BBB Accredited Business since

Pro Automotive, Inc.

Additional Locations

Phone: (276) 666-2167 1741 Spruce Street, Martinsville, VA 24112

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


This company offers general auto repair services.

BBB Accreditation

A BBB Accredited Business since

BBB has determined that Pro Automotive, Inc. 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 Pro Automotive, Inc. include:

  • Length of time business has been operating
  • Complaint volume filed with BBB for business of this size
  • Response to 1 complaint(s) filed against business
  • Resolution of complaint(s) filed against business

Customer Complaints Summary Read complaint details

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

Customer Reviews Summary Read customer reviews

1 Customer Review on Pro Automotive, Inc.
Customer Experience Total Customer Reviews
Positive Experience 1
Neutral Experience 0
Negative Experience 0
Total Customer Reviews 1

Additional Information

BBB file opened: July 18, 2000 Business started: 02/03/1988 in VA Business incorporated 12/30/1996 in VA
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:

State Corporation Commission
P.O. Box 1197, Richmond VA 23218
Phone Number: (804) 371-9733
Fax Number: (804) 371-9211

Henry County Business License

Phone Number: (276) 634-4691

Type of Entity


Business Management
Mr. Jeffrey Barrow, President Ms. Sharon Barrow, Office Manager
Contact Information
Principal: Mr. Jeffrey Barrow, President
Business Category


Industry Tips

Additional Locations

  • 1741 Spruce Street

    Martinsville, VA 24112 (276) 666-2167

  • P.O. Box 4564

    Martinsville, VA 24115


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)

12/5/2014 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: My vehicle had a transmission fluid leak, ask the business to find the source of the leak and repair. The repair shop stated with written copy that the source of the leak (pan gasket) was repaired, the gasket was replaced. Charged $180.00. the vehicle continued to leak transmission fluid the very next day, which was a Friday. D id not drive the vehicle again until the following Monday 10/27 and took it back to the repair business. The vehicle was again checked and a different source of the leak was found. I was charged an additional $150.00 to fix the original source of the leak. The business owner stated that i was only charged labor but the written copy of the receipt showed that i was also charged for additional parts.

Desired Settlement: I should be reimbursed for the second charge of $150.00 because the original repair was wrong and unnecessary.

Business Response: This letter is in response to the complaint filed by Mr. ****** on 10/27/2014.  Mr. ****** called and made an appointment at our shop to have us check for a transmission fluid leak around the transmission pan.  He stated that his daughter had taken it to another garage sometime last year and they had replaced the pan.  When questioned as to why he didn't take it  back to the shop that had originally done the work he replied that he did not want them to look at it again.  When we brought the vehicle in on 10/23/2014 it had a major leak around the transmission pan gasket.  What appears to have happened is when  the other garage replaced the transmission pan, the filter and the gasket were not replaced.  Silicone was used to keep the old gasket in it's place.  The pan bolts were also over tightened which put a strain on the gasket and caused a leak.  What we did was replace the transmission filter and gasket and installed new transmission fluid.  We rinsed the transmission pan off, test drove the vehicle, and checked for leaks, we  found none at the time.  We also checked the battery for a slow start and found that it was not secured in it's hold down position.  We secured it properly and made Mr.  ****** aware that his battery had tested low.   When the vehicle came back on 10/27/2014 Mr. ****** stated that the vehicle was leaking transmission fluid at whatever angle the vehicle was leaning.  When we pulled the vehicle in to check we found that this leak/seep was coming from the right front corner above the pan.  We pulled the shield and found that the electrical connector was leaking.  We replaced the transmission connector , rinsed off the pan, and topped off the transmission fluid.  We checked for codes and verified that there were no leaks at this time.   According to our research this is a common problem with this vehicle and could have possibly been the  original problem when the transmission pan was replaced to begin with.  I can understand Mr. ******'s frustration but we addressed two different problems with his vehicle.    The first time that he came in we had to address his leak that was a result of another garage installing his pan and gasket incorrectly.  In all honesty I can't hold myself accountable for work that was done by another garage.  With all of this being said  we run an honest garage and do the best we can by  our customers.  Mr. ****** should have called and spoke to the owner of the garage  and he would have addressed  his complaint.  (He was speaking with the technician who repaired his vehicle)  I am not willing to refund the entire amount of the second repair because I do not think that would be fair to me.  Please let know how to proceed with this matter.  Sincerely,****** ******Pro Automotive, Inc.  Owner:  ******* ******Phone:  ###-###-####

Consumer Response:  I have reviewed the response offer 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. First of all i did speak with the owner when i picked up my vehicle the 2nd time. His name is Jeff ****** and i DID speak with him. The cashier asked him to come and speak with me after i questioned the charges. He also tried to convince me that the previous garage that performed work on the vehiclewas the cause of all the problems, which i don't necessarily dispute. I brought my vehicle to Pro Automotive on a positive reference from a friend to find the SOURCE of the leak, not to just assume it was the pan gasket. The work done previously on the vehicle has nothing to do with the service performed at Pro automotive. I had no confidence that the previous garage could correctly diagnose the source of the leak. The first inspection of the transmission pan area should have included all possibilities where the leak could be originating. I appreciate that it was eventually found and fixed but i think the technician specifically focused on the gasket. I'm not asking for any refund but i think a business should charge people responsibly if the problem was not diagnosed properly the first time. The owner, **** ******, did state that he would not charge me for the defective parts found and replaced on the second visit, but he did chargeme for the part. I have the receipt copy to verify this, but did not notice it until i got home.

Business Response: This letter is in response to complaint number ********.  As I stated in my first response to this complaint the customer had two separate issues.  We did not make an assumption that he had a leak at the pan gasket, he did have a major leak.  He stated that the work that was done by the previous garage had nothing to do with the service we performed but it did.   He had a major leak with transmission fluid all underneath his vehicle.  We repaired that leak, cleaned off all of the fluid and test drove vehicle.  We then checked again for leaks and found none at that time.  When it came back in the second time the customer stated that the vehicle was leaking but only when parked at an angle.  When we checked it that time we were able to see a small leak at the electrical connector at the transmission.  This would not have been apparent the first time the vehicle was in the garage because of the amount of transmission fluid that was leaking  everywhere.  The customer stated that we should charge people responsibly for not diagnosing the vehicle properly the first time.  We do not feel that we misdiagnosed this vehicle.   The first time he was in we repaired what the other garage had done incorrectly, the second we repaired what was more than likely his original problem to begin with.  I honestly don't know what else to say about this.  Please advise me as to the best way to resolve this issue.   Sincerely,****** ******

Consumer Response:  I have reviewed the response offer 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.Provide details of why you are not satisfied with this resolution.   As i stated before, i am not seeking to be reimbursed. Mrs. ****** stated that the serious leak was repaired the first time, by replacing the gasket. The vehicle still leaked after that, even after all the fluid had been cleaned from the area the electrical connector leak wasn't noticed. We continue to get hung up on the problems with the previous garage repair. If i had just brought the car in and said i have a leak without mentioning the previous work maybe the original source of the leak would have been diagnosed without any pre-determined assumptions. I take responsibility for that, possibly confusing the technicians approach to the repair. I still assert that i was charged an unfair amount the 2nd time. However, i do not intend to discredit this business or pursue this matter any further as we are of differing opinions. Lets just leave it at that.      Thank you, *** ******