Complaints

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:05/05/2025

  Type:Service or Repair 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.

  On March 25, 2025, my 2025 ****** Corolla (MRJ6084) was towed from the CVS customer parking lot at **********************************************************************. The towing, executed by a maintenance technician from MCGANN & CHESTER, LLC, was carried out despite the parking signage being noncompliant with Pennsylvania law. The signage failed to meet state-required standards under the following provisions: 67 Pa. Code 212.115(b)(2)(i) Minimum 3-inch letter height for primary parking restrictions 67 Pa. Code 212.115(b)(2)(ii) Minimum 2-inch letter height for secondary restrictions 67 Pa. Code 212.115(b)(1)(iii) Absence of the required name and telephone number on the signage 67 Pa. Code 212.115(b)(4) (75 Pa.C.S. 3353(b)) Prohibition on towing from private lots with improperly posted restrictions The merchant replied and claimed there are eight compliant signs between the lot entrance and where ***** parked, but those signs refer to a **different lot (Lot2)** and are not visible from the area in question. The two signs at the actual lot from the entrance to the place where my car was towed remained noncompliant (I can provide photos and videos).MOREOVER, they charged me with $280.88. This violates city code ****** (b): No fees for towing in excess of those set forth in the annual fee schedule shall be charged for towing a motor vehicle from a parking area without the prior consent or authorization of the operator or driver of the vehicle. According to the annual fee schedule (************************************************************************************************************************) The charge should be no more than $135 (Towing Fee-Non City Owned Vehicles <***** lbs Pre April 1st 2025 $135.00)

  Business Response

  Date: 05/12/2025

  Good morning Wei,
  
  Thank you for reaching out regarding the towing of your ******. I apologize that we missed each other's calls last week. I wanted to follow up in writing to address your concerns.
  
  Following your message, I personally went to the parking lot to check the signage. I wasn't initially sure if your vehicle was in the top or bottom lot, but after reviewing the video from my truck, I confirmed it was in the bottom lot.
  
  You are correct that the bottom lot is currently not marked properly. However, I want to assure you that when we initially agreed to service this lot, it was indeed correctly marked. Our understanding from ******* management was that there were metal posts in the mulch which made towing permissible. These posts appear to have been removed since then.
  
  I have already communicated this issue to ******* management, and they have assured me they will take immediate corrective action and have ordered new signs. While we are not responsible for the installation of these signs, we do verify their accuracy before agreeing to work with a private lot. Due to this issue, we have suspended our service to the ******* building until the signs are reinstated. Generally, our involvement with the ******* building has been minimal.
  
  On a related note, I want to inform you that we have significantly reduced our private lot towing services citywide. This decision affects numerous locations, including the Aviary, the *************** and ************, among other large problem parking areas. Our primary reason for this change is that private lot towing is no longer a business area we wish to focus on. The only reason we continued to service the ******* building was due to the University of Pittsburgh Police using the upper lot and experiencing parking issues. Additionally, the towing rates set by the City code have not seen any cost of living increases in over 20 years, which, as you know from everyday expenses, is no longer sustainable.
  
  Regarding the cost of your tow, the standard rate prior to April 1st, 2025, was $135. Because your front-wheel drive vehicle was parked facing inwards, we had to use a flatbed to avoid causing any damage, which incurs an additional $50 fee. Due to the limited space, the driver had to use skates and a winch to safely position your car onto the flatbed. According to the ordinance, the winch usage should have been a minimum $40 charge for up to 30 minutes. Therefore, the correct total for your tow should have been $225.00.
  
  The charge of $230 plus fuel and winch was due to an error by a new dispatcher. As I mentioned, we primarily handle police-related towing, and our rates for those services (excluding City of Pittsburgh police rates, which are governed by State law) are posted in our front office. The rate you were charged is the correct rate for a private lot outside of the City limits. The dispatcher mistakenly applied that rate to your situation within the City.  I would like to offer you a credit for $95.88.  That is the original cost of the tow plus the flatbed fee.  
  
  Sincerely,
  
  McGann and Chester

  Customer Answer

  Date: 05/12/2025

  Better Business Bureau:
  
  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.
  
  Dear McGann & Chester,
  
  Thank you for your response dated 05/12/2025 regarding the towing of my ****** Corolla (MRJ6084) on March 25, 2025, from the *** parking lot at *******************
  
  I acknowledge your investigation and your confirmation that the signage in the bottom lot, where my vehicle was parked and subsequently towed, was indeed "not marked properly" at the time of the incident.
  As outlined in my initial complaint, Pennsylvania law 75 Pa.C.S. 3353(b) prohibits towing from private property unless parking restrictions are posted in accordance with state regulations, including the specific requirements detailed in 67 Pa. Code ******* (regarding letter height, content, etc.). Your admission confirms that these legal requirements for signage were not met, rendering the towing of my vehicle unlawful.
  Since the tow was performed without the legally required compliant signage, there was no legal basis for towing my vehicle or charging any fees. Therefore, I require a full refund of the $280.88 that was charged.
  Your offer of a $95.88 credit, which would result in a final charge of $185, is unacceptable. This offer fails to acknowledge the fundamental illegality of the tow itself due to the non-compliant signage you admitted to.
  
  Furthermore, even if the tow had been permissible (which your admission confirms it was not), the proposed final charge of $185 still violates Pittsburgh City Code. As previously cited:
  City Code 525.03(b) and the 2025 Fee Schedule set the maximum towing fee for a non-city-owned vehicle under ***** lbs prior to April 1st, 2025, at $135.00.
  City Code 525.05(d) prohibits charging for any fees or services other than the towing and storage fees permitted by the annual fee schedule for non-consensual tows. This prohibits additional charges like the $50 flatbed fee you included in your revised calculation.
  
  Therefore, the absolute maximum charge that could ever have been legally assessed under city code, if the tow had been legal, was $135.00. Your proposed charge of $185 remains in violation of city ordinance.
  However, the primary issue remains: the tow was unlawful due to the admitted lack of compliant signage required by state law. Explanations regarding past compliance, dispatcher errors, arrangements with property management, or changes in your company's business focus do not alter the illegal nature of this specific tow.
  To resolve this complaint, please process a full refund of $280.88.
  
  Sincerely,
  Regards,
  
  *** **

  Business Response

  Date: 05/14/2025

  The signage is the responsibility of the Private property lot owner. They are not willing to help so I have emailed the customer and offered a refund and terminated our services to that lot.  

  Customer Answer

  Date: 05/14/2025

  [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. 
  
  Regards,
  
  *** **

• Initial Complaint

  Date:06/20/2023

  Type:Billing 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.

  April 28, 2022. Automobile Ford Fusion 2007 was towed by the business. Towing initiated PO ***** ***** ***** ****** Reason for the towing doesn't match with the Pittsburgh Bureau of Police policy "Towing procedures-reasons for towing ". Business refused to provide me back my property after I paid service amount of 160$. I received my automobile back only after I paid again 160$ for imposed service.

  Business Response

  Date: 07/12/2023

  I am in receipt of your email regarding the consumer complaint filed by *** ********** alleging that we illegally towed his vehicle without cause on April 28th 2023. 
  By way of introduction, McGann and Chester LLC ("McGann and Chester") is an independent contractor of the City of Pittsburgh, whereby we are contracted to tow illegally parked, as well as vehicles that have violated Pennsylvannia's Vehicle Code. Pursuant to our contract with the City of Pittsburgh, McGann and Chester is called directly by the City's Police following its findings of a specific violation, whereby we respond to the scene to tow the vehicle. 

  
  In this particular instance, on April 4th the City of Pittsburgh Police had us respond to tow a 2007 Ford Fusion with a trailer that was precariously attached. The tow slip was filled out by the Police Officer on scene on which they notated that the vehicle was to be towed off the impound lot for a variety of violations. A copy of the Tow Slip is attached. 
  ** ********** arrived to retrieve the vehicle at which time he was informed the vehicle must be towed out. He paid the initial impound as well as a private tow to have us tow the vehicle to a location of his choice. *** ********** had the opportunity to contract with any other company to have his vehicle removed. Instead he chose to use us. Therefore, that portion of the requested refund is invalid. 

  I am attaching photographs which the McGann and Chester responder took of the condition of the vehicle prior to towing, which clearly marks it as a safety violation. However, the decision to have the vehicle towed was not ours. Instead the City of Pittsburgh Police Department made this decision. *** ********** should have received a citation. On the back of that citation are instructions on how to dispute the ticket, and therefore the tow through the court system. If found not guilty, he is eligible to recuperate the ORIGINAL tow fee only. This is the proper avenue for him to peruse recuperation of fees paid. 

  
  By way of the attached and the above, please accept this letter as our response to both ************ consumer complaint and your letter, which demonstrate the actions taken by McGann and Chester were well within the scope of its contracted responsibilities with the City of Pittsburgh and authorized directly by same. Should you or ********** have any additional questions involving this matter, please feel free to contact me directly. 
  
  Ryan M***** 
  Operations Manager 
  

  
  

  Customer Answer

  Date: 07/15/2023

  Better Business Bureau:
  
  
  
  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.
  
  
  **** ** ******

  I would like to point your view on the date in the letter from business. In the letter Mr Ryan McGann provided different dates of the same event. Pictures with "clearly marks of safety violations" as stated by Mr Ryan McGann missing. Court found me not guilty and dismissed all charges. Service was imposed when I tried to get back my automobile. They refuse to give it to me and I paid them again towing fees(please see picture #2). After they received my payment I drive my Ford Fusion by myself from their facility. 7Thanks to Mr McGann.
  
  
  
  Regards,
  
  
  
  ****** **********

  Business Response

  Date: 07/20/2023

  I apologize as my letter did have some conflicting dates. However, the substance of my letter was correct. 
  
  As for the vehicle being a hazard and therefore removed from the road is not our issue to dispute. That was what the Police determined and therefore up to the court to decide. Please see my response below to see how to proceed in getting a refund if indeed the court dismissed the case. 
  
  The point about them driving the vehicle off of our lot is untrue. They were given a receipt at the time they scheduled the service to have the vehicle removed from the lot. As stated before, the customer could have utilized any towing company for that service. They chose to contract with us. That tow will not be refunded as it was asked of us by the customer and the service was performed. 
  
   If they were ruled not guilty by the court as stated, they are eligible to receive a refund for the first tow, as well as the ticket issued to them. They would have to provide a copy of the stamped court order at our office they would have received and then if the paperwork is correct are eligible to be issued a refund. 
  
  Ryan McGann

  Customer Answer

  Date: 07/21/2023

   

  Dear Mr McGann,
  Will you give me a refund if I provide verification of my statement that I drove by myself on my Ford Fusion from your facility and it wasn't on the towing truck of your company? 
  I asked the clerk after the court hearing about it and he printed me that, please see the picture. He said that they don't provide court orders if a case is dismissed. 
  All my statements are true and correct, this is the reason of the complaint. 

  Sincerely,

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