Find Nearby Plumbers In Boise City, Idaho

This plumbing contractor demonstrates strong overall performance with a WW Score of 82.3, driven by consistently high marks in professionalism, experience, and project completion. The contractor excels in punctuality, communication, technical knowledge, and work quality, with the vast majority of recent reviews (2024-2025) praising responsiveness and professional conduct. However, pricing emerges as a notable weakness, with a significant subset of reviews—particularly from 2014-2018—citing overcharging, inflated estimates, and unfair service fees. While recent pricing feedback has improved, historical complaints about costs being 2-4x competitor rates remain a concern. The contractor's strength lies in execution and customer interaction; the challenge is pricing consistency and transparency.

• PRICING VOLATILITY: Strong historical pattern of overpricing complaints (2014-2018), with customers reporting charges 2-4x higher than competitors. Recent reviews (2024-2025) show improved pricing feedback, suggesting possible business model correction, but caution warranted.
• MIXED RELIABILITY ON NO-SHOWS: Multiple reviews document missed appointments and failure to call ahead (2016, 2022, 2023), though this appears less frequent in recent reviews. Pattern suggests operational inconsistency.
• QUALITY CONTROL ISSUES: Several reviews report incorrect installations causing damage (water heater installation errors, sewer line failure after 5 years, plumbing damage from improper work). These are isolated but serious.
• FAKE REVIEW RISK - MODERATE: Approximately 40-50 reviews from 2021-06-09 and 2021-06-10 are extremely generic, lack detail, contain no text, or use identical phrasing ('Great service', 'Always helpful', 'Smart helpful people'). These appear to be placeholder or auto-generated reviews. Additionally, some reviews mention the company offering Starbucks gift cards for positive reviews, which is a red flag for review manipulation.
• RECENCY BIAS NOTED: Reviews from 2024-2025 are overwhelmingly 5-star with detailed, specific praise. Reviews from 2014-2018 contain numerous 1-star complaints about pricing and service. This temporal split suggests either significant business improvement or potential review filtering/curation.
• ETHICAL CONCERNS: Multiple reviews reference the company's use of 'Jesus Christ' branding and Christian messaging while alleging dishonest practices, creating a trust credibility gap. One review explicitly states the company offered free Starbucks for positive reviews.

This WW Score of 82.3 is reliable for recent work (2024-2025) where professionalism and completion are consistently strong, but should be treated with caution regarding pricing—the contractor's cost structure has been historically problematic and recent improvement may not be permanent. The presence of fake/generic reviews and the stark contrast between recent and historical feedback suggests selective review visibility. Recommend obtaining multiple quotes and clarifying all costs in writing before engaging.

Excel Plumbing demonstrates strong overall performance with a WW Score of 82.3, driven by consistently high marks in professionalism (85.2), experience/skill (86.4), and project completion (84.6). The company excels at punctuality, communication, technical knowledge, and work quality, with numerous reviews praising specific technicians like Luke, Yuri, Bob, and Kevin. However, pricing emerges as a notable weakness (72.1), with recurring complaints about high costs, unexpected charges, and perceived overpricing relative to the work performed. While most recent reviews (past 12 months) are highly positive, older reviews reveal persistent pricing concerns and occasional service failures that have not been fully resolved.

• PRICING CONCERNS: Multiple reviews (spanning 2014-2025) report unexpectedly high quotes, hidden charges, and perceived overpricing. Examples include $450 for 20 minutes of drain work, $250 for a simple faucet replacement, $500 for toilet flange/wax ring, and significant quote increases after initial estimates. This pattern suggests systemic pricing transparency issues.
• FAKE REVIEW PATTERN DETECTED: Reviews dated 2025-06-05 through 2025-06-08 include 3 empty reviews with 5-star ratings and 2 identical reviews with identical phrasing ('I spoke with Lori, who was very friendly and helpful. She got back to me within minutes, fantastic response time. The overall experience was excellent, and the price I was quoted felt great. Highly recommend!') dated 2025-06-07 and 2025-06-05. This suggests potential review manipulation or duplicate submissions.
• SERVICE FAILURES: Several reviews document incomplete work, follow-up failures, and quality issues. Examples include: ejector pump not resealed/reconnected properly (2024-06-15), sewage left on floor after drain cleaning (2023-08-17), sump line misdiagnosis leaving customer worse off (2022-05-04), and multiple instances of plumbers not following up on promised estimates (2020-07-25, 2016-08-08).
• INCONSISTENT QUALITY: While many reviews praise specific technicians, others report poor workmanship from different technicians at the same company, suggesting inconsistent quality control or training standards.
• RECENCY BIAS: The majority of highly positive reviews are from the past 6 months (2025), while older reviews (2014-2022) contain more critical feedback about pricing and service quality. This temporal distribution warrants caution in interpreting the overall score.

This WW Score of 82.3 is reliable for assessing professionalism and technical competence, which are consistently praised across 187+ mentions, but should be interpreted cautiously regarding pricing fairness—the 72.1 pricing score reflects genuine and recurring customer concerns documented across a decade of reviews, and potential review manipulation in recent submissions reduces confidence in the most recent data.

Heritage Plumbing demonstrates strong overall performance with particular strengths in professionalism and technical expertise. The company excels at punctuality, communication, and skilled workmanship, with 98 mentions of professional conduct and 64 mentions of quality technical work. Project completion is reliable with 76 mentions of timely, thorough job execution. However, pricing emerges as a notable weakness with only 32 mentions and a lower score of 73.0, reflecting customer concerns about overcharging, high service fees, and pricing transparency. Recent reviews (2024-2025) are overwhelmingly positive, but older reviews (2006-2018) contain several serious complaints about unresponsiveness, project abandonment, and unprofessional behavior from certain technicians.

• SIGNIFICANT QUALITY VARIANCE: Multiple negative reviews from 2015-2018 describe serious issues including project abandonment ($8,000+ unpaid work), non-responsiveness, and unprofessional conduct. These contrast sharply with recent 2024-2025 reviews which are nearly universally 5-star. This suggests either significant company restructuring or potential review manipulation.
• PRICING CONCERNS: 11 reviews explicitly mention overcharging or high prices (e.g., $520 for 50-minute job, $456.37 for disposal installation, $225 for toilet flapper replacement, $150 estimate fee for refused work). This pattern indicates systematic pricing issues despite overall positive service ratings.
• FAKE REVIEW INDICATORS: 6 reviews contain only ratings with no text or minimal text ('unknown', 'Great!!!!!!', 'no answer from them'). Additionally, 3 reviews are completely blank with only 5-star ratings. These appear to be placeholder or artificially inflated entries.
• RECENCY BIAS: 65% of reviews are from 2024-2025 (all 5-star with detailed praise), while negative reviews cluster in 2015-2018 and 2019-2020. The dramatic shift suggests either genuine improvement or review platform changes. Older reviews contain credible complaints about abandonment and non-responsiveness.
• PERSONNEL INCONSISTENCY: Reviews mention multiple technicians (Ben, Victor, Tony, Tommy, Rick, Gene, Travis, Eric, Rusty, Phillip, Dylan, Rodney Speake) with vastly different quality levels. One technician (Rick/Rodney Speake) appears in multiple serious complaints (project abandonment, overcharging, conspiracy rants, retaliation). This suggests quality control issues or personnel turnover.
• SERIOUS CONDUCT ISSUES: One 2018 review describes a technician engaging in aggressive political rants and conspiracy theories, then abandoning the job. Another 2017 review alleges retaliation against a customer who didn't award a bid. These are red flags for workplace culture and screening.
• RESPONSIVENESS PROBLEMS: Multiple reviews from 2018-2020 describe failure to return calls/emails despite promises of 'great service.' This contradicts the recent 2024-2025 narrative of excellent responsiveness.

This WW Score of 82.3 should be treated with CAUTION. While recent 2024-2025 reviews (65% of dataset) are consistently excellent and suggest genuine current quality, the presence of serious historical complaints (project abandonment, non-responsiveness, overcharging, unprofessional conduct), combined with suspicious review patterns (blank entries, sudden quality shift, multiple technician names), indicates the score may not fully reflect the company's actual reliability. The pricing dimension (73.0) is well-supported by credible complaints and should be weighted heavily in decision-making. Recommend requesting detailed references from recent clients and clarifying pricing structure before engagement.

Master Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism and technical expertise across most reviews, with technicians consistently praised for punctuality, communication, and knowledgeable work. However, the company shows significant inconsistency in project completion and follow-through, with multiple serious complaints about no-shows, abandoned work, poor callbacks, and unresolved issues. Pricing feedback is mixed—some customers report fair and reasonable rates, while others cite high costs or unexpected charges. Recent reviews (2025) are overwhelmingly positive, but older reviews reveal systemic problems with accountability and customer service that appear partially resolved over time.

• CRITICAL: Multiple severe project completion failures documented—no-shows on scheduled appointments (2022, 2015, 2008), work left incomplete (2022, 2008), and technicians ghosting customers after payment (2022, 2009). These are not isolated incidents.
• CRITICAL: Serious follow-up and callback failures—customers reporting inability to reach company for warranty issues, repairs, and damage assessment (2022, 2009, 2008). One customer reported manager hanging up phone (2023).
• PATTERN: Significant quality control issues in older reviews—incorrect installations, damaged property during jobs, undersized systems, and poor workmanship that required re-repair by other companies (2022, 2008, 2007).
• RECENCY BIAS DETECTED: Reviews from 2025 and late 2024 are almost uniformly 5-star with generic praise and minimal specifics. Reviews from 2022-2023 show serious complaints. This suggests either significant operational changes or potential review manipulation in recent period.
• PRICING INCONSISTENCY: Multiple complaints about unexpected charges, high hourly rates ($175/hour noted as surprise), and quotes that don't match final bills (2008, 2015). Some customers report fair pricing; others report being overcharged.
• MULTIPLE TECHNICIAN NAMES: Reviews mention many different technicians (Doug, Meir, Jim, Kyle, Steve, Scott, etc.), making it difficult to assess whether issues are company-wide or individual. Quality appears highly variable by technician.
• FAKE REVIEW INDICATORS: Recent reviews (2025) contain repetitive structure, minimal detail, and suspiciously consistent 5-star ratings with vague praise ('Great service,' 'awesome,' 'highly recommend'). Multiple blank/minimal-text 5-star reviews suggest possible review padding.
• GEOGRAPHIC INCONSISTENCY: Reviews reference multiple locations (San Francisco, Boise, Idaho, Mountain View, etc.), suggesting either multiple locations or franchises with inconsistent quality standards.

This WW Score should be treated with MODERATE-TO-HIGH caution. While recent 2025 reviews are uniformly positive, historical data (2022-2023) reveals serious systemic issues with project completion, follow-through, and customer service that directly contradict the current narrative. The company may have improved significantly, but the recent review pattern shows signs of potential manipulation (generic praise, minimal detail, high concentration of 5-stars). Customers should verify current operational practices independently and request specific technician references before committing to major work.

All Star Plumbing earns strong marks across professionalism, project completion, and experience, with the vast majority of reviewers praising courteous, knowledgeable technicians who arrive on time and complete jobs thoroughly. Recurring technicians such as Kyle, Manny, Jerry, Anthony, Toan, Bobby, and Johnny are cited repeatedly for going above and beyond, explaining issues clearly, and leaving work areas clean. Project completion is a clear strength, with many reviews noting same-day or next-day service, jobs finished as promised, and follow-through on callbacks. Pricing is the weakest dimension: while many reviewers describe costs as fair or competitive, a meaningful minority of negative reviews cite quotes that were significantly higher than competitors, unexpected charges, or price discrepancies between phone estimates and final invoices. A small but notable cluster of negative reviews also flags instances of no-shows, poor communication, rude behavior, and at least one case of faulty workmanship with no warranty honored, which moderately suppresses the professionalism and project completion scores.

• DUPLICATE REVIEW DETECTED: Two reviews with identical text ('Great customer service he did what needed to be done. Our kitchen sink stopped up. Knew exactly what to do.') were posted two days apart (2025-06-06 and 2025-06-08) with the same 5-star rating. This is a likely fake or duplicate submission and was counted only once for scoring purposes.
• REVIEW SCOPE CONCERN: This review set appears to aggregate reviews from multiple distinct All Star Plumbing businesses across different cities and states (Fresno CA, Fairfield CA, Napa CA, Corona CA, Greensboro NC, Minneapolis MN area, Arizona, and others). These are almost certainly separate, unrelated businesses operating under the same or similar name. Scores and narratives may reflect a blended profile of multiple companies rather than a single contractor, significantly reducing the reliability of any aggregate score.
• RECENCY NOTE: Reviews span from approximately 2005 to June 2025. A substantial portion of reviews predate 2022 and reflect business conditions, staff, and ownership that may no longer be current. Recent reviews (2024-2025) are weighted more heavily in scoring but older reviews still influence the aggregate.
• NEGATIVE REVIEW PATTERN: Approximately 20-25 reviews (roughly 5-6% of the total) are 1-2 star ratings citing: price gouging or bait-and-switch pricing, no-shows or failure to return calls, rude or dismissive technicians, faulty workmanship with no warranty honored, and pressure tactics. These are distributed across the review history and are not isolated incidents.
• GENERIC PRAISE PATTERN: A significant number of short reviews (e.g., 'Great service!', 'Professional', 'Excellent and friendly service', 'Best experience') contain no specific detail and cannot be reliably scored. These were excluded from dimension scoring but counted toward total reviews analyzed.
• BLANK REVIEWS: Approximately 10 reviews contained no text (only a star rating). These were excluded from dimension scoring.

This WW Score carries HIGH data confidence due to the large volume of detailed reviews, but its practical reliability is MODERATE-to-LIMITED as a guide for hiring any single contractor, because the review pool almost certainly blends feedback for multiple unrelated businesses operating under the 'All Star Plumbing' name across different states and regions — consumers should verify they are reading reviews specific to their local branch before making a hiring decision.

ACE Plumbing, Heating and Air draws an overwhelmingly positive picture across a large review base, with the vast majority of customers praising specific technicians by name — particularly Aaron, Chappy, Gerry, Ryan, Manuel, Everett, Martin, Josh, and others — for being professional, knowledgeable, courteous, and responsive. Project completion scores are strong, with most reviewers confirming jobs were finished same-day or next-day, often under emergency conditions. Experience scores are elevated by repeated praise for diagnostic accuracy, technical depth, and creative problem-solving (e.g., Chappy saving a customer $8,000 by avoiding an unnecessary mini-split installation, Martin keeping a 34-year-old HVAC unit running). Pricing scores are pulled down meaningfully by a cluster of credible negative reviews citing hidden fees (credit card surcharges, travel time charges, truck fees), overcharging for simple jobs, and one reviewer being quoted $1,200 for a job another plumber did for $200. Professionalism is also modestly penalized by a recurring pattern of negative reviews citing rude staff, no-shows, failure to honor warranties, and at least one technician (Mike/Mohammad) accused of fraud and non-refund — these are serious flags that prevent a higher score despite the dominant positive signal.

• DUPLICATE REVIEWS DETECTED: Two pairs of reviews are near-identical in wording and posted on consecutive dates (June 6-8 and June 5-7, 2025). The Aaron review and the Martin/Aaron AC review each appear twice with different dates. This is a strong indicator of review manipulation or padding and reduces confidence in the most recent review cluster.
• FAKE REVIEW CONCERN: A review posted by the company owner (Max Greenberg) praising his own technician Chappy is included in the dataset. While disclosed, this is a self-review and should carry zero weight in scoring. It has been excluded from scoring calculations.
• HIDDEN FEES / PRICING TRANSPARENCY: Multiple credible negative reviews cite undisclosed fees including a 5% credit card surcharge, a $30 travel time charge, and a $10 truck fee not disclosed at booking. One reviewer was charged $470 to auger three drains with no upfront pricing disclosure. These are material pricing integrity concerns.
• SERIOUS MISCONDUCT ALLEGATION: One review (Feb 2024) names a specific technician 'Mike (Mohammad Alzawahreh)' and alleges payment was taken via Venmo for unresolved work, refund requests were ignored, and calls were evaded. This is a fraud allegation and significantly impacts the professionalism score.
• WARRANTY VIOLATIONS: Multiple reviews across different time periods allege that ACE failed to honor stated warranties — including a lifetime water heater guarantee, a 30-day drain warranty dispute, and a callback that was never honored after a no-show emergency call.
• NO-SHOW / ABANDONMENT INCIDENTS: At least three reviews describe technicians or the company failing to show up for scheduled appointments without notice, including one emergency no-call no-show and one technician who broke drywall and left without completing the job.
• RUDE STAFF PATTERN: Multiple reviews spanning 2018–2024 describe rude, dismissive, or hostile interactions with staff — including hang-ups, refusal to let customers speak, and disrespectful treatment of elderly customers. This is a recurring pattern, not isolated incidents.
• RECENCY NOTE: The review dataset spans from 2011 to June 2025. Reviews from 2011–2018 involve different technicians and possibly different ownership/locations. The most recent 12 months (mid-2024 to mid-2025) are heavily positive and dominate the dataset, but the negative reviews from this period (hidden fees, rude manager Scott, no-show) are credible and have been weighted accordingly.
• MULTI-LOCATION AMBIGUITY: Reviews reference multiple geographic areas including Sacramento CA, Bullhead City AZ, Toledo OH, Baltimore MD, Diamond Bar CA, Evansville IN, and others. It is likely that this dataset aggregates reviews for multiple unrelated businesses operating under the 'Ace Plumbing' name. Scores should be interpreted with caution as they may not reflect a single contractor's performance.

This WW Score carries HIGH data confidence due to the large review volume, but its reliability as a single-contractor assessment is MODERATE at best, given strong evidence that reviews from multiple geographically distinct and likely unrelated 'Ace Plumbing' businesses have been aggregated together — consumers should verify they are reading reviews specific to their local ACE Plumbing branch before making a hiring decision.