Find Nearby Plumbers In Tucson, Arizona

Silverado Plumbing demonstrates strong overall performance with a WW Score of 82.1, driven primarily by exceptional professionalism (87.3) across 128 reviews highlighting punctuality, courteous technicians, and responsive communication. Technical expertise and workmanship are solid at 84.2 based on 87 mentions of skilled problem-solving and quality work. Project completion reliability is adequate at 79.8 from 94 mentions, though a notable subset of reviews cite scheduling failures, no-shows, and follow-up communication breakdowns. Pricing fairness scores 79.5 from 52 mentions, with customers generally reporting competitive rates, though some complaints about high hourly charges and unexpected cost increases exist. The company shows inconsistency in execution quality and customer service consistency.

• SCHEDULING AND NO-SHOW PATTERN: Multiple reviews (at least 8-10) document significant scheduling failures including no-shows, missed appointment windows, poor communication about ETAs, and rescheduling issues. This is a material weakness despite strong professionalism scores.
• MANAGEMENT/OFFICE COMMUNICATION ISSUES: Several reviews explicitly criticize office staff responsiveness, dispatcher communication failures, and management's failure to return calls or address complaints. This contrasts sharply with field technician professionalism.
• INCONSISTENT SERVICE QUALITY: While most reviews are highly positive, a meaningful minority (10-15 reviews) report poor outcomes, incomplete work, or technicians lacking competence. This suggests inconsistent hiring or training standards.
• PRICING TRANSPARENCY CONCERNS: Multiple reviews mention unexpected cost increases mid-project, high hourly rates, and invoices lacking itemization of hours/materials. Some customers felt overcharged relative to actual work performed.
• POTENTIAL OWNERSHIP/MANAGEMENT CHANGE: One detailed 2024 review references Art Cake (former owner) dying in 2022, with suspicious responses attributed to him in 2023-2024, suggesting possible fake review responses or company instability.
• FAKE REVIEW RISK - LIMITED: While most reviews appear genuine with specific details, the high concentration of 5-star reviews (approximately 85% of total) with very few 2-3 star reviews is atypical. However, the presence of detailed negative reviews with specific complaints suggests this is not a systematic fake review campaign.
• RECENCY NOTE: Reviews span from 2009 to June 2025. Most recent reviews (2024-2025) show mixed results with both strong praise and serious complaints about scheduling and management responsiveness.

This WW Score of 82.1 is reliable for assessing field technician professionalism and technical competence, but should be weighted with caution regarding project completion reliability and scheduling consistency, as office/management performance appears materially weaker than field performance and represents a significant operational risk for customers requiring timely service.

Hester Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism with consistent punctuality, responsiveness, and courteous service across 89 mentions. Pricing is competitive and fair, with customers frequently noting better value than larger competitors (32 mentions). Project completion is solid but shows some variability—most jobs are completed successfully and on-time, though a small number of callbacks and communication lapses are documented (68 mentions). Technical expertise is evident across multiple complex installations and problem-solving scenarios (52 mentions). The company's family-owned structure and personalized service are frequently praised, though occasional service gaps and one notable customer service conflict suggest inconsistency in execution.

• DUPLICATE REVIEW DETECTED: Reviews dated 2024-10-16 and 2024-09-26 contain identical text (Fantastic plumbing company that is ran by a Dad...). This suggests either a system error or potential review manipulation. Confidence slightly reduced.
• NEGATIVE OUTLIER - PROFESSIONALISM: Review dated 2023-07-02 (3-star) describes owner Brian as 'arrogant and curt' with poor follow-up communication and lack of empathy. This contrasts sharply with overwhelmingly positive reviews but represents a legitimate service failure.
• COMMUNICATION GAPS: Multiple reviews mention delayed callbacks or lack of response (2015-07-28, 2016-02-08, 2024-11-11), suggesting inconsistent communication practices despite generally high responsiveness ratings.
• CALLBACK ISSUES: Review dated 2015-11-12 (3-star) required three service visits to correct initial installation errors, indicating occasional quality control problems.
• GENERIC/MINIMAL REVIEWS: Approximately 15 reviews contain only 'unknown', '.', or single-word responses (e.g., 'Great!', 'Excellent!!!'), providing no substantive data. These were excluded from scoring but inflate total review count.
• RECENCY NOTE: Majority of reviews are from 2013-2017 (approximately 65% of dataset). Only 8 reviews from past 12 months (2025, 2024). Recent data is limited, which may not fully reflect current service levels.
• LOCATION INCONSISTENCY: Reviews reference multiple locations (Tucson, Simi Valley, Lowes installations across regions), suggesting either multi-location operation or data aggregation from different service areas. This may affect score reliability if service quality varies by location.

This WW Score of 82.1 is reliable with HIGH overall confidence due to substantial mention counts across all dimensions (32-89 mentions per category) and consistent patterns across 150 reviews spanning 12+ years. However, the score should be interpreted with caution: (1) recency bias exists—most data is 7+ years old with limited recent reviews; (2) one notable negative professionalism incident and occasional callback issues indicate the company is not uniformly excellent; (3) duplicate reviews and generic entries suggest minor data quality issues. The score accurately reflects a solid, family-owned plumbing business with strong fundamentals but occasional execution gaps. Prospective customers should expect generally professional, fairly-priced service with good technical competence, but should verify current responsiveness and communication practices given limited recent feedback.

Expert Plumbing demonstrates strong overall performance with a WW Score of 82.1, driven by consistently high marks in professionalism, experience, and project completion. The company excels in punctuality, courteous staff, technical expertise, and reliable job completion across 68+ professionalism mentions and 59+ project completion mentions. However, pricing emerges as a relative weakness (74.3), with multiple customers citing high service charges, travel fees, minimum hour billing, and concerns about value despite acknowledging honest practices. The company's reputation for honesty and reliability is well-documented, but pricing transparency and affordability lag behind operational excellence.

• PRICING CONCERNS: Multiple reviews (2023-06-10, 2022-06-10, 2014-06-13, 2014-02-10) cite high labor charges, travel fees, minimum hour billing, and lack of transparency about fees upfront. One customer paid $280 for a drain snake that didn't solve the problem; another paid $104 for a 15-minute job.
• SERVICE FAILURES: 5 one-star reviews document serious issues: no-show with no callback (2023-06-10), rude staff and refusal to provide quotes (2023-06-10), failure to honor commitment to travel to Corpus Christi (2021-02-18), incomplete repairs with ongoing leaks (2020-06-10), and unprofessional behavior including entering apartment without permission and breaking lights (2021-06-10).
• STAFF INCONSISTENCY: While many reviews praise specific technicians (Dan, Luke, Donnie, Rick, Matt), negative reviews cite rude office staff and poor communication, suggesting inconsistent customer service quality depending on which team member handles the interaction.
• INCOMPLETE REPAIRS: At least 3 reviews mention jobs that didn't fully resolve the problem or required follow-up work, raising questions about diagnostic accuracy and thoroughness.
• RECENCY NOTE: Most negative reviews cluster in 2020-2023, while older reviews (2013-2019) are predominantly 5-star. This may indicate service quality decline or increased customer expectations over time.

This WW Score of 82.1 is reliable and well-supported by 104 reviews with strong data density across all dimensions. The HIGH overall confidence reflects substantial mention counts (51-68 per dimension) and consistent patterns. However, the score masks a significant bifurcation: operational excellence (professionalism, experience, completion) is genuinely strong, but pricing practices and occasional service failures create legitimate customer dissatisfaction. The score should be interpreted as: Expert Plumbing is a competent, honest, and reliable contractor with strong technical skills, but customers should expect premium pricing and should clarify all fees upfront before committing.

DR Plumbing demonstrates strong overall performance with particular strengths in professionalism and responsiveness. The company excels at emergency response, punctuality, and customer communication, with numerous reviews praising same-day or rapid service. Technical competence is consistently highlighted across complex projects including water heater replacements, pipe repairs, and system installations. However, pricing emerges as a notable weakness, with three explicit complaints about overcharging (garbage disposal at $545 vs $150 cost, price increases during remodels, and one instance of refusing warranty work). Additionally, one serious quality issue involved incorrect shark bite installation that caused recurring leaks three years later, and another involved improper hot/cold line installation behind walls during a remodel.

• PRICING CONCERN: Three reviews explicitly mention overcharging or unfair pricing practices ($545 garbage disposal replacement, price increases during remodels, and one instance of refusing to honor warranty work). This contradicts the majority positive pricing feedback and suggests inconsistent pricing practices.
• QUALITY DEFECT PATTERN: Two reviews describe significant workmanship failures—incorrect shark bite installation causing leaks 3 years later (customer stated company did not admit fault or back up work) and improper hot/cold supply line installation behind walls during a large remodel (company refused to fix acknowledged mistake).
• SUSPICIOUS REVIEW CLUSTERING: Multiple empty/blank review texts with 5.0 ratings (at least 3 instances) suggest potential data quality issues or placeholder reviews.
• RECENCY BIAS: Majority of reviews (approximately 60+) are from May-June 2025, with a sharp drop-off in older reviews. This clustering may indicate recent reputation management or review campaign activity.
• INCONSISTENT ACCOUNTABILITY: One review explicitly states company 'did not admit to their defect work or back it up' regarding a failed shark bite installation, while other reviews praise honesty and trustworthiness. This suggests selective accountability depending on circumstances.

This WW Score of 82.1 should be treated with MODERATE-TO-HIGH confidence for professionalism and project completion, but LOWER confidence for pricing assessment. The company demonstrates genuine strengths in emergency response and customer service, but the explicit pricing complaints and documented quality failures (shark bite installation, supply line installation errors) indicate real operational issues that are not fully reflected in the predominantly positive review volume. The recent clustering of reviews and multiple blank entries warrant caution. Prospective customers should specifically discuss pricing structure upfront and request written warranties for complex work.

Sahuarita Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism with consistent punctuality, friendly demeanor, and responsive communication across 42 reviews. Pricing is competitive and transparent, with fair estimates honored (18 mentions). Project completion is solid but shows some vulnerability: while most jobs finish promptly and cleanly, 5 negative reviews explicitly cite follow-through failures (incomplete work, unresolved callbacks, damage not addressed). Technical expertise is evident with skilled diagnostics and problem-solving (22 mentions). The company's primary weakness is inconsistent accountability on complex jobs and post-service follow-up.

• FAKE REVIEW PATTERN DETECTED: Reviews from 2025 (past 6 months) show suspiciously generic, repetitive phrasing ('knocked it out of the park,' 'saved the day,' 'rescued my home') with minimal specific detail. Multiple reviews use identical structural patterns and lack substantive information. This suggests potential review manipulation.
• CRITICAL NEGATIVE PATTERN: 5 one-star reviews (2024-06-09, 2023-08-24, 2021-11-15, 2019-03-29, 2018-06-24, 2014-02-08) explicitly cite serious failures: incomplete work requiring callbacks, damage caused and not repaired, non-responsive communication, and unprofessional owner conduct. These are detailed, credible complaints with specific incidents.
• RECENCY BIAS: 35 of 89 reviews (39%) are from 2025 (past 6 months) and cluster heavily in May-June 2025. Older reviews (2014-2019) are more detailed and balanced. Recent reviews lack specificity and show uniformly positive ratings despite known operational issues.
• FOLLOW-UP FAILURE: One detailed 2024 review documents 2-month delay in removing old water heater despite repeated callbacks and promises. Another 2023 review cites owner refusing to reimburse customer for damage caused by technician error. These suggest systemic accountability gaps.
• EMPTY/MINIMAL REVIEWS: 8 reviews contain no text or only 1-2 words ('Great,' 'unknown,' blank), inflating positive rating count without substantive evidence.

This WW Score of 82.1 should be treated with CAUTION. While the company demonstrates genuine strengths in professionalism and pricing, the recent review cluster shows signs of manipulation, and credible negative reviews document serious follow-through and accountability failures. The score is pulled down appropriately by project completion issues (78.0), but the HIGH overall confidence is partially undermined by fake review patterns in the most recent data. Customers should weight the detailed negative reviews (especially 2024-2023) more heavily than the generic 2025 praise.

Economy Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism across nearly all reviews, with consistent praise for punctuality, communication, and courteous technicians. Pricing is generally viewed favorably with multiple mentions of fair and competitive rates, though some older reviews note service call charges that created friction. Project completion is solid overall, with most jobs finished promptly and thoroughly, though one recent review (Feb 2025) flagged insufficient time allocation causing incomplete work. Technical expertise is well-documented across complex jobs including full repiping, emergency repairs, and diagnostics. Two negative reviews (2024 and 2018) involving incomplete work and no-shows significantly impact the score, but represent outliers in an otherwise consistently positive dataset.

• One critical negative review from May 2024 alleges parts were never replaced despite payment, and customer was charged for services not rendered. This directly contradicts the company's otherwise strong reputation and warrants investigation.
• One negative review from Aug 2018 reports two missed/rescheduled appointments and no-show for a $6K estimate, suggesting potential operational issues in past years.
• One recent review (Feb 2025) indicates scheduling/time allocation problem where insufficient crew time was allocated, leaving work incomplete and requiring rescheduling.
• Majority of reviews (40+ of 52) are from past 12 months (Feb 2025 - June 2025), with strong clustering in May 2025. Older reviews (2016-2019) show some service inconsistencies.
• No evidence of fake review patterns detected. Reviews contain specific details, named technicians, varied job types, and authentic concerns in negative reviews.

This WW Score of 82.1 is reliable with HIGH overall confidence due to substantial review volume (52 reviews) and consistent data across all four dimensions. However, the score is tempered by credible negative reviews documenting serious failures (incomplete work, no-shows, alleged billing fraud), which prevent a higher score despite overwhelming positive sentiment. The company's recent performance (past 12 months) is notably stronger than historical performance, suggesting possible operational improvements.