Business Names
Performance Automotive Utah LLC

Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating Summary

Toyota Bountiful has received 0 out of 5 stars based on 0 Customer Reviews and a BBB Rating of A+.

BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating Overview

Additional Locations


    2380 S Highway 89

    Woods Cross, UT 84010 (801) 295-3481


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.

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)

11/3/2014 Advertising/Sales Issues | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: Toyota Bountiful fraudulently induced us to purchase a truck when we were promised that the brakes had been replaced, when in fact they had not. Our complaint is based on the fraudulent misrepresentation by Toyota Bountiful of the condition of the 2010 Ram 1500 which we were sold. When we responded to an online ad from Toyota Bountiful we were introduced to the sales representative, ******* ******** who showed us the truck. He told us that the vehicle was recently traded in, that they had inspected the vehicle and that it was in excellent condition except for two things: it needed to be cleaned and the brakes needed to be replaced. ******* told us that both of these things would be taken care of before we purchased the vehicle. After an exhausting process of ******* continually returning to his manager to negotiate terms for purchase, we settled on a price. We told the salesperson, *******, that we wanted to take the truck to a mechanic to ensure that there were no additional or hidden problems. He responded by asking why we would want a mechanic to look at the vehicle when it was so new and where the only thing wrong with the truck were the bad brakes; considering that they were having the brakes replaced. We insisted that we wanted to do our due diligence and have another mechanic look at the truck. ******* left and spoke with his manager and then informed us that because the brakes were being replaced and that the truck was in such great shape otherwise, that they would let us have a mechanic inspect the truck for safety and emission issues only. Relying on his promises that the brakes were replaced we purchased the vehicle on 9/17/2014 subject to a mechanic inspecting the vehicle by noon the following day. It took over two hours for the vehicle to be prepared for us to take possession and we told ******* that we were glad to wait as long as they did a good job replacing the brakes and cleaning the truck. Eventually ******* informed us that the truck was ready and we signed the paperwork and gave them a check for $25,071.66. The next morning, I took the truck to a mechanic for inspection and was informed that the rear brakes on the truck were over 50% used and that the front brakes needed to be replaced immediately. Leaving the mechanic, at around 10:00 am on 9/18/2014 I informed ******* of what the mechanic said and he asked that I send him paperwork from the mechanic showing the work that needed to be done. I provided the paperwork to him and he informed me that because I informed him of the issues with the brakes before the noon deadline they would make sure that the issue was resolved. After several weeks of contacting ******* inquiring when they would repair the brakes as promised they asked me to bring the truck back to the dealership so they could evaluate the brakes again. We dropped the truck off again and asked that they look particularly at the brakes on the left side of the vehicle. When we returned they said that they instead looked at the brakes on the right side of the truck and that they had passed their inspection. Initially, I was told by ******* that the brakes were bad, needed to be replaced and that they were being replaced as I waited. I relied on their promise that the truck would have new brakes and purchased the vehicle. When an outside mechanic exposed their fraudulent conduct, they claimed that the brakes passed their inspection after looking only at the brakes on the wrong side of the truck. The only thing that changed since I was told by ******* that they had replaced the brakes until now is that I had given them a check and paid for the vehicle in full. Since then they have been completely non-responsive to my repeated attempts for them to keep their word and fix the issue.

Desired Settlement: We respectfully request that Toyota Bountiful pay for the brakes to be replaced as promised.

Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2014/10/13) */ Contact Name and Title: ** **** ******* Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX Contact Email: ******** When completing the initial transaction, we put in writing on the "We Owe" form that "if brakes did not pass state inspection we would allow the customer to unwind the deal. The brakes do pass inspection. Yes, they are not new, but the paperwork didn't say they were new. We have inspected the vehicle twice, making sure the second inspection was the side of concern and both inspections passed. We have filled up their tank of gas 2 times to try and make them happy. We also had the vehicle detailed a second time, again, trying to make them happy. The brakes do not need to be replaced according to State standards. We are not sure who the mechanic is that is saying this, but it is simply not true. Please close. Best regards, **** ******* General Manager XXX-XXX-XXXX ******** Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 8, 2014/10/20) */ I was told by your salesperson that the brakes were new. Therefore, there was no need for the brakes to be a part of the written transaction. If he had not affirmatively promised that the brakes had been replaced then you would be correct, the paperwork would be accurate. But the fact remains that I relied on his misrepresentation of the condition of the vehicle when I purchased it. He told me that the brakes had been replaced when I signed the paperwork and took possession of the truck. The reference in the paperwork dealt with passing the state inspections and emissions were dealing with other possible hidden defects. According to Utah law the elements of fraudulent misrepresentation are: (1) That a representation was made; (2) concerning a presently existing material fact; (3) which was false; (4) which the representor either (a) knew to be false or (b) made recklessly, knowing that he or she had insufficient knowledge upon which to base such representation; (5) for the purpose of inducing the other party to act upon it; (6) that the other party, acting reasonably and in ignorance of its falsity; (7) did in fact rely upon it; (8) and was thereby induced to act; (9) to his or her injury and damage." See Pace v. Parrish, 122 Utah 141, 247 P.2d 273, 274-75 (1952). Each of these elements have been met. If I had not been lied to about the dealership putting new brakes on the truck the paperwork would have reflected the worn brakes being replaced as a condition of the sale. Now, if your dealership inspected the side of concern then why did you only provide paperwork on the right side brakes and not the left as we requested? The reason why your dealership filled up the tank for us had nothing to do with trying to fix this brake issue, but it does illustrate how difficult your dealership is to work with. It was offered to us because when we purchased the truck after waiting for hours for the brakes to be replaced and for the truck to be detailed, we were told that they could not get it cleaned thoroughly enough before closing so we set an appointment to have it done at a later date. When my wife showed up for that appointment she was told that the sales/service department never made the appointment with the detailing department and they had no record that they were supposed to detail the truck. She eventually got to the bottom of the issue after talking with all the departments and was finally told that it would be done. She waited for 3 hours before she was told that she would have to set another appointment for the following week to return to complete the detail. Finally, the following week my wife dropped the truck off and your dealership kept the truck all day before your dealership got around to completing the detail. We did not ask for anything other than to have the truck detail completed as promised. Your dealership offered to fill up the truck because at your request and instruction she had to keep coming back again and again to complete the detail. I did not include this issue in the initial complaint because eventually the detail was completed. Finally, you know who the mechanic is who says the brakes need to be replaced because at your request I provided to you the paperwork from the mechanic stating that they needed to be replaced! Check your records and if you have misplaced it I would be happy to send you another copy. Your dealership needs to deliver as promised. When we purchased the truck we were told that the brakes were new. We request nothing more or less. Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 12, 2014/10/22) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Mr. ********* We were given the following paperwork: 1) Motor Vehicle contract of sale 2) Odometer disclosure statement 3) Buyers guide 4) Vehicle application for Utah Title 5) Addition & removal order We were not provided this "We Owe" document that you have referenced. But in any event, this "we owe" paperwork is irrelevant because again, for the third time, this was NOT something that you were going to do for us AFTER the sale. We were told that it had ALREADY been done when we signed the paperwork! There was no need to include this in the paperwork because we were told that the brakes had already been replaced. *******, your salesperson was not promising that you would replace the brakes, he promised that the brakes had already been replaced. We discovered that we had been deceived and that the brakes had not been replaced when we had our mechanic look at the vehicle the following day. Final Business Response /* (4000, 18, 2014/10/28) */ Contrary to what you think, you do not have a claim here. Any court would see the signed documentation and immediately throw this out. You and I both know this was not promised or you would not agree to pay half. With that said, I am still willing to pay half but ONLY if it is done at my dealership. It is clear that the mechanic you took it to isn't honest. If you believe he is, let's call the Highway Patrol and have them come and inspect them. Then when they do, hopefully you want call them liars. This offer will only be available until Oct 31st. **** ******** ****

8/13/2014 Problems with Product/Service
2/28/2014 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: Purchased truck 1/6/14 at 0% interest. Took delivery 1/7/14. 1/8/14 dealer stated unable to finance and to return vehicle or finance elsewhere. Hi, my name is ********** ******* ******* ******, and I am writing because I have a binding contract with Bountiful Toyota, UT. However the dealership wrote to inform me that I do not have any financing. In essence, they are not honoring the contract. I purchased a 2013 Platinum Tundra around November 25, 2013. I was unhappy with the deal because the agreed sales price was different than the amount that the finance office presented. The finance manager stated that the dealership could not take a $2100 loss. I purchased a 2013 Tundra because the dealer was going to provide more incentives than if I purchased a 2014 model. They didn't. After I purchased the vehicle, I expressed my displeasure in the on-line survey. On January 6, 2014 I returned to the dealership at lunch to seek resolution. I asked to speak with the General Manager. Instead I was routed to two sales managers. I stated that the previous deal was deceptive at best. The two managers asked me to give them a few hours to see what kind of deal that they could come up with. I returned at 5 p.m.and a manager presented an offer for me to purchase a 1794 Edition truck. The manager explained that the vehicle should be arriving in the next day or two. I was not interested in purchasing a vehicle unseen and taking a $6k trade in loss. I ran the numbers and decided that even though I was taking a huge loss on the truck that I had for over a month, the 0% financing would off set the loss. I searched the lot on the dark and snowy night and even went across the street to the over flow lot. I did not see a Tundra that I loved, so I decided to just find a vehicle on the lot and go with the 0% on a 2014 model. It was now 7 pm MST and I chose a 2014 Sienna van. While waiting I wanted to see if there were any new cars on the used car lot; there was, and it was the 2014 1794 edition truck hidden on the side of the building. The truck was the only new car there. The dealer never was being deceptive again. I went back inside and notified my salesman that the vehicle was in stock and that I would I agree to the original deal. the manager presented the deal in writing $47K for the 2014 1794, and $40K for the 2013 Platinum trade in. I counter-offered and the manager said that the dealership could not accept a penny less, but he promised that the offer sheet that I signed would not change in the finance office this time. I signed the contract and providing my debit card. The finance manager said that it would be easier if I returned with a check. At 5 pm the next day, January 7, 2014 I returned with a check and took delivery of the truck. I was happy. However, on January 8, 2014 at 3 pm I received a call from finance office stating that I was not financed and that I needed to put down another $5700 to receive 0% finance for 36 and not 60 months, find financing elsewhere or return the vehicle. I stated that I have a binding contract and that I am not changing the terms. I also stated that all the issues should have been addressed before I took delivery of my truck, and that I was taking the 2013 truck back. January 11, 2014 I received a letter in the mail informing me that I need to return the vehicle, pay 30 cents a mile, and return to the terms of my 2013 Platinum Tundra contract. This is the second time that the Bountiful Toyota has presented an offer and then changed the terms in the finance office. The dealer stated that the only way I qualified for 0% interest was on a 2014 model, therefore I had to trade in and take a $6K loss which is the difference in why the dealer says I don't qualify. The dealer also decided on the terms of the contract knowing that it would not meet the criteria to be financed by the Toyota Finance Co. The dealer has no explanation as to why they did not know that the contract would not meet minimum requirements for financing. My credit is good and the issue is the negative equity from trading the 2013 which they insisted.

Desired Settlement: I will put more money down, and I am asking the dealer to increase my trade in amount. This second truck was supposed to be a customer service resolution, but instead it appears to be otherwise.

Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1000, 7, 2014/02/06) */ Contact Name and Title: **** ******** Managing Partner Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX Contact Email: **** I am so sorry. I thought I had responded to this on the 19th. We worked everything out with Mr. ******. He is happy with our resolution. Sorry again ****

12/17/2013 Advertising/Sales Issues
11/15/2013 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: The extended warranty was voided by Toyota Financial leaving us with a useless $1200 contract. Further, the car was not serviced prior to delivery. Dear Mr. ********* My wife and I purchased a used 2006 Maserati from your dealership on July 2, 2013. Your staff was pleasant and the dealership looked clean and professional. However, there are two issues that I need to address with you. 1. Extended Warranty: As an important part of our used car purchase from your dealership we decided to select an extended warranty plan. As we were about ready to use it in September we received the attached letter from Toyota corporate indicating that are warranty was not valid. Despite several attempts to clarify this matter with your staff this issue remains unresolved. We want to have an extended warranty in place since there are several major issues that have arisen with the Maserati. Copies of the correspondence with your dealership are attached. Since our purchase of the extended warranty in July we have received zero benefits. The contract is not in place. Over $1000 was paid to your dealership for the extended service. Approximately four of the twelve months have passed with no benefit to us. Desired result: An extended service contract in place beginning in November covering the same components with the same deductible. 2. Vehicle Condition: Attached is the correspondence with your dealership regarding the condition of the vehicle. According to your service department two things were performed by your dealership -- a new battery and replacement shade film for the back two doors. I have never purchased a vehicle from a dealership that was not serviced (oil levels, new filters, brakes, etc.). You will see in the correspondence that there were several safety issues discussed with your staff before and immediately after delivery of the Maserati. With the existing condition of the Maserati in an emergency my wife can not open the passenger door from inside the car. The door only opens from the outside. I believe that I have repaired/replaced the other items that were identified in the correspondence. The remaining issue is to have the car serviced and safety inspected (hopefully with an extended warranty). It is my hope that the above matters can be resolved in a satisfactory manner. I appreciate your time in reviewing my correspondence with your dealership. Sincerely, ****** (***) *******, Jr. ****** ** ******* **** *** ***** Drive Carson City, Nevada 89703 XXX-XXX-XXXX

Desired Settlement: A valid extended warranty as per the initial agreement between the dealership and us. Service/repair for the vehicle that was not serviced prior to delivery. According to the service department the only service was a new battery and new tint on the rear door windows. Passenger from door won't open, service light came on shortly after delivery, etc. I wasn't too concerned about the service light until I found out that our extended warranty had been voided. I had to pay for an owners manual, tire changing hardware, spare tire, replace broken switch which controls either the forward or rear movement of the car (at the time of purchase the car could be shifted abruptly from drive or reverse or reverse to drive by simply touching the broken switch assembly), car was delivered with a non-functioning brake/tail light. I didn't expect a perfect used car but rather a safe vehicle according to Utah/Nevada state law, a car that was serviced prior to delivery, and one that had an owner's manual so that we would know how to safely operate the car.

Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2013/10/29) */ Contact Name and Title: **** ******** GM Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX Contact Email: **** Good morning, We spoke at great lengths with this customer yesterday. We have come to a resolution that is acceptable to both parties. Thanks, **** E ******** General Manager

10/1/2013 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: Charged extra fee not quoted up front. Unable to remove from mailing lists. Had my car serviced at this location. They quoted me a price, and then they charged a "shop fee" on top of the price. This extra fee was not mentioned up front. It was a sneaky hidden deceptive back-end fee. Secondly I have requested several times that they remove my name & address from their mailing lists. I receive frequent junk mail from them. They are unable to stop third party companies, and the company themselves from sending mail to my address.

Desired Settlement: Refund of the "shop fee" charged on the original service order. Secondly, removing my name & address from ALL contact lists, both in house and third party (shared with third parties). I do not ever want to receive any mail from them again - except perhaps if they offer a refund of the "shop fee" that was inappropriately & deceptively added onto my original repair order.

Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2013/09/12) */ Contact Name and Title: **** ********* General Manager Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX Contact Email: **** We have spoken to Mr ****** about his concern of the "shop fee" from his visit March of 2012. We have removed him from ALL mailing lists we have any control of. We explained that there are outside mailing companies that purchase zip code lists that we can't control unfortunately. We are mailing him the $8.90 for the shop fee that every customer pays. This hopefully will resolve this issue. Thanks, **** ******** General Manager

9/5/2013 Advertising/Sales Issues | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: "2 for 1" billboard special not accurate. The employees and even managers were dishonest with regards to this promotion. I passed a billboard on I-15 that read "2 for 1 vehicles next right"- an advertisement for Bountiful Toyota. I called and spoke with ***** who validated the promotion, explaining that sometimes Toyota "gives them extra cars because they sell so many". We made an appointment to meet at the dealership because he would not describe the terms over the phone. When I arrives at the dealership at 1:30pm on Wednesday, August 28th Marco was unavailable. I spoke with ****** I asked again for the specifics of the offer. ***** confirmed that the offer was "2 cars for the price of 1". ***** then asked me to follow him to the lot to pick out my two vehicles. I picked two Toyota Corollas. After the typical dealership run around ***** finally returned with a piece of paper. The paper had "car 1- $397/month, car 2- $0. ***** then explained that it was a lease offer. He then showed me a slip inside of a binder which showed the typical lease price of a single corolla as $169 per month. I asked why the total price for the 2 for 1 offer was so much higher, to which he explained that the additional $230 per month were taxes and fees. I told him that it looked like they had just rolled the price of the second car into the price of the first. He quickly dismissed my accusation and said that $397 is the price for a single car lease. He went through a detailed and confusing explanation as to why the price was soup,e what it should be. After everything, we ended back at me same question. I asked to speak with his manager, at which point he told me that they were not available. He escorted me to the sales counter where a man was seated. ***** told me that this man was a manager. I explained to him my concerns regarding the validity of the 2 for 1 offer. He explained that the "2 for 1" is meant to be interpreted as follows: the payments for the two cars is paid in one large payment instead of two separate payments. He laughed and said, "did you think we were giving 2 cars for the price of 1?" I used this example to clear my point: if McDonald's posted and add that read "2 for 1 Big Macs". What would you expect? He replied "2 Big Macs for the price of 1". Exactly. This add is completely misleading. This offer is in no way a 2 for 1 offer. It is at best a "we'll bundle your payments" offer. I already knew that I could buy a second car for double the price. This add is intentionally misleading. The employees at Bountiful Toyota were dishonest regarding the true nature of the offer even though I explicitly asked for the specifics of the offer numerous times.

Desired Settlement: Removal of the misleading 2 for 1 add campaign and a written apology

Business Response: Business' Initial Response /* (1000, 5, 2013/09/02) */ Contact Name and Title: **** ********* General Manager Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX Contact Email: **** I have talked with all the employees regarding this situation. I am very sorry that they were NOT trained appropriately on our "2 for 1 Toyota's" program. That is 100% my fault for not making sure all of the team is trained. Our" 2 for 1 Toyota" offer has been going on for about 4 months now. We offer 2 new Toyota's for one low payment. We have provided this for almost 50 individuals over the last few months and they LOVE IT. Please let Mr *******'s know I am personally sorry and responsible for this lack of communication. I have addressed this with the sales manager and Lucky to ensure this never happens again. I am available personally for Mr ******** for any future Toyota business that he may want to pursue. Thanks for the information! **** ******** General Manager **** Consumer's Final Response /* (2000, 7, 2013/09/04) */ (The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.) I appreciate the apology and quick response. Thank you for taking care of the situation,

9/4/2013 Problems with Product/Service
6/6/2013 Advertising/Sales Issues