Complaints

This profile includes complaints for Servco Pacific Inc.'s headquarters and its corporate-owned locations. To view all corporate locations, see Find Local Branches.

close

Find a Location

Servco Pacific Inc. has 9 locations, listed below.

*This company may be headquartered in or have additional locations in another country. Please click on the country abbreviation in the search box below to change to a different country location.

BBB accredited

Near

Country

USUnited States

Please enter a valid location.

Filter

• 

  Servco Pacific Inc.

  Honolulu, HI 96819-4475

  
• 

  Servco Pacific Inc.

  45-655 Kamehameha Hwy Kaneohe, HI 96744-2036

  
• 

  Servco Pacific Inc.

  650 Kapiolani Blvd Honolulu, HI 96813-5130

  
• 

  Servco Pacific Inc.

  2850 Pukoloa St Ste 104 Honolulu, HI 96819-4436

  
• 

  Servco Pacific Inc.

  2850 Pukoloa St Ste 200 Honolulu, HI 96819-4467

  

The complaint text that is displayed might not represent all complaints filed with BBB. Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:01/09/2025

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Between the dates of 12/30/2024 - 1/9/2025, I made several attempts to get reimbursement and service from Servco Pacific for my 2022 ****** Sienna, which was experiencing a sensor defect that drains the battery. This defect was a known issue with this vehicle (according to a technical service bulletin produced by ****** on this particular make, model, and VIN number.) A certified ****** dealership in *********, ** diagnosed the issue in our vehicle on 12/28/2024 with an estimated cost of $5600. ****** customer ********************** (US office) first offered $2500 toward the repair and then proceeded to tell me on several more occasions that they just realized they couldnt do anything to help me because my vehicle had a Hawaiian VIN number. They told me I would need to deal with Servco Pacific to resolve my issue. I spoke with Servco Pacific 3 times between 12/30-1/9. They told me that yes, they produced and serviced the vehicle when it was in ****** but because I live in ****, they would not help resolve my issue. Again, this is a known defect in this make and model but because there is no recall and I dont live in the state in which the car was made (****** considers Hawaii a foreign market ) I am left stranded. As a ****** customer and consumer, this is appalling. The dealership I bought the car from says they werent responsible to know or communicate this issue /discrepancy between a Hawaiian VIN and a non-Hawaiian VIN. Servco Pacific takes no responsibility either because I dont live there. I am requesting a partial reimbursement of $2500 for the repair costs.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 02/11/2025

  This is Companys response to Complaint ID ********
  
  
  
  
  Toyota Hawaii/Servco Pacific Inc. has received and reviewed the customers concerns about battery drainage and the reference to a Technical Service Bulletin (T-SB-0071-22).  The referenced TSB states that repairs directly related to this program are covered under ******************* Warranty period, which is in effect for 36 month or ****** miles, whichever comes first.  Nonetheless, we are unable to confirm that the referenced TSB is directly related to your current battery concern.
  
  After a thorough review of all available information, we identified that this vehicle was originally purchased in ****** and later relocated to the continental *************. As a result, the vehicle is no longer within our distributor and dealer network.  While we were able to view limited-service history from visits to dealers within the ********** network, we noted the following:
  
           The first mention of a battery concern occurred after the expiration of the ******************* Warranty (vehicle mileage exceeded ****** miles).
  o    12/28/24, mileage *****, dealer #*****, RO 0016079
           The most recent service visit involved a dealer's estimate to replace the kick sensors.
  o    1/16/25, mileage *****, dealer #*****, RO 0017068
  
  Unfortunately, since the vehicle is outside of our distributor and dealer network, and no applicable warranty or repair programs apply to the concerns outlined, we are unable to fulfill your refund request, nor review your case further. If there are any questions, please contact Servco Customer ********************** at ************
  

• Initial Complaint

  Date:05/24/2024

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Our company had purchased two 2022 ***** Blazers from Servco Pacific in Waipahu. Both have engine issues and are still under warranty, but we cannot get them serviced. One broke down today (only ****** miles). I called ************** and spoke with ***** regarding my need to have the vehicle towed for service to Waipahu. ***** said that the Waipahu location's computer system was down but that she would message them ahead regarding incoming vehicle. First standby appointment was not until May 29th (5 days away), but they would work on it before then if time permitted. An hour later, our vehicle is attached to the tow truck and we gave a courtesy call to Waipahu to ask if we could bring in the second Blazer at the same time because the check engine light is on. Waipahu refused to accept either vehicle for service -- including the one that is already on a tow truck to go to Waipahu based upon the direction given to me by ***** two hours earlier. So now have two malfunctioning Blazers and no service appointment, despite the vehicles remaining under warranty.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 06/15/2024

  Servco *******'s response is attached.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 06/17/2024

   
  Complaint: 21758731
  
  I am rejecting this response because: as discussed on the phone with Assistant Service Manager, ***************, ***** at the service center (#**************) was fully aware of the network outage on May 29th at the time she authorized the towing of our disabled vehicle.   We were only having the one vehicle towed.  It was only an hour later when the two truck arrived and my boss called to ask if we could also drop off our second Blazer that was driveable but for which the check engine light was on that we were told that BOTH vehicles (including the one already on the two truck) would be refused entry if brought to your facility.  After investigating you still do not have your facts correct.  You are correct in your statement that "Upon thorough scrutiny, no records indicate the arrival or rejection of a tow operator at our facility,"  but I had already told you that.  Why would we pay to tow vehicle from downtown ******** to Waipahu when your Waipahu location was suddenly telling us that they would reject it if we did... an hour after ***** told us to tow the vehicle over  You have accepted no responsibility for the miscommunication between your service phone center and your service location in Waipahu and I do not see any indication in your response that you do in fact take customer satisfaction seriously. 
  
  Sincerely,
  
  *************************

• Initial Complaint

  Date:12/20/2023

  Type:Product Issues
  Status:

  ResolvedMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I reserved a Silverado EV with Servco in January 2022, paying a refundable $100 deposit. I moved off-island and cancelled my reservation in August 2023. I have been unsuccessful in getting Servco to refund the $100, despite repeated attempts and promises of restitution.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 12/27/2023

  See Servco's response attached. 

  

  Business Response

  Date: 12/27/2023

  See Servco's response attached. 

  Customer Answer

  Date: 01/07/2024

   
  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and find although some facts were incorrect, that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  *****************************

• Initial Complaint

  Date:08/30/2023

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  - I bought a brand new Tacoma from them in 2018 and my wife and I noticed a whistle sound from the Truck immediately after we started driving the truck around. - When I brought my truck in for its first ever service in April of 2019 at the service department next to the dealership, they said nothing was wrong with the truck. - Fast forward 5 years later, my A/C breaks about a month ago and I was researching online about Tacoma A/C problems. According to a third party mechanic, my Evaporator core broke.- In my research I found out that ****** released a service bulletin in ************************************************** the Tacoma. The fix was to replace the evaporator core, which is covered under the warranty. - I brought the truck back to Servco and asked them to replace the evaporator core under warranty, since I first brought the whistle issue up to them in 2019. I showed them my service record where it shows I complained about a whistle. - They made me pay a diagnostic fee first which was $180. they confirmed that the evaporator core was broken and they were able to confirm the whistle. - They refused to cover the repair under the warranty because the truck is now out of warranty. I feel that they should honor the warranty since I brought this whistle issue to them in 2019 right after I bought the vehicle and the truck was under warranty at that time. It appears that since the ****** service bulletin did not come out until 2022, they did not know about this whistle issue, or how to replicate it, or how to fix it when I brought in the truck in 2019. But what is confirmed is that the issue was present and the truck was under warranty. Since they know how to fix it now, they should honor the warranty.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 09/21/2023

  Servco's response is attached, 

  Best regards,

  Servco Pacific Inc.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 09/21/2023

   
  Complaint: 20546399
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

       Servco is plainly agreeing with the facts that support my assertion that they should fix my evaporator core under warranty yet are refusing to do so; specifically that I brought my truck in for service and complained about the whistle while my vehicle was still under the warranty in April of 2019.  The Service Bulletin recommends replacing the evaporator core to address the whistle issue under warranty, and it states; "Warranty application is limited to occurrence of the specified condition described in this bulletin."  The occurrence was in April of 2019, on our first service of the vehicle.  The fact that you acknowledge this occurrence took place, yet refuse to cover the repair under warranty is a deceptive business practice. 

       In your response to my complaint and your service technician's response to me in my recent 2023 visit, it was mentioned that the service technicians could not replicate and diagnose the whistle on that service visit in April of 2019.  The implication here is that since your technicians could not replicate or diagnose the whistle, then the whistle occurrence never happened in April of 2019.  Is that your contention?  Are you saying that I was lying or mistaken about the whistle issue in April of 2019?  If that is your contention, I would like you to plainly state that.  The fact that my wife and I noticed the whistle right after we bought it and reported to your service department (and our sales rep by the way) should be evidence enough that the occurrence dated back to April of 2019.  However, the evaporator core failing pre-maturely within 5 years of life and your technician successfully replicating and diagnosing the whistle on my recent **************************************************************************************************************** April of 2019.  So, what is evident from an independent observer is that the whistle occurrence happened as early as April 2019 and your technicians simply failed to properly diagnose and fix it under warranty at that time (for whatever reason.)  

       It is plainly evident, in retrospect, that Servco was obligated and failed to cover this repair under warranty in April of 2019 upon the issue's first occurrence possibly due to incompetence.  Instead of making things right and covering the repair at this time, they are failing their obligation again, this time by choice with deceptive business practices.  I might understand if the service technician made that choice alone.  What is harder to understand is how the Service Manager and now the *** & General Manager of the company would make that choice.  Perhaps, covering the repair under warranty in a retroactive manner is simply out of Servco's control, regardless of the facts.  If that is the case, I would like them to plainly state that and commit to covering the cost of the repair in some other manner other than under warranty.

  
  Sincerely,
  
  *********************

• Initial Complaint

  Date:03/21/2023

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Failure to send/ship vehicle (#2) expeditiously as promised per ***'s initial agreement email dated 3/9/2023 Per YB Kaua'i agent on 3/21/2023, vehicles (#s 1 & 2) sent as "volume sales" meaning they are discounted shipments sent by dealers on a 'by availability basis,' not with a guaranteed shipping date **** emailed me a booking receipt with a "Sail Date: 3/20/2023" highlighted indicating to me and any reasonable person that the actual sail date would, in fact, be March 20, 2023 Servco Lexus had the option of upgrading shipping method for more timely delivery yet chose to forgo this option out of cheap business practices Failure to pay in advance for shipment of vehicles ************ vehicle #1, it was never previously discussed or disclosed to me that I would be responsible for "COD payment" to YB; nonetheless, I paid over $650 for the delivery of the first vehicle For vehicle #2 which still has not been received, YB Kaua'i agent says it was shipped using the same method: COD, meaning I am expected to pay the full price of shipment upon picking up the vehicle This is completely contrary to ***'s emailed agreement to me dated 3/9/23 in which it is clearly stated that: "We will pay for shipping the ** back from Kaua'i as well as the one we're shipping to you"Failure to reimburse for gas bill (over $90.00) for vehicle #1 despite having provided gas receipt to **** directly via text and asking if he wanted the actual receipt mailed.Failure to properly and fully inspect vehicle #1 prior to shipment to Kaua'i, thereby displaying questionable quality control measures and resulting in vehicle breakdown 12 hours after receipt Failure to disclose that Lexus technicians are dispatched to Kaua'i only once per month and ****** Kaua'i is only able to diagnose, but not repair, Lexus vehicles Failure to uphold ****************** as plainly outlined in ***'s own words per email agreement dated 3/9/2023

  

  Business Response

  Date: 03/31/2023

  Please see Servco's response attached.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:01/27/2023

  Type:Product Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Purchased a 2022 ****** Tundra from *****************. Service is the ****** "manufacturer" for ******. I have had nothing but problems with this vehicle it is a lemon. I have had to return to the dealership for an attempt to remedy the rattling sound coming from the bed of the truck. After 3 attempts the rattling noise is still present. It may be a serious issue, Servo had one of its techs in **** ride my vehicle and confirmed the problem. I have also had to replace the screen in the truck due to a defect in the screen. After the dealer installed the screen I am unable to log into my account via the screen rendering my account preferences useless now due to a defective screen unit. I have contacted service about these problems after 2 months of runaround they offered no solution. I have since filed a complaint with the ****** **** to file a lemon law complaint. Service knows about the problem this $85,000 truck has and will not refund my money or replace the truck with one that is fully operational.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 02/22/2023

  Servco's response is attached.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 02/24/2023

   
  Complaint: 18937043
  
  I am rejecting this response because: Per ****** Lemon Law 

  
  

  1. This vehicle has it has a nonconformity (a defect, malfunction, or condition) which was not repaired within 3 attempts.

  2. The nonconformity SUBSTANTIALLY impairs the use, market value, or safety of the car.

  3. The nonconformity is not the result of an accident, abuse, neglect, or alteration of the car by persons other than the manufacturer or its authorized dealer.

  4. I tried to get the nonconformity repaired by the manufacturer's authorized dealer during the Lemon Law Rights Period.

  5. I gave the manufacturer or its authorized dealer a reasonable opportunity to repair the nonconformity during the Lemon Law Rights Period

  
  

  The dealer and Servcos own tech noted the noise. The noise is not coming from the tailgate as indicated by servo customer **********************. I have given servco ample opportunity to correct this situation which they will not do. I paid top dollar for a vehicle I expect it to not knock and rattle like a vehicle with ******* miles on it! Furthermore servco and the dealer cannot confirm this problem may be hazardous!
  

  
  Sincerely,
  
  Mariner Revell

• Initial Complaint

  Date:09/27/2022

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  They deny any warranty claims that are filed. Due to damage, well a warranty is designed for damage. They refuse to explain why and go into details.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 09/28/2022

  We are unable to locate any vehicle connected to the customer in our system. Without the Vehicle Identification Number, we are unable to thoroughly search customer records. Please provide this information.

   

  Sincerely,

  Servco Pacific Inc.