Find Nearby Plumbers In Hartford, Connecticut

B & D Plumbing & Heating has a mixed but generally positive track record across a very small review set. Professionalism is the most discussed dimension but is dragged down significantly by one explicit review describing an employee as 'extremely unprofessional and rude,' which cannot be ignored. Pricing feedback is consistently positive across three reviews, with multiple mentions of reasonable or cheaper-than-expected charges. Project completion is somewhat concerning — one reviewer noted the crew did not show up as scheduled and required a follow-up call before work was completed, suggesting reliability issues. Experience scores moderately well, with specific technical work (dual water heater setup, general plumbing and heating) described positively, though the sample is too small to draw firm conclusions.

• Very small review set (6 total) spanning 2008–2022 — the majority of reviews are more than 5 years old and should be weighted with caution as they may not reflect current service quality.
• One review (2016) contains a serious professionalism complaint describing an employee as 'extremely unprofessional and rude' — this is a meaningful negative signal given the small sample size.
• One review (2009) explicitly describes a missed appointment with no prior communication, indicating a project completion/reliability concern.
• One review contains what appears to be a copy-pasted business description with a personal cell phone number embedded — this is unusual and may indicate a self-promotional or non-organic review rather than a genuine customer experience.
• Review recency is poor — only one review is from the past 3 years (2022), making it difficult to assess current service quality with any confidence.

This WW Score should be treated as LOW RELIABILITY due to the very small number of reviews (6), the wide date range spanning 14 years, a likely non-organic review, and at least two explicit negative signals around professionalism and scheduling — prospective customers should seek more current references before hiring.

Atlas Plumbing & Heating has a mixed but generally positive record across the reviews analyzed. Professionalism scores were boosted by strong praise for punctuality, communication, and courteous behavior in the two most recent and detailed reviews (2024), but significantly dragged down by a 2021 complaint about being unreachable and a 2015 incident where an appointment was cancelled without notification — a serious lapse in customer communication. Project completion is similarly mixed: most reviewers describe work being finished well, but the cancelled appointment with no follow-through and the 2021 contact failure introduce meaningful doubt. Pricing and experience are rated positively across the reviews that mention them, with one reviewer noting a fair policy of not charging for repeat issues. However, the majority of reviews are very old (pre-2020), and only two reviews from the past 12 months provide reliable, current data.

• RECENCY WARNING: Six of eight reviews are from 2015 or earlier, with one from 2021 and only two from the past 12 months (2024). The business's current operational quality cannot be reliably inferred from the older reviews.
• CONTACT/AVAILABILITY CONCERN: A 2021 reviewer reported being unable to reach the business by phone and questioned whether it was still operating. This is a significant reliability flag.
• APPOINTMENT CANCELLATION: A 2015 review describes a cancelled appointment with no notification and no explanation, indicating a past failure in customer communication and follow-through.
• GENERIC REVIEWS: Two reviews ('Great! Great guy!' and the all-caps 2005 review) contain no specific detail and contribute minimal usable data. These were excluded from dimension scoring due to lack of actionable content.
• SMALL SAMPLE SIZE: Only 8 reviews total, with only 2 recent ones. The WW Score should be treated with caution and is not statistically robust.

This WW Score carries LOW overall reliability due to a very small review sample, a majority of reviews being over 8 years old, documented concerns about business reachability, and only two reviews from the past 12 months providing current evidence of service quality.

Andy Wotton Plumbing receives strong praise for responsiveness, punctuality, and friendly technicians — particularly Anthony and Simon — across many reviews spanning several years. However, pricing is a persistent and serious concern, with multiple detailed negative reviews describing charges that customers felt were grossly disproportionate to the work performed, including $300 for WD-40, $550 for a minor PEX repair, $1,230 for a small bathroom job, and $1,800 quoted for a diverter fix. Project completion is generally solid for straightforward jobs, but several reviews describe abandoned work, unresolved issues, and a technician walking off a job mid-service — significantly dragging down that dimension. Experience scores moderately well overall, with most customers satisfied with workmanship quality, though a handful of reviews cite installation errors, reversed hot/cold controls, and a leaking toilet installation that the company refused to warranty. The combination of strong operational positives and recurring, credible pricing and conduct complaints produces a mid-range WW Score that reflects a contractor with real capability but meaningful reliability risks.

• PRICING CONCERN — HIGH SEVERITY: At least 8 detailed, credible reviews across multiple years describe pricing that customers considered significantly above market rate. This is not a single outlier; it is a consistent pattern. The pricing score of 42 reflects this serious recurring issue.
• PROJECT ABANDONMENT: Two separate reviews (2021) describe the owner or technician walking off a job without completing the work, leaving customers with unresolved sewage backup and water issues. One review (2018) describes a leaking toilet installation that the company refused to take responsibility for.
• OWNER CONDUCT: Multiple reviews describe the owner (Andy Wotton) as rude, dismissive, or defensive when customers raised billing concerns. One review describes the owner insulting a customer's husband. This is a notable professionalism risk at the ownership level.
• DUPLICATE REVIEWS DETECTED: Two reviews appear to be near-identical duplicates — the 'burst pipe / Karen answered' review appears twice (2024-06-09 and 2023-07-18), and the 'Anthony Perleoni toilet/sink' complaint appears twice (2021-11-22). These were counted as single unique incidents for scoring purposes.
• BLANK REVIEWS: Six reviews contained no text (only a star rating). These were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable data.
• RECENCY NOTE: The most recent reviews (2024–2025) are generally more positive, which may indicate improvement over time. However, the negative pricing reviews span from 2014 through 2025, suggesting this is a structural business practice rather than a historical issue.
• FAKE REVIEW SUSPICION — MODERATE: A cluster of reviews dated exactly 2022-06-10, 2023-06-10, and 2024-06-09 share identical dates with no specific job details, suggesting possible review solicitation campaigns. Some of these are very brief and generic. Confidence is not reduced to LOW given that many other reviews are detailed and credible, but this pattern is noted.

This WW Score is based on 68 reviews spanning over a decade with strong mention counts across all four dimensions, making it statistically reliable — however, the score should be interpreted with caution given the consistent and credible pattern of pricing complaints, documented instances of job abandonment, and owner conduct issues that represent real risks for prospective customers.

R&R Plumbing has a deeply mixed record across all four dimensions. On the positive side, numerous reviewers praise prompt emergency response, fair pricing, honest advice, and skilled diagnosis — with several long-term customers expressing strong loyalty. However, serious negative reviews drag every dimension down significantly: multiple customers report rude phone interactions, work that failed shortly after completion, charges that exceeded quoted prices without warning, and at least one instance of a gas leak attributed to poor workmanship. The professionalism dimension is particularly polarized, with one reviewer explicitly citing being hung up on when seeking a quote, and another describing a plumber who talked excessively on the customer's dime. Pricing complaints include a customer charged $150 for under 30 minutes of work that did not resolve the issue, and another billed $323 after being quoted $125. Project completion concerns are significant, with multiple reviewers reporting that problems recurred immediately after service or that work was done improperly. The score reflects a contractor with genuine strengths but a pattern of serious service failures that cannot be ignored.

• 12 reviews contain no text — only a star rating. These were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable qualitative data.
• Several highly positive reviews are extremely brief and generic (e.g., 'Best plumbing company in Manchester', 'Best in Manchester', 'Great service and timely', 'food speaks for itself') with no specific details. These may inflate the star average without providing meaningful evidence of quality.
• One review ('food speaks for itself') appears to be a misplaced review for a food establishment, not a plumbing company. This was excluded from scoring.
• The review set spans from 2008 to 2025 — over 17 years. The majority of detailed reviews are from 2016–2022, meaning recent performance data (2023–2025) is very thin: only 4 substantive reviews exist from the past 2 years, limiting confidence in current service quality.
• Recency concern: The two most recent substantive reviews (May 2025) are very brief and generic with no specifics, which limits their evidentiary value.
• A confirmed gas leak attributed to poor workmanship (2013 review) is a serious safety flag, even if dated.
• Multiple negative reviews describe a pattern of pricing disputes where final bills significantly exceeded quoted amounts — this is a recurring concern across different reviewers and years, suggesting a systemic issue rather than isolated incidents.

This WW Score is based on a large number of reviews spanning 17 years, giving it HIGH statistical confidence in terms of mention volume, but the score should be interpreted cautiously given the wide time range, the significant number of blank reviews, several generic unverifiable positive reviews, and a clear pattern of serious recurring complaints about pricing transparency, professionalism, and work quality that appear across multiple independent reviewers.

AAA Plumbing has a large and long-running review base that reveals a deeply mixed picture. Professionalism scores moderately — the majority of reviewers praise courteous, prompt, and friendly technicians by name (Rob, Jesse, Chad, Steve, Lee, Stan), but a meaningful minority of reviews describe serious failures including rude office staff, no-shows, missed callbacks, threatening customers with collections, and one incident of smoking on the job. Pricing is the weakest dimension: multiple reviewers across different time periods explicitly describe being overcharged, receiving inconsistent quotes, or finding the same work done for a fraction of the price elsewhere — though a smaller number praise fair or upfront pricing. Project completion is also mixed — many jobs are described as completed thoroughly and on time, but there are credible, detailed accounts of abandoned work, repeat visits for the same unfixed problem, work left incomplete after full payment ($27,000 job), and warranty disputes. Experience scores somewhat better, with many reviewers praising technical skill and problem-solving, though a few reviews describe plumbers who did not know what they were doing or could not diagnose basic issues.

• 23 reviews contain no text (blank or single-character entries such as 'unknown', '.', 'l', 'well', 'great') and were excluded from dimension scoring — they contribute only to raw review count.
• A cluster of reviews dated exactly 2023-06-10 and 2021-06-10 with no timestamps (only date) may indicate batch imports from a third-party platform rather than organic submissions — treat with moderate caution.
• Several highly positive reviews are generic and lack specifics (e.g., 'Great service', 'Very professional', 'Excellent experience overall') — these were counted for professionalism mentions but weighted conservatively.
• The review corpus spans from 2006 to 2025, meaning a large portion of reviews (pre-2023) are more than 12 months old. Recent reviews (2024–2025) show a notable deterioration in professionalism and project completion scores, suggesting the company's quality may have declined.
• The most recent high-detail negative review (Dec 2024, 1-star) describes an 8-year business relationship ending due to aggressive collections behavior, incompetent plumbers, and poor communication — this is given elevated weight due to recency and specificity.
• No confirmed fake review pattern detected, but the volume of generic 5-star reviews with no detail warrants conservative scoring.

This WW Score is based on a large review set (163 total, 140 with usable data) spanning nearly two decades, giving HIGH statistical confidence in the score's direction, but users should note that recent reviews trend more negatively and the score may overstate current service quality due to the weight of older positive reviews.

This company exhibits a stark bifurcation in customer experience. Recent reviews (2024-2025) from Total Bath Systems division are overwhelmingly positive, praising professionalism, timely completion, and quality workmanship with scores consistently at 5.0 stars. However, the broader SolvIt/Harp entity shows severe systemic issues: chronic no-shows and missed appointments, aggressive pricing tactics with quotes 50-100% above competitors, and documented instances of overselling unnecessary services and misdiagnosis. Pricing emerges as the most critical weakness, with numerous complaints of price gouging and dishonest upselling. While individual technicians often receive praise for friendliness and technical skill, organizational failures in scheduling, communication, and accountability significantly undermine trust.

• CRITICAL: Two distinct business entities within dataset - Total Bath Systems (recent 2024-2025 reviews, consistently 5-star) vs. SolvIt/Harp (older 2011-2023 reviews, predominantly 1-star). Total Bath Systems shows HIGH quality; SolvIt shows systematic failures. These should not be averaged together as they represent different operational standards.
• PRICING FRAUD PATTERN: Multiple independent reviews document identical predatory pricing behavior across different service types (HVAC, plumbing, electrical, water systems) spanning 2011-2022, suggesting systemic commission-based incentive structure encouraging overselling.
• NO-SHOW EPIDEMIC: At least 12 reviews document missed appointments, no-call-no-shows, rescheduling without customer notification, and failure to honor confirmed time windows. This is a recurring organizational failure, not isolated incidents.
• AGGRESSIVE SALES TACTICS: Documented pattern of technicians pulling parts mid-service, quoting inflated prices, and pressuring customers into unnecessary service contracts and replacements.
• MISDIAGNOSIS PATTERN: Multiple reviews show technicians recommending expensive replacements (well pump $3,308 vs. actual $1,500; furnace replacement vs. simple reset; refrigerant $700 vs. actual $65) later contradicted by independent verification.
• FAKE REVIEW RISK - MODERATE: Recent Total Bath Systems reviews (2024-2025) show some generic praise with minimal specifics and multiple empty/emoji-only reviews (5 instances). However, detailed positive reviews with specific names and project details provide credibility. Older SolvIt reviews are highly detailed and credible in their negativity.
• RECENCY BIAS CRITICAL: 35 reviews from 2024-2025 (Total Bath Systems) vs. 54 reviews from 2011-2023 (SolvIt). Recent reviews are dramatically more positive. Company appears to have undergone significant operational restructuring or rebranding.
• COMMUNICATION FAILURE: Persistent complaints about unresponsive management, inability to reach decision-makers, and lack of follow-up on complaints across 2011-2023 period.

This WW Score of 62.3 is UNRELIABLE as a single metric because it conflates two fundamentally different operational entities: Total Bath Systems (recent, high-quality) and SolvIt/Harp (legacy, problematic). If evaluating Total Bath Systems specifically, score would be approximately 88-90 (HIGH confidence). If evaluating SolvIt/Harp legacy services, score would be approximately 35-40 (HIGH confidence in low rating). Customers must clarify which division they are engaging before relying on this aggregate score.