Estimated reading time: 8 minutes.
Key facts
- Agreement: Pennsylvania announced its Mavis Tire Supply settlement on September 28, 2026.
- Required payment: $215,000, including $190,000 for consumer restitution and $25,000 for investigation costs.
- Complaint deadline: January 26, 2027, with sufficient support for the complaint.
- Separate penalty: $100,000 is suspended and becomes payable only if a court finds a settlement breach.
- Company position: Mavis denies the allegations and does not admit liability or wrongdoing.
- Court record: Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, September 2026 No. 03390, case ID 260903390.
In this article
- What the Pennsylvania agreement resolves
- Who Mavis and the state consumer bureau are
- How the disputed repair process worked
- The laws and required business changes
- The agreement timeline
- Who can submit a complaint
- How the money and deadline work
- What the record does not establish
- What happens next
- Frequently asked questions
What the Pennsylvania agreement resolves
Pennsylvania's Office of Attorney General has reached an agreement with Mavis Tire Supply LLC over allegedly unnecessary, unperformed or poorly completed vehicle services. The September 28 announcement directs consumers who believe they were affected to submit supported complaints by January 26, 2027.
The agreement is an Assurance of Voluntary Compliance, a negotiated resolution of the state's investigation with payment and business-practice obligations. It is not a private class action settlement with a certified group of customers, a standard payment per claimant or an administrator's nationwide claim form. The state investigated the company's practices and accepted commitments intended to resolve the matter without litigating the underlying accusations.
The filed agreement preserves an important distinction. Mavis entirely denies the state's contentions and denies engaging in unfair or deceptive practices. It says it maintains established operational standards and policies and that, to the extent the alleged conduct occurred, employees failed to follow those policies. Mavis says it entered the agreement to avoid prolonged litigation's time, uncertainty and expense, without admitting liability or wrongdoing.
A settlement is not proof of every allegation
Mavis accepted payment and compliance obligations while denying the state's accusations. The agreement does not establish that every Mavis customer received unnecessary or defective work.
Who Mavis and the state consumer bureau are
Mavis Tire Supply LLC operates under the consumer-facing name Mavis Discount Tire. The agreement identifies it as a Delaware-organized limited liability company with its principal place of business in White Plains, New York. The relevant business is evaluating, recommending and selling automobile repair and maintenance services and replacement parts in Pennsylvania.
Consumers encounter the company when bringing vehicles to its repair locations, receiving service recommendations and authorizing paid work. The attorney general's announcement says Mavis operates more than 130 Pennsylvania branches. That statewide footprint explains the potential reach of the investigation, but it does not establish that all those locations committed the alleged practices.
The other party is the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, acting through Attorney General David W. Sunday Jr. and the Office of Attorney General. Its Bureau of Consumer Protection investigates business practices and handles consumer complaints. Here, the office is the public enforcement authority and the organization designated to distribute restitution. It is not Mavis, a private plaintiff's law firm or a service that promises individual representation.
The agreement was filed in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, a Pennsylvania trial court. The cover sheet records September 2026 No. 03390, and the filed pages carry case ID 260903390. The document says the court retains authority to enforce the agreement. Those identifiers connect the announcement to a filed legal record rather than a general customer-service policy.
How the disputed repair process worked
The state's allegations concern the link between a repair recommendation, customer authorization and the work actually supplied. The agreement describes Mavis employees evaluating vehicles and recommending services. In certain instances, Pennsylvania alleges, employees advised customers to authorize and pay for work that was not reasonably necessary for safe or proper vehicle operation.
The state also alleges that Mavis represented services as having particular characteristics, benefits or standards but failed to meet those promised standards. It says some consumers paid for unnecessary services, services that were not completed or services not performed in a skilled and workmanlike manner. In this context, workmanlike means carrying out the repair with the expected skill and care, not merely issuing an invoice saying it was performed.
These are distinct allegations. An unnecessary repair concerns whether the recommendation was justified. An unperformed repair concerns whether paid work happened. Poor workmanship concerns the quality of work that was done. The agreement addresses each, rather than treating every dispute over a bill as the same kind of problem.
The public record reviewed does not identify particular vehicle models, service dates, branch-level findings or a count of affected customers. It does not provide an independent mechanical assessment of any reader's vehicle. An invoice alone therefore cannot establish from this article that a particular repair was unnecessary; the bureau must evaluate the supported complaint.
The laws and required business changes
The agreement cites Pennsylvania's Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, which addresses unfair or deceptive conduct in business transactions. The provisions identified here concern misrepresenting a service's characteristics or benefits, advertising services without intending to supply them as advertised, and deceptive conduct likely to cause confusion or misunderstanding.
It also cites the Pennsylvania Automotive Industry Trade Practices regulations. These rules address specific repair-shop practices, including misleading statements that repairs are necessary or have been performed, charging for work not actually performed, and failing to promptly fix deficient work without charging the customer when the customer promptly brings the problem to the shop's attention.
The assurance requires compliance with those consumer-protection provisions and automotive regulations. It also requires measures to oversee and train employees and representatives and to monitor their duties. An injunction is a legal restriction requiring a party to do or stop doing something; the agreement's conduct restrictions sit alongside the monetary obligations, not in place of them.
For the next two calendar years beginning October 1, 2026, Mavis must conduct annual compliance assessments. Reports must reach the state within 30 days of completion. The company must also cooperate with requests for available customer information needed to implement the agreement, including invoices, billing records, contact information and details of allegedly supplied services.
Those records matter because the resolution connects restitution to supported consumer harm. The assurance does not replace that review with a promise of an identical check for anyone who visited a branch.
The agreement timeline
The public assurance describes an investigation into earlier business practices but does not specify when that investigation began or set a transaction-period start date.
Mavis's signature is dated September 21, 2026. The state's signature is dated September 25. The cover sheet and filing stamp show September 28, the same day as the attorney general's announcement. The agreement makes its filing date the effective date, meaning the date its terms take effect.
October 1, 2026 is the stated beginning of the two-calendar-year compliance-assessment requirement. January 26, 2027 is the complaint deadline published by the attorney general. The assurance describes a 120-day period following its effective date for additional complaints, while also preserving the state's authority to determine that other consumers are eligible for restitution.
The announcement is a September development receiving further public coverage in October. It should not be mistaken for a new October court verdict or a newly certified class action.
Who can submit a complaint
The attorney general invites people who believe they were affected by the alleged practices to contact the Bureau of Consumer Protection. The announcement identifies consumers who have already complained and those who submit a complaint with sufficient support by January 26.
The practical official route is the Pennsylvania consumer complaint page. The announcement also lists 1-800-441-2555 and scams@attorneygeneral.gov. This article is not the complaint form, and contacting Class Action Pulse does not submit a complaint to the state.
The bureau's published instructions ask consumers to explain what happened, when and where it happened, and to provide supporting documents. Examples include receipts, repair orders, contracts, proof of payment, emails and screenshots of relevant messages. The instructions also recommend keeping records of attempts to resolve the issue with the business.
The form explains that complaint information will be shared with the business complained about and may be shared with other enforcement or regulatory agencies. The office cannot act as a consumer's private attorney. Those are important limits on what submitting a complaint means; it initiates review, not guaranteed representation or compensation.
Documentation matters more than a broad customer label
The official announcement requires sufficient support. Keep the repair recommendation, invoice, proof of payment and relevant communications together when explaining the disputed service.
How the money and deadline work
Mavis's required payment is $215,000. The agreement allocates $190,000 to restitution, meaning money intended to compensate affected consumers. The remaining $25,000 reimburses investigation costs. Those are separate uses of the payment; the entire $215,000 is not an individual-customer payout pool.
The amount, timing and manner of restitution distribution are within the state's sole discretion. The agreement covers existing complainants, additional complaints within the stated window and others the state determines eligible. It does not publish a uniform award, a guaranteed minimum, a per-person maximum or a payment date.
A separate $100,000 civil penalty is suspended. Under the filed terms, it becomes due only if a court with authority finds Mavis breached one or more agreement terms. It should not be added to the restitution allocation or described as money already available for consumers.
The agreement also describes how uncashed checks may eventually be voided after reasonable contact attempts and a waiting period of at least 90 calendar days. That distribution provision is not the January 26 complaint deadline and does not establish a common check-expiration date for all future recipients.
January 26 is a complaint deadline, not a guaranteed payday
Submit supported information through the official bureau process. The state determines restitution amounts and timing; the reviewed materials do not promise a payment to every complainant.
What the record does not establish
The filed assurance and official announcement support the agreement's terms, company response and complaint instructions. They do not supply a full inventory of disputed repairs, the investigation's underlying evidence or individual eligibility decisions. No total number of qualifying consumers is verified here.
The reviewed sources also do not establish that Mavis has already paid every required amount, completed future compliance assessments or begun a particular restitution distribution. A duty to pay and an announcement of a settlement are different from evidence that each step has occurred.
The agreement says individual rights of action are not waived or limited except as expressly provided, and permits arguments about crediting restitution against other recoveries to the extent allowed by law. This article does not interpret that language for an individual's situation. Questions about separate legal rights require advice beyond general news reporting.
What happens next
The immediate consumer milestone is the state's January 26, 2027 complaint deadline. The bureau reviews supported complaints and controls restitution distribution. Mavis also has ongoing training, oversight, cooperation and reporting duties under the assurance.
If Pennsylvania believes the company has defaulted, the agreement provides for notice and ten business days to explain why a default has not occurred, with court enforcement available under the stated terms. That is an enforcement mechanism, not an assertion that a breach has already happened.
For other reported consumer matters, see the Class Action Pulse case directory. That directory does not replace the Pennsylvania complaint process or turn this government resolution into a private class action.
Frequently asked questions
Is the Mavis Pennsylvania settlement a class action?
No. The reviewed agreement is an Assurance of Voluntary Compliance resolving a Pennsylvania attorney general investigation, not a private class action settlement.
What is the complaint deadline?
The attorney general's announcement identifies January 26, 2027 for supported complaints. Use the official Bureau of Consumer Protection process.
How much money is for consumers?
The agreement allocates $190,000 to consumer restitution from a $215,000 required payment. The other $25,000 is for investigation costs.
Does every Mavis customer qualify for money?
No automatic eligibility or payment is established. The bureau reviews complaints with sufficient support and determines restitution amounts, timing and distribution.
Did Mavis admit wrongdoing?
No. Mavis denies the state's allegations and entered the assurance without admitting liability or wrongdoing.
Where should I send a complaint?
Use the Pennsylvania attorney general's official consumer complaint page. The settlement announcement also lists 1-800-441-2555 and scams@attorneygeneral.gov. Class Action Pulse is not the state complaint recipient.