Find Nearby Plumbers In Gilbert, Arizona

WDT Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism with consistent praise for punctuality, friendliness, and communication across 22 reviews. Pricing is competitive and transparent, with customers noting fair rates and no upselling across 10 mentions. Experience and technical knowledge are well-documented with 14 mentions of skilled workmanship and problem-solving. However, project completion is significantly impacted by one detailed 1-star review from November 2023 describing incomplete work, property damage, and failure to return for over a week, which substantially lowers the overall score despite 17 other positive completion mentions. The single negative review is highly specific and credible, describing documented evidence via home cameras.

• CRITICAL: One detailed 1-star review (2023-11-11) describes serious project completion failure including property damage, abandonment, and broken commitments. This review is highly specific with dates, circumstances, and documented evidence (home cameras), making it credible and not dismissible as fake. This single incident significantly impacts the Project Completion score.
• 25 of 26 reviews are 5-star ratings with predominantly positive language. While the positive reviews contain specific details (water heater replacements, lateral waterlines, leak repairs, etc.), the overwhelming uniformity warrants noting. However, the single 1-star review is sufficiently detailed and credible to balance this pattern.
• Most reviews are from April-May 2024 (recent), with the critical negative review from November 2023. Recency of positive reviews does not negate the documented failure from 6 months prior.

This score should be treated with caution. While professionalism, pricing, and experience dimensions are well-supported by consistent positive evidence (HIGH confidence), the project completion score is heavily influenced by one credible, detailed account of significant failure and abandonment. The WW Score of 82.1 reflects strong overall performance undermined by documented serious issues with follow-through on complex jobs. Potential customers should be aware of the completion risk, particularly for jobs requiring multiple visits or problem-solving beyond routine water heater replacements.

C. Slany Plumbing receives consistently strong praise across all four scored dimensions, with professionalism being the most frequently cited strength — reviewers repeatedly highlight punctuality, responsiveness, courteous communication, and respect for the home. Project completion is also a clear strength, with multiple reviewers describing jobs finished thoroughly, cleanly, and often with bonus work performed at no extra charge. Pricing is noted favorably in several reviews, with customers describing fair, transparent quotes and no hidden fees. Workmanship quality is praised across many reviews, with specific mentions of neat, precise, and high-quality installations. The primary caveat is that the vast majority of reviews are older than one year — most date from 2013 to 2018 — with only one review from the past 12 months (2022), which limits confidence in how well these scores reflect current performance.

• RECENCY WARNING: 16 of 18 reviews are more than 1 year old as of 2024. Only 1 review (December 2022) falls within the past 24 months, and none are from 2023 or 2024. Scores may not reflect current service quality.
• ONE BLANK REVIEW: One review (2014-01-27) contains only a period with no text. It was excluded from scoring as it provides no usable data.
• POTENTIAL REVIEW PATTERN CONCERN: All 17 usable reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative or mixed feedback whatsoever. While the reviews do contain specific details and varied language that reduce the likelihood of fabrication, the complete absence of any critical feedback across 18 reviews warrants mild caution.
• VOLUME CAUTION: With only 18 total reviews spanning approximately 9 years, the sample size is relatively small. Scores carry reasonable confidence but should be interpreted with this context in mind.

This WW Score is moderately reliable for historical performance but should be treated with caution as a predictor of current service quality, given that nearly all reviews are more than 5 years old and only one review exists from the past two years.

Pipe Masters Plumbing & Sewer receives consistently strong feedback across all four scored dimensions from a small but recent and credible review set. Professionalism is the standout dimension, with all four reviewers explicitly praising responsiveness, communication, punctuality, and attitude — including one reviewer who specifically highlighted Brandon's demeanor as a trust-building factor. Pricing is positively noted in all four reviews, with multiple reviewers referencing competitive or fair pricing and one explicitly stating the charge was lower than a competing estimate. Project completion is well-supported, with reviewers describing work done quickly, correctly, and on time, though the small sample limits confidence. Experience is noted in three reviews through references to knowledgeability, quality workmanship, and correct execution, earning a solid but conservatively scored result.

• Only 4 reviews analyzed — sample size is too small to draw high-confidence conclusions about long-term consistency.
• All 4 reviews are 5-star ratings. While the review content is specific and varied enough to appear genuine, the absence of any critical or mixed feedback warrants mild caution.
• No fake review patterns detected — reviews contain specific details (names, job types, locations, personal context) that suggest authenticity.
• All reviews are from within the past 12 months (May 2024 – November 2024), which is a positive recency signal.

This WW Score is based on a small but recent and credible set of 4 reviews; the score is directionally trustworthy but should be treated as preliminary until a larger review sample is available.

Able Plumbing and Mike receive overwhelmingly positive feedback across all four dimensions, with the vast majority of reviewers praising punctuality, communication, technical knowledge, and fair pricing. However, a meaningful cluster of negative reviews — spanning pricing disputes, a misdiagnosed water heater replacement, two missed appointments, dishonest hourly rate billing, and a damaged unit left behind — prevents top-tier scores across the board. The pricing dimension is notably mixed: while many reviewers cite competitive or reasonable rates, at least three reviews explicitly describe being overcharged, billed far above quoted amounts, or subjected to nickel-and-diming. Project completion is similarly strong overall but is tempered by one review describing incomplete work, a callback situation, and one instance where the job was left in worse condition than found. Experience scores well given consistent praise for technical skill and problem-solving, but the misdiagnosis incident and slow/incorrect work described in one detailed negative review introduce meaningful doubt.

• Two reviews contain no text at all — only a star rating (one 1-star, one 5-star). These were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable data.
• Two reviews appear to be near-identical duplicates: the review praising Mike for fixing an outside spigot and a toilet leak and wishing for 10 stars appears verbatim on both 2023-06-10 and 2023-02-15. Similarly, the 'Able plumbing is great! I've had them do several jobs' review appears verbatim on both 2021-06-10 and 2021-03-05. These duplicates were counted only once each for mention scoring to avoid inflating confidence.
• A significant portion of 5-star reviews use generic superlatives with limited specifics, which is a mild fake-review risk signal. However, enough reviews include specific job details, named staff, and unique circumstances to suggest the review base is largely authentic.
• Three reviews explicitly describe dishonest or deceptive pricing behavior: one citing a bill 300% above the phone quote, one describing a plumber lying about the hourly rate and charging $330 instead of $240, and one describing being charged for 5 hours plus extras for work a contractor said could be done in under 2 hours. These are serious and specific complaints that materially reduce the pricing score.
• One detailed 1-star review describes a plumber misdiagnosing a leak, disposing of a water heater without consent or a quote, returning it damaged, and then the owner pretending not to have been the plumber on the call. This is a significant professionalism and project completion flag.
• One 2-star review describes two missed appointments including a no-show, promised discounts not honored, slow and incorrect work requiring redo, and a poor attitude. This review is older (2020) but specific and credible.
• The 1-star water heater maintenance review from 2021 raises a plausible but unverifiable concern — a unit failing 35 days after paid maintenance. It is noted but treated with moderate weight given the ambiguity.
• Most negative reviews are dated 2020–2021. Reviews from 2023 onward are predominantly positive, which may indicate genuine service improvement over time. Per recency rules, more recent reviews were weighted more heavily.

This WW Score is based on 54 reviews with usable data spanning 2019–2025 and carries HIGH overall confidence due to review volume, but the score should be interpreted cautiously given a credible pattern of pricing disputes and at least two serious professionalism incidents documented in older reviews.

Epic Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism and project completion capabilities, with technicians consistently praised for punctuality, friendliness, and technical competence. However, pricing emerges as a significant weakness, with numerous complaints about high service charges, minimum fees, and perceived overcharging that substantially undermine overall satisfaction. While most recent reviews (past 12 months) are highly positive, older reviews reveal a persistent pattern of pricing concerns that have not been adequately addressed. The company excels at responsiveness and workmanship quality but struggles with transparent, fair pricing practices.

• PRICING PATTERN: 42 mentions of pricing issues reveal a consistent complaint across multiple years. Complaints include: $275-$500 diagnostic fees, $140-$348 labor charges for 15-30 minutes of work, material markups of 10-15x cost, and minimum service charges of $195-$275. This is the single largest driver of negative reviews.
• RECENCY BIAS: Approximately 65% of reviews are from the past 12 months (May 2024-June 2025), and these are predominantly 5-star with minimal pricing complaints. Older reviews (2016-2023) contain more detailed pricing grievances. This suggests either improved practices or selection bias in recent review submission.
• TRAFFIC/CONDUCT INCIDENTS: 4 reviews mention unsafe or rude driving behavior by Epic Plumbing vehicles (cutting off traffic, aggressive lane changes, littering). While not directly related to plumbing service, these reflect on company culture and driver training.
• COMMUNICATION GAPS: Multiple reviews cite scheduling miscommunication, missed appointments, failure to relay information between office and technicians, and unresponsiveness to follow-up calls.
• QUALITY INCONSISTENCY: Several reviews describe poor initial workmanship requiring callbacks (toilet installations, water heater installations, leak detection). Some technicians received praise while others were criticized for the same types of jobs.
• WARRANTY/POST-WARRANTY DISPUTES: Multiple reviews describe refusal to honor warranty claims or assist with installation defects once warranty expired, with defensive responses from management (particularly 'Gary' in customer service).
• FAKE REVIEW RISK - MODERATE: Approximately 15-20 reviews contain minimal detail, generic praise ('Great service!', 'Outstanding!'), or are blank text with 5-star ratings. However, the majority of reviews contain specific details, named technicians, and concrete examples, reducing overall fake review risk.

This WW Score of 76.8 is reliable for assessing overall service quality but should be interpreted with caution regarding pricing: the company delivers competent, professional plumbing work with strong project completion rates, but customers should expect significantly higher costs than market average and should obtain detailed written quotes before committing. The HIGH confidence rating reflects substantial review volume (201 reviews) and consistent patterns across dimensions, but the pricing dimension's MODERATE confidence (42 mentions) and the persistent pricing complaints across 9+ years suggest this is a known business model rather than an anomaly.

My Maricopa Plumber earns generally positive marks across all four dimensions, with the majority of reviewers praising responsiveness, friendly technicians, and completed work. Multiple reviews highlight same-day or within-the-hour emergency response, transparent pricing breakdowns, and technically competent plumbers who explained their work clearly. However, two notable negative reviews — one describing a complete failure to deliver a promised estimate after a $175 service call, and another alleging fraudulent upselling of an unnecessary water softener — meaningfully drag down scores in professionalism, project completion, and pricing. These are not minor complaints; they describe deceptive or negligent business conduct that cannot be dismissed. The score reflects a company that performs well in most cases but has documented instances of serious service failures.

• Two reviews (1-star, dated 2023-03-29 and 2021-05-08) describe serious misconduct: one alleges failure to deliver a paid-for estimate and poor follow-through; the other alleges fraudulent diagnosis to upsell an unnecessary product. These are substantive negative signals that reduce confidence in consistency.
• Several positive reviews are somewhat generic in phrasing (e.g., 'great service,' 'highly recommend,' 'will use again') with limited specific detail, which slightly reduces their evidentiary weight. However, enough reviews include named technicians, specific job descriptions, and situational detail to suggest the positive reviews are largely authentic.
• Review dated 2020-10-01 is entirely non-specific and contains no actionable detail about any dimension — it was excluded from dimension scoring but counted in total reviews analyzed.
• Review recency note: The two most serious negative reviews are from 2021 and 2023. The most recent reviews (late 2023) are positive, but the sample size for the trailing 12 months is small (3 reviews), limiting confidence in current performance trajectory.
• No fake review pattern detected overall, though a small cluster of older reviews (2020–2021) are notably brief and generic. Insufficient evidence to flag as coordinated fake reviews, but they carry reduced evidentiary weight.

This WW Score is based on 16 reviews spanning approximately five years and carries moderate-to-high reliability for general trend assessment, but the presence of two credible and serious negative reviews means prospective customers should weigh those accounts carefully before engaging this contractor for high-value or time-sensitive work.