BBB Accredited Business since

Chapman Ford of Lancaster

Phone: (717) 299-4331 Fax: (717) 431-2402 5201 Manheim Pike, E Petersburg, PA 17520 View Additional Email Addresses

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

BBB Accreditation

A BBB Accredited Business since

BBB has determined that Chapman Ford of Lancaster 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 <em>lowered</em> the rating for Chapman Ford of Lancaster include:

  • 8 complaint(s) filed against business

Factors that raised the rating for Chapman Ford of Lancaster include:

  • Length of time business has been operating
  • Response to 8 complaint(s) filed against business
  • Resolution of complaint(s) filed against business

Customer Complaints Summary Read complaint details

8 complaints closed with BBB in last 3 years | 4 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 7
Total Closed Complaints 8

Customer Reviews Summary Read customer reviews

0 Customer Reviews on Chapman Ford of Lancaster
Customer Experience Total Customer Reviews
Positive Experience 0
Neutral Experience 0
Negative Experience 0
Total Customer Reviews 0

Additional Information

BBB file opened: January 01, 1977 Business started: 01/01/1929 in PA Business started locally: 09/01/1995
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 Professional & Occupational Affairs (BPOA)-PA
PO Box 2649, Harrisburg PA 17105
Phone Number: 717-783-1404
Fax Number: 717-705-5540
The number is 856410.

Type of Entity


Business Management
Raymond V.J. Garraffa, President Ms. Shirley Davies, Controller Mr. Norm Eshleman, Controller
Contact Information
Customer Contact: Ms. Shirley Davies, Controller
Principal: Raymond V.J. Garraffa, President
Business Category

Auto Dealers - Used Cars Auto Dealers - New Cars

Alternate Business Names
Chapman Auto Group
Industry Tips

Additional Locations

  • 5201 Manheim Pike

    E Petersburg, PA 17520


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)

5/16/2015 Problems with Product/Service
11/25/2014 Advertising/Sales Issues
11/2/2014 Problems with Product/Service
5/27/2014 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: The nature of my complaint could be repair, sales and service related. We took our car to repair our starter in Jan 2014. In March, the same issue had come up. This time the issue was also combined with a transmittion problem. Chapman did honor the parts warranty and replaced the starter again. They then mentioned they would need to do a rebuild of the transmittion and the cost would be close to 4k. Thankfully a family member used to be a mechanic for ford and asked what codes they were receiving. After providing the information, he told me to ask them if it could be an issue related to the ignition not causing the proper voltage to go towards the transmition. When Chapman got back to me I was told they would not check that specifc problem, since it would take over two hours to look at. On top of that in my frustration I mentioned trading in the car. The mention of a trade in became their main focus, not fixing the problem at hand. The service representative *** mentioned, "I actually have a sales representative in front of me now." I asked them to fix the starter problem and hold off on the transmition. My father helped pick the car up for me and when he went to start the car, it wouldnt start. He was then told it takes a little for the new part to break in before it works. I have delt with bad cable companies, phone companies etc, but never a company so unfocused on service and client satisfaction. Im sorry for my long response. In summary the first problem (starter) was never fixed. Secondly they tried to sell or replace and not fix the new transmition problem.

Desired Settlement: A refund of the first "fix" of my starter and an secondly the service manager and owner to be aware that complaints have been filed.

Business Response:

*** ********* *** purchased a vehicle at our **** ********** location January 13th, 2011.  It was a 2008 ******* ******* with 29,516 miles on it.  He has been a loyal customer to this location since then and has done numerous repairs with us.  Dec 27th, 2013 he had his vehicle to our facility for repairs (Yearly inspections, diagnosis of vehicle being tough to start, exhaust leak, and traction control light), and at this point the vehicle had 93,794 miles.  His concern was the customer must jiggle the keys at times to start the vehicle.  It was found that his ignition switch assembly was the cause of the concern due to it being worn out with pluger binding up.  Customer approved repair of the ignition switch.  The new ignition switch was installed and shimmed.  At that time the concern was resolved and all other repairs were performed as needed, and there was no concern expressed to us at the time *** ********* *** picked up his vehicle. 

Vehicle returned to our dealership on March 10th, 2014 for a drivetrain transmission concern with the milage of 97,450 miles with nothing mentioned in regards to previous repairs.  The technician performed diagnosis on the vehicle for the transmission, and performed an electronic test pulling code *****.  The vehicle at that time had no second gear.  Performed Ford pin point test that they provided, and at that time the transmission would need to be inspected internally.  Removal of the pan andpossible removal of the transmisson and dissemble to find cause of failure.  At that point the customer was notified and customer declined any further diagnosis to the vehicle.

While the vehicle was in (3-10-14) we felt a concern with the ignition switch again.  A second ignition switch was installed at no charge to the customer.  The customer was only charged for the first hour of diagnosis for the transmission concern.  The customers transmission concern was never fully diagnosed without the removal of the pan or disassembly of the transmission and is in no way related to the ignition that was repaired originally. 

Chapman Ford has performed all diagnostics and repairs that were approved by the customer and the customer was correctly billed.  We do not feel that we are responsible for a refund of the first repair due to the fact that he was no charged for the second repair of the ignition switch because we absorbed the cost of the second repair.  If any documentation is needed, we are more than willing to supply the support documentation.  If you have any further questions please feel free to contact me at ###-###-####.


**** *******

Service Manager

Chapman Ford Sales/Service

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

Consumer Response: [To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

 Complaint: *******

I am rejecting this response because:

The starter was never fixed either time. When we picked up the car after the second 'fix' of the starter. We brought up the fact it still would not start. We were told the part needs time to 'break in'. It never did.


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

Consumer Response: Documents

4/22/2013 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: see Attached document

Desired Settlement: Please see attached letter

Business Response:

*** ******* did bring his 1998 Ford Ranger with 77,257 miles for a concern that the check engine light was on.  The technician performed an electronic engine control test. Codes in the sytem are ***** and *****. A lean condition was deteched in both banks. The technician performed the pin point test for the codes and the test does not show  that the lean condition was detected at this time. The customer was informed that the test should be performed when the engine is cold and for no additional cost to him. The reason that the testing should be performed when the engine is cold  so the technician can verify the true cause of failure and unneeded parts are not replaced. The customer was offered to complete all needed testing for the origional cost.

All information was stated to the customer and also documented on the customers invoice copy.


Thank you

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

Service Manager

Chapman Ford

Consumer Response:

 Complaint: *******

I am rejecting this response because:

Please see attached response.


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

3/27/2013 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: I took my car in to get the annual state inspection, emissions and an oil change. I was informed that in order for the car to pass inspection, it needed a tag bulb and the headlights were oxidized which prevented the light from being emitted. I requested to have the measurements of how much light was being emitted in writing numerous times, to which we never received. I was however shown a copy of a page of the state inspection regulations codebook, which showed that this was part of the points inspection. I was to receive a copy of this but never did. The service adviser kept saying that he was going by what the technection told him and that he trusted his judgment. Our concern comes from the dealership being unable to prove or being unwilling to prove that the headlights were defective.

Desired Settlement: Would like the dealership to refund the money for a repair that they could not or were unwilling to prove that this repair was indeed needed for the vehicle to pass inspection.

Business Response:

**** ***** did bring her 2006 Ford Fusion in for ************ State inpection on February 23, 2013. The licenced technician performed the ** state inspection on that date. The vehicle failed for two issues. One of these issues was for the tag light bulb and the other was that both front head lights where extremely oxidized. The certified licensed technician of 19 years and also a Ford Senior Master technician failed the vehicle for these reasons. Chapman Ford offered the customer the cheapest repair to see if we could save the customers head lights. The customer agreed to have the dealership/technician perform a reconditioning to the head lights. The technician performed the the recondioning and at that time the vehicle's head lights were able to pass PA state inspection and a ** state inspection sticker was issued. **** ***** stated that she was extremely happy with the results of the reconditioning of the head lights and also stated that her husband was going to perform the reconditioning himself, but never got around to it. The customer was billed for the reconditioning in the amount of $131.30. The alternative option would have been to replace the head lights which would have come to a total of $462.47. Chapman Ford felt that we provided the customer with a reasonable and cost-effective repair and the customer was satisfied with the outcome of the repair.


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

Service Manager

Consumer Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

 Complaint: *******

I am rejecting this response because:My wife and I both asked that Chapman prove in writing that the lights were not bright enough to pass inspection, the service adviser said he would include this information on our bill, he did not do so. We agreed to have the service done because they would provide the proof that the lights were too dim.  Chapman failed to do this verballly or in writing. According to the ** Department of Transportation low beam head lights must measure a minimum of 7500 candle power, and high beams must measure a minimum of 10000 candle power, to pass state inspection. When my wife  asked the service adviser what the headlights on our car measured and how they had come to the determination that that they were not bright enough he replied he did not know and that he trusted his technician's judgment, he then said he would speak to the technician and have a measurement put in writing on our bill.  I also called and spoke to the service adviser asking how they knew that the lights were not bright enough, his response was the same as that given to my wife, that he trusted his technicians judgment. I also insisted that a measurement be put on our bill to prove that the lights were not bright enough to pass inspection, the advisor said he would tallk to his technician and have said measurement in writing put on the bill. At no time was a measurement given to us eighter verbly or in writeing as requested.   We paid for a service that we were told was needed to pass inspection, but were not given the proof that said service was needed even after askeing several times for it in writing. At no time did my wife state that she was "  extremely happy " with the reconditioning. According to my wife she said they looked fine and just wanted to get out of there because she felt like she had been taken advantage of, and felt unappreciated as a customer because of our several requests for writen measurement of the brightness of the headlights was not provided.Below you will find a link to the PENDOT website with the listing of headlight brightness requirements. 



****** *****

Business Response: See attached.

Consumer Response: [A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response.  If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]

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. 


****** *****

3/11/2013 Problems with Product/Service
8/27/2012 Problems with Product/Service