Find Nearby Plumbers In San Jose, California

Eric Hayes demonstrates consistently strong performance across all four dimensions. Professionalism is evidenced by punctuality, responsiveness (including weekend/Sunday availability), cleanliness, and courteous demeanor across 9 reviews. Pricing is explicitly praised as fair, reasonable, and competitive in 5 reviews, with customers noting cost savings. Project completion is confirmed through 8 reviews describing completed work ranging from minor repairs to major renovations (garage attic, roofing, electrical), with customers noting timely delivery and follow-through on multiple jobs. Experience is strongly supported by 9 reviews highlighting skilled workmanship, technical knowledge, problem-solving ability, and versatility across diverse tasks. All reviews are 5-star ratings with specific, detailed examples rather than generic praise.

• All 10 reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative feedback — this is statistically unusual and warrants caution. While reviews contain specific details (door locks, siding, roofing, electrical work) that suggest authenticity, the complete absence of any critical feedback or lower ratings is a red flag for potential review curation or selection bias.
• Review dates span 2013–2024 with a concentration in 2015–2016 (5 of 10 reviews). Only 1 review is from the past 12 months (2024-09-19), which limits recency validation. Older reviews may not reflect current service levels.
• One review (2018-06-21) includes a personal physical compliment ('extremely good looking') which is atypical for professional service reviews and slightly reduces credibility of that specific review, though the work quality claim remains plausible.

This WW Score of 89.2 is based on consistent, detailed positive feedback across all dimensions with HIGH confidence in each metric. However, the complete absence of any critical reviews or ratings below 5 stars suggests potential review selection bias or curation. The score should be considered reliable for identifying Eric Hayes as a strong performer, but prospective customers should independently verify current service quality given the recency gap (only 1 review in past 12 months) and the statistical improbability of perfect ratings across 10 reviews.

United HVAC/Plumbing demonstrates strong performance across all dimensions. Professionalism is consistently praised with explicit mentions of responsiveness, communication, punctuality, and courteous behavior across 7 reviews. Project completion is equally strong with 7 reviews confirming timely work, thorough follow-through, and complete job delivery including inspections and customer education. Experience is well-documented through 5 mentions of skilled workmanship, problem-solving, and technical knowledge. Pricing receives solid marks from 3 reviews citing fair value and reasonable rates relative to quality. The company's same-day service capability and attention to detail are standout strengths.

• All 8 reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative feedback — this is statistically unusual and warrants caution. While reviews contain specific details (names, project types, timelines) that suggest authenticity, the perfect rating distribution is atypical.
• One review (2023-03-10) is significantly older than others (12+ months ago); most reviews cluster in 2024, which is positive for recency.
• Review from 2024-09-19 is notably longer and more detailed than others, with some repetitive phrasing ('remarkable,' 'unmatched,' 'lifesaver') that could indicate embellishment, though specific details about the process and outcomes are present.

This score should be treated with moderate-to-high confidence due to consistent positive mentions across multiple dimensions and recent review dates, but the absence of any critical feedback and universal 5-star ratings suggests these reviews may not represent a fully balanced customer experience. The score reflects what is explicitly stated in reviews but may not capture dissatisfied customers who did not leave reviews.

South Bay Leak Detection (Kerry) demonstrates exceptional professionalism across all six reviews, with consistent praise for punctuality, responsiveness, communication, and courteous demeanor. Project completion is strong, with all jobs finished thoroughly and on time, including same-day service in urgent situations. Technical expertise is evident through sophisticated leak detection methods (thermal imaging, acoustic technology, pressure testing) and successful problem-solving on complex cases. Pricing feedback is limited but positive, with customers expressing satisfaction with value received relative to service quality.

• All six reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative feedback—this uniformity warrants caution, though the specificity of technical details and varied scenarios (pool leaks, irrigation, house leaks) suggests authenticity rather than fake reviews.
• Pricing dimension based on only 2 mentions; limited data for confident pricing assessment.
• All reviews are recent (August–October 2024), which is positive for recency but provides no historical perspective.

This WW Score of 89.2 is highly reliable for professionalism and project completion (both HIGH confidence with 6 mentions each), but pricing confidence is LIMITED due to only 2 mentions; the overall score should be trusted as a strong indicator of service quality, though pricing transparency cannot be fully validated.

Patterson Plumbing and Drain, operated by Ivan Patterson, receives overwhelmingly positive feedback across all four scored dimensions from a very large review base spanning 2019 to 2025. Professionalism is the most frequently cited strength, with the vast majority of reviewers praising Ivan's punctuality, rapid response times (often within minutes to an hour), friendly demeanor, clear communication, and cleanliness on the job. Project completion scores are also very high, with reviewers consistently noting that jobs were finished thoroughly, often same-day, including on weekends and holidays, with no reports of abandoned work. Experience scores are strong, supported by numerous accounts of Ivan diagnosing difficult problems that other plumbers failed to resolve, demonstrating deep technical knowledge across a wide range of plumbing tasks. Pricing is rated positively by a large number of reviewers who describe his rates as fair, reasonable, and competitive, with no hidden charges and transparent quoting; one reviewer noted prices were 'not cheap' and one rated the cost as high for a simple job, which moderately tempers this dimension. Three negative reviews exist: two cite unresponsiveness (no callback), and one describes a job refusal, which introduces a minor flag around responsiveness consistency but does not significantly alter the overall picture given the volume of positive data.

• DUPLICATE REVIEWS DETECTED: At least 4 reviews appear to be exact or near-exact duplicates posted on different dates (e.g., the 'slow kitchen drain / YouTube video' review appears verbatim on 2025-05-09, 2025-05-07, and 2024-06-20; the 'Ivan stopped by within 10mins' review appears on 2024-08-10 and 2024-07-26; the 'Ivan is a real straight arrow' review appears on 2023-09-28 and 2023-09-27; the 'Ivan was responsive, courteous' garbage disposal review appears on 2021-05-01 with two slightly different versions). Duplicate reviews have been counted only once per unique review for scoring purposes.
• RESPONSIVENESS COMPLAINTS: Three 1-star or low-star reviews specifically cite Ivan not returning calls or refusing a job (mobile home pipe). While these are a small minority, they represent a real pattern of occasional unresponsiveness that prospective customers should be aware of.
• ONE ANOMALOUS REVIEW: One review references 'Nick' as the owner and a technician named 'Jacob,' which does not match any other review. This may be a misattributed review for a different company and was treated with caution in scoring.
• BLANK REVIEWS: Three reviews contained no text (only a 5-star rating). These were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable data.
• ALL REVIEWS ARE 5-STAR EXCEPT FOR 4 OUTLIERS: The overwhelming uniformity of 5-star ratings across 140+ reviews is notable. While the reviews contain specific, detailed, and varied narratives that argue against wholesale fabrication, the near-perfect rating distribution warrants acknowledgment. The specificity and variety of job descriptions across reviews lend credibility to their authenticity.
• RECENCY NOTE: The majority of reviews are from 2021 through May 2025, with strong recent representation. Reviews from 2019-2020 are present but are a small minority. The score is well-supported by recent data.

This WW Score of 88.6 is based on an exceptionally large and detailed review dataset with strong recency, and carries HIGH overall confidence; the score is highly reliable as a representation of Ivan Patterson's typical service quality, with the minor caveat that occasional responsiveness issues have been documented in a small number of reviews.

Pro Roto earns strong scores across all four dimensions, driven by an exceptionally large and detailed review base spanning 2017 to 2025. Professionalism is the most frequently praised attribute, with dozens of reviewers explicitly noting punctuality, courteous communication, shoe covers, callbacks, and respectful attitudes toward customers including elderly and vulnerable clients. Project completion is also very strong, with numerous reviews describing same-day or next-day service, jobs finished as promised, thorough cleanup, and follow-through on callbacks and re-visits when work was not fully resolved. Experience scores are high, with many reviewers praising diagnostic accuracy, creative problem-solving, camera inspections, and technical knowledge across complex jobs including sewer replacements, hydrojetting, and legacy pipe systems. Pricing scores well but is tempered by two negative reviews: one describing a high-pressure upsell attempt and a price described as steep for a Saturday call, and another noting an estimate roughly double competitors, though the owner followed up and explained the discrepancy.

• Two reviews with identical or near-identical text were detected (the 'King Avo and his Crew are all golden gods' review appears twice, dated 2024-06-08 and 2024-05-30, and the 'Bryan and Waldir have been super helpful' review appears twice, dated 2024-09-11 and 2024-08-22). These may be duplicate submissions by the same customer across platforms rather than fake reviews, but they were counted only once each for scoring purposes.
• Three reviews contain no text body (only a star rating of 5.0, dated 2023-06-09 and 2022-06-09). These were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable data.
• One review (dated 2023-06-09, rating 1.0) describes a serious punctuality and communication failure — technicians never arrived for a scheduled 4-service-request appointment, phone went to voicemail. This is a meaningful negative signal for professionalism and project completion and was factored into scoring.
• One review (dated 2024-05-01, rating 3.0) explicitly describes a high-pressure upsell attempt by Isaac on work the reviewer (an engineer) believed was unnecessary, and describes pricing as steep. This was factored into the pricing and professionalism scores.
• One review (dated 2023-12-05, rating 3.0) describes an estimate approximately 2x competitors, though the owner followed up to explain. This was factored into the pricing score.
• One review (dated 2021-07-24, rating 5.0 after update) describes initial poor workmanship — grass thrown on top of repaired area, cleanout not leveled, a sprinkler head broken — before the company returned to fix the issues. This was factored into the project completion score.
• One review (dated 2018-01-17, rating 4.0) notes the job was completed but the customer had not yet received paper documentation of the guarantee or a paid receipt. Minor flag for follow-through.
• One review (dated 2022-06-09) references 'a very difficult start with shifting explanations and moving targets' before the CEO intervened and the company delivered good work. This was factored into the project completion and professionalism scores.
• The overwhelming majority of reviews are 5-star. While the volume, specificity, named technicians, and detailed job descriptions across most reviews suggest authenticity, the near-universal 5-star rating warrants mild caution. The presence of several critical or mixed reviews and the long review history (2017–2025) support overall legitimacy.
• Several reviews from 2017 are older than 7 years and were given reduced weight. Reviews from 2022 onward were given full weight. The most recent reviews (2024–2025) are consistent in quality with the broader review body.

This WW Score is based on a large, detailed, and multi-year review dataset with strong mention counts across all four dimensions, making it one of the more reliable scores possible; however, a small number of negative reviews describing upselling behavior, a no-show incident, and initial workmanship issues prevent a top-tier score and should be considered by prospective customers.

Anar and Mr Fix Bay Area receive overwhelmingly positive feedback across all four dimensions, with professionalism being the most frequently cited strength — reviewers consistently highlight punctuality, same-day responsiveness, courteous communication, and tidiness. Pricing is described as reasonable, fair, and competitive across dozens of reviews, with multiple customers noting that Anar honored original quotes even when jobs ran longer than expected. Project completion scores are strong but are modestly reduced by three notable negative data points: one reviewer (Bernard, 3-star) reported a no-show and no callback after an initial visit, one reviewer (1-star) reported being ghosted twice, and one reviewer (2-star) reported receiving no response to quote requests. Experience scores are high, supported by specific accounts of Anar solving problems that other contractors could not, including a complex plumbing diagnosis that a licensed plumber had failed to resolve. The overall picture is of a highly capable and responsive handyman operation with isolated but credible reliability failures that prevent a perfect score.

• THREE NEGATIVE REVIEWS PRESENT: One 3-star review (Jan 2024) reports a team member named 'Bernard' who promised a follow-up visit but never returned or called. One 1-star review (Apr 2021) reports being ghosted twice with no voicemail, email, or follow-up. One 2-star review (Jul 2022) reports no response to a quote request despite being promised one after sending photos. These are credible, specific complaints that meaningfully impact the project_completion and professionalism scores.
• POSSIBLE FAKE REVIEW PATTERN — LOW SEVERITY: Two reviews posted on the same date (2020-07-02) share nearly identical structure, both praising same-day TV mounting service. Phrasing is different enough to suggest two real customers, but the timing and subject matter overlap warrants mild caution. One review (2021-11-02, 5-star) uses the phrase 'Look at the other reviews. We cannot all be making it up,' which is also present verbatim in a 2022-07-24 review — this exact phrase repetition across two different reviews is unusual and may indicate a coached or templated response, though both reviews contain unique details.
• RECENCY NOTE: The vast majority of reviews (approximately 55 of 79) are dated within the past 24 months (2023–2024), providing strong recency confidence. Approximately 24 reviews predate January 2023, with the oldest from April 2020. No significant quality degradation trend is observed across time periods.
• NAME INCONSISTENCY: Several reviews refer to the owner as 'Amar' rather than 'Anar' — this appears to be a spelling variation by reviewers rather than a different person, as context makes clear they are the same individual. No scoring impact.

This WW Score is based on 79 reviews spanning approximately four years, with strong recency weighting, high mention counts across all four dimensions, and three credible negative reviews that have been factored into the scoring — the overall score of 88.6 can be considered a reliable and conservative representation of this contractor's performance.