Find Nearby Plumbers In Quincy, Massachusetts

Tyler (Chenette Plumbing) demonstrates exceptional performance across all four dimensions. Professionalism is consistently praised with 13 mentions highlighting punctuality, politeness, responsiveness, and communication. Project completion is strong with 12 mentions confirming jobs finished on time, work done thoroughly, and follow-through on commitments. Pricing receives 10 mentions emphasizing fair, reasonable, and transparent costs with no hidden charges. Technical experience is evident in 8 mentions describing efficient problem-solving, knowledgeable workmanship, and proper installation techniques. The WW Score of 92.3 reflects a highly reliable contractor with strong execution across all service dimensions.

• All 14 reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative feedback or variance — this uniformity is unusual and warrants caution
• Multiple reviews use similar phrasing patterns ('reasonable price,' 'polite,' 'professional,' 'highly recommend') which could suggest template-like responses or curated reviews
• No reviews mention any problems, delays, or areas for improvement — real-world service typically shows some variation
• Recent reviews (June 2024) and older reviews (April 2023) both maintain identical 5-star pattern with no temporal degradation in quality perception
• Consider requesting independent verification or third-party review sources to validate this uniformly positive profile

While the WW Score of 92.3 is supported by consistent mentions across all dimensions and recent review activity, the absence of any negative feedback or variance across 14 reviews raises concerns about review authenticity; this score should be treated as a strong indicator of quality but verified through additional independent sources before making critical service decisions.

True Blue demonstrates exceptional professionalism across communication, punctuality, and customer service, with 42 reviews explicitly praising responsiveness, politeness, and attitude. Project completion is consistently strong with 28 mentions of timely, thorough work and follow-through. Technical expertise and problem-solving are well-documented across 26 reviews, with particular praise for knowledge of complex systems. Pricing receives a more conservative score due to one significant negative experience (October 2024 review) where a customer was quoted $829 for a $165 job elsewhere, though 13 other reviews describe pricing as fair and transparent. The company shows strong consistency over many years of operation.

• One critical pricing complaint (October 2024): Customer reported being quoted $829 for parts/labor that another company completed for $165, with concerns about lack of transparency in labor breakdown. This is a material outlier and suggests potential pricing inconsistency or aggressive upselling in certain situations.
• Multiple empty/blank reviews (3 reviews with only 5-star ratings and no text) reduce data quality slightly but do not suggest fake reviews given the overwhelming specificity and detail in other reviews.
• Recency note: 24 of 51 reviews are from 2020 or earlier (47%), with strongest recent activity in 2024-2025 (9 reviews). Recent reviews maintain consistent 5-star pattern with detailed positive feedback.
• One 1-star review (November 2018) citing company not accepting new customers—this appears to be a service availability issue rather than quality complaint and is now outdated.

This WW Score of 88.2 is highly reliable, based on 50 usable reviews with strong mention counts across all dimensions and consistent positive feedback spanning multiple years. However, the pricing dimension should be interpreted with caution due to one documented case of significant overcharging, suggesting customers should request detailed itemized quotes and compare pricing before committing to major work.

Mark Cullen Plumbing demonstrates strong performance across all dimensions. Professionalism is consistently praised with 13 mentions highlighting punctuality, cleanliness, pleasant demeanor, and responsiveness—including emergency callouts. Project completion is solid with 11 mentions confirming jobs finished properly, on time, and with follow-through on callbacks and additional issues identified. Experience is well-documented across 10 mentions showing skilled workmanship and problem-solving ability. Pricing receives 7 mentions with generally positive feedback, though one 2022 review noted high costs, tempering the overall pricing score to 78. The contractor's reliability and customer satisfaction are evident from repeat business and strong recommendations.

• Review age distribution is heavily skewed toward older reviews (11 of 16 reviews are from 2018 or earlier). Only 2 reviews are from 2024, and only 3 from 2022 or later. This limits confidence in current service quality.
• One pricing complaint from 2022 (4-star review) explicitly states 'very expensive' despite good work, suggesting pricing may be a legitimate concern that contrasts with other positive pricing mentions. This creates some tension in the pricing dimension.
• No negative reviews present in dataset—all ratings are 4.0 or 5.0. While this could reflect genuine quality, it also suggests potential selection bias in review collection or that dissatisfied customers may not have left reviews.

This WW Score of 87.2 is reliable for assessing historical performance, but should be weighted toward older data; current service quality cannot be fully validated given the recency gap in reviews. The contractor's professionalism, completion, and experience dimensions are well-supported by multiple mentions, but pricing assessment is moderate and somewhat contradictory.

T&K Mechanical demonstrates strong overall performance across all dimensions. Professionalism is a clear strength, with consistent mentions of punctuality, politeness, cleanliness, and responsiveness across 20 reviews. Project completion is solid with 16 mentions showing timely delivery and thorough follow-through, though two older reviews (2006) flagged communication failures. Experience and technical skill are well-documented across 12 reviews, with customers praising problem-solving ability and quality workmanship. Pricing receives moderate support (8 mentions) with customers consistently describing work as reasonably priced and transparent. The company shows particular strength in gas line and fireplace installation work.

• Two very old negative reviews (2006, 2016) citing poor customer service and communication failures; these are 8-18 years old and may not reflect current operations
• Three reviews contain only placeholder text ('unknown', '.') with 5-star ratings—these provide no substantive data and suggest possible data entry errors rather than fake reviews
• Most reviews are older than 5 years (22 of 31); only 3 reviews from 2023-2024, limiting recency assessment
• One review (2014) mentions unprofessional behavior (truck breakdown excuse, scratches, incomplete warranty follow-up), suggesting occasional service inconsistencies
• One review (2015) notes coordination issues with electrician, indicating potential project management gaps in multi-trade scenarios

This WW Score of 86.2 is reliable for historical performance but should be interpreted cautiously due to the age of most reviews (primarily 2005-2015) and limited recent data (only 3 reviews from 2023-2024). Current service quality may differ from this assessment. The score reflects strong professionalism and experience with moderate pricing support, but the two old negative reviews and occasional coordination issues suggest the company is not flawless.

Mr. Drain Plumbing earns strong marks across all four dimensions, with professionalism being the most consistently praised attribute — technicians are repeatedly described as polite, friendly, punctual, and communicative. Project completion scores well given the large volume of reviews confirming jobs were finished same-day or next-day, with a notable 30-day warranty honored in at least one case; however, a handful of reviews describe abandoned or incomplete resolutions and one instance of a wrong-part installation requiring a callback. Experience scores solidly, with many reviewers praising diagnostic accuracy and technical skill, though several credible negative reviews describe significant misdiagnoses and unnecessary upselling that meaningfully drag this dimension down. Pricing is the weakest dimension: while many customers found costs fair or reasonable, a meaningful cluster of reviews — including a $17,716 charge, a $5,200 bill for 14 hours of work, a $25,000 sewer line quote later done for half elsewhere, a $4,000 quote for a $285 fix, and complaints about an undisclosed 3% credit card surcharge — indicate inconsistent and sometimes deceptive pricing practices that cannot be ignored.

• 12 reviews contained no text (rating only) and were excluded from dimensional scoring but counted in total reviews analyzed.
• Several reviews are very old (2014–2018) and may not reflect current business practices; recency weighting applied — older reviews given reduced influence.
• Multiple credible negative reviews describe significant upselling, inflated quotes, and misdiagnosis (e.g., $4,000 quote for a $285 fix, $25k sewer quote done elsewhere for ~$12.5k, $5,200 charged for 14 man-hours of work, $17,716 total bill). These are specific, detailed, and plausible — not dismissed.
• One reviewer explicitly alleges the company impersonated Roto-Rooter on the phone, which is a serious business conduct concern.
• One reviewer alleges discriminatory targeting (young, female, POC) and fabricated water pressure readings — this is a serious allegation and noted as unverified but credible in tone.
• One review describes a wrong-size part installed (3-inch stopper on 4-inch drain) with refusal to honor a callback without full charge — a clear project completion failure.
• One review describes repeated no-shows and missed appointment windows — a professionalism failure.
• The overwhelming majority of reviews are 5-star, which warrants mild fake-review scrutiny; however, most positive reviews contain specific technician names, job details, and varied language, reducing the likelihood of systematic fabrication. The negative reviews are detailed and credible, suggesting the review pool is largely authentic.
• The undisclosed 3% credit card surcharge is mentioned in at least two reviews as a surprise charge — this is a transparency/pricing concern.
• Score confidence is tempered by the pricing dimension's high variance: the gap between best-case and worst-case pricing experiences is extremely wide, making the pricing score less predictive than usual.

This WW Score is based on a large, diverse, and largely authentic review set spanning 2014–2025, and carries HIGH overall confidence; however, prospective customers should weigh the pricing dimension with particular caution given documented instances of significant overquoting and lack of pricing transparency, and are strongly advised to obtain competing quotes for any major plumbing work.

Faherty Company demonstrates strong performance across all four dimensions based on available reviews. Professionalism and project completion are consistently praised, with all four reviews explicitly mentioning punctuality, responsiveness, and successful job completion. Experience is evidenced by technical competence across diverse plumbing tasks (garbage disposal replacement, restaurant infrastructure, pipe replacement, water heater work). Pricing is noted as fair and transparent in three reviews. However, the sample size of only 4 reviews limits confidence; all reviews are from 2019–2020 and uniformly 5-star, which warrants caution.

• Small sample size (n=4) limits statistical reliability and confidence in the score
• All reviews are 5-star with no negative feedback or critical comments; this uniformity is atypical and suggests potential selection bias
• All reviews are from 2019–2020; no recent reviews (past 12 months) are present, making it impossible to assess current service quality
• Repetitive positive phrasing across reviews ('professional,' 'on time,' 'highly recommend') may indicate curated or non-representative feedback
• No reviews mention any challenges, delays, or areas for improvement, which is unusual for a contractor with multiple engagements

This WW Score should be treated with caution due to the small sample size, age of reviews, and lack of critical feedback; while the data present is positive, it is insufficient to confidently assess current performance without more recent and diverse customer input.