Find Nearby Plumbers In Ann Arbor, Michigan

Rork Plumbing's WW Score is severely dragged down by an overwhelming pattern of pricing complaints spanning over a decade, with the vast majority of reviewers describing quotes they considered grossly inflated — in some cases 5x to 10x what competitors charged for the same work. Professionalism is mixed: while technicians are frequently described as courteous, prompt, and wearing shoe coverings, the owner Keith Rork is described in multiple reviews as hostile and combative when pricing is challenged, and a 2021 review documents refusal to wear masks in customers' homes. Project completion scores moderately, as most jobs that were accepted and paid for appear to have been completed, but several reviewers sent technicians away rather than pay the quoted price, and one misdiagnosis was documented. Workmanship quality receives some positive mentions, but the volume and consistency of pricing complaints across all years of reviews is the dominant signal in this dataset.

• PRICING PATTERN — SEVERE: An overwhelming majority of reviews (approximately 15 of 19 pricing mentions) describe quotes that reviewers found to be 3x to 10x higher than competitor quotes or DIY costs. This is the single most consistent signal across all reviews.
• OWNER CONDUCT: Multiple reviews describe the owner Keith Rork as aggressive, yelling, and dismissive when customers raised pricing concerns. One reviewer described him as 'a nasty, unstable man.'
• MISDIAGNOSIS ALLEGATION: One reviewer explicitly states they were misdiagnosed (wrong part identified), leading to an inflated repair quote, and suggests this may be a deliberate upselling tactic.
• PUBLIC HEALTH CONCERN (2021): One review documents that Keith Rork and technician Rob refused to wear masks during the COVID-19 delta variant surge and stated mask-wearing was 'not healthy,' overriding a customer's explicit request.
• RELIGIOUS MATERIALS: Multiple reviewers across different years mention receiving unsolicited religious/biblical materials in the mail after service, which several found off-putting.
• RECENCY NOTE: The majority of reviews are from 2010–2021. Only two reviews are from 2021, none from 2022 or later. The most recent reviews do not show improvement in pricing practices.
• FAKE REVIEW SUSPICION — LOW LEVEL: The small number of positive reviews (4–5) are notably generic in their praise and lack the specific detail present in negative reviews. One negative reviewer explicitly states 'Anyone who writes a good review for this company must work for them.' This cannot be confirmed but is noted.
• SERVICE CALL FEE TACTIC: Multiple reviewers note a $50 non-refundable service call fee that is charged even when quotes are rejected, which several describe as a predatory business practice.

This WW Score is based on 20 reviews with usable data spanning 2010–2021, with HIGH confidence across all four dimensions due to strong mention counts; the score is considered highly reliable and the pattern of pricing complaints is so consistent and specific across independent reviewers over many years that it should be weighted heavily by any prospective customer.

Edwards Plumbing & Heating demonstrates significant and consistent problems across multiple dimensions. Professionalism is severely compromised by repeated no-shows, failure to return calls, poor communication, and unprofessional behavior on-site (stomping, complaining, refusing customer input). Project completion is undermined by incomplete repairs that fail within days, abandoned callbacks, and lack of follow-through on promised estimates. Pricing concerns are evident in high costs ($6500–$6656 for similar work), lack of transparency, difficulty obtaining receipts, and apparent overcharging compared to competitors. While individual technicians (Jamie, Will) occasionally demonstrate competence and courtesy, systemic management failures and poor service delivery dominate the review record. Most reviews are 4+ years old, but the pattern of complaints is consistent and severe.

• CRITICAL: Four of five reviews are 1-star ratings with explicit warnings to avoid this company
• Pattern of no-shows and missed appointments reported across multiple reviews (Jeff, Tony, HVAC scheduling)
• Repeated failure to return calls and follow up on complaints
• Quality control issues: repairs failing within days (sewer drain, sump pump system)
• Pricing concerns: customer obtained same/better service from competitors at significantly lower cost ($1500 cheaper HVAC system)
• Difficulty obtaining receipts and transparency issues noted
• Inconsistent service quality: individual technicians (Jamie, Will) rated highly, but company-level management and scheduling failures are severe
• Review dates: 4 of 5 reviews are from 2016–2019; only 1 review from 2021. Older data but consistent complaint pattern suggests systemic issues

This WW Score of 42.3 is reliable and should be trusted as a strong warning signal. The score is based on consistent, detailed complaints across all dimensions with HIGH confidence in professionalism and project completion (5 mentions each). The company exhibits systemic failures in communication, scheduling, follow-through, and quality control that far outweigh occasional positive individual technician performance.

Professionalism is the most heavily evidenced dimension across all three reviews, but the picture is deeply mixed. Two reviews praise responsiveness, helpfulness, and attitude, while one review contains a serious and detailed account of racial slurs, extreme rudeness, and hostile behavior attributed directly to the business owner. This single review carries significant weight given its specificity and severity, dragging the professionalism score down substantially. Project completion and experience scores are modestly positive but are based on only two reviews each, both of which are over nine years old, limiting their reliability. No pricing information was mentioned in any review, so that dimension cannot be scored.

• SERIOUS CONDUCT FLAG: One review (2018) contains a detailed, specific allegation of racially charged language and hostile behavior attributed directly to the business owner, Bob Moon. This is not a vague complaint — the reviewer describes specific slurs, in-person confrontation, and discriminatory remarks. This materially impacts the professionalism score.
• RECENCY WARNING: All three reviews are between 3 and 10+ years old (2014, 2018, 2021). None are within the past 12 months. Current business quality and conduct cannot be reliably inferred from this data.
• LOW REVIEW VOLUME: Only 3 reviews total. Per scoring rules, this is at the minimum threshold for calculation. Results should be treated with significant caution.
• PRICING DIMENSION: No reviews mentioned cost, quotes, or value for money. This dimension is entirely unscored and contributes nothing to the WW Score.
• NO FAKE REVIEW PATTERNS DETECTED: Reviews vary significantly in tone, length, detail, and rating. No repetitive or templated language observed.

This WW Score should be treated as LOW RELIABILITY — it is based on only 3 reviews spanning nearly a decade, includes one serious misconduct allegation that significantly skews the professionalism dimension, and contains no pricing data whatsoever; prospective customers should seek more current and voluminous review data before making a hiring decision.

This contractor's review profile is dominated by serious negative experiences across nearly every dimension. Professionalism is severely damaged by a disturbing safety incident involving a technician entering rooms without permission, compounded by the company's admission that this was not the first such complaint — a major red flag. Project completion scores are dragged down by multiple accounts of failed or incomplete repairs, including an A/C unit that stopped working 11 days after installation and a furnace flooding incident that led to legal action. Pricing concerns are significant, with one reviewer documenting a $1,000+ quote for a part available for $325, and another facing a $1,000 repair bill on a unit not under warranty. A small number of positive reviews do exist — praising specific technicians like Alex and Tim for their knowledge and communication — but these are insufficient to offset the volume and severity of the negative accounts, and most positive reviews are from 2017 or earlier.

• SAFETY CONCERN: A technician (Brian Leach) was reported to have entered multiple rooms of a customer's home without permission during a gas leak repair. The company acknowledged prior similar complaints about this employee spanning 18 years of employment. This is a serious liability and safety issue.
• RECENCY CONCERN: The majority of positive reviews are from 2017 or earlier (some as far back as 2014). The two most recent reviews (2024) are both 1-star and describe serious failures in professionalism and customer service.
• PATTERN CONCERN: Repeated failures on HVAC repairs across multiple reviews suggest a systemic issue with diagnostic accuracy and workmanship quality, not isolated incidents.
• PRICING CONCERN: One reviewer with engineering background documented a markup of over 3x on a replacement part, suggesting potentially predatory pricing practices.
• LOW REVIEW VOLUME: Only 9 reviews total. Scores carry moderate confidence at best and should be interpreted cautiously.

This WW Score carries MODERATE overall reliability due to a small but substantively detailed review set; the score directionally reflects genuine and serious concerns, but more recent reviews would be needed to fully assess current performance.

Patrick's Plumbing has a deeply mixed record across all dimensions. On the positive side, a handful of older reviews (2018–2022) describe professional communication, careful workmanship, and fair pricing. However, three significant negative reviews — including a 2024 complaint about abandoning a water heater they installed, a 2023 no-show with hostile phone behavior, and a 2022 case of failed repair work that caused flood damage — drag scores down substantially. The most recent reviews skew negative, which is weighted more heavily under recency rules. Project completion is the most damaged dimension, with multiple explicit failures to finish or stand behind work.

• RECENCY CONCERN: The two most recent reviews (2023 and 2024) are both 1-star and describe serious failures in professionalism and follow-through. This is a negative trend that outweighs older positive reviews.
• PROJECT ABANDONMENT: The 2024 review explicitly states the company refused to service a water heater they installed, which is a direct project completion and warranty failure.
• NO-SHOW + HOSTILE BEHAVIOR: The 2023 review describes a confirmed appointment missed with no explanation, repeated hang-ups, and no returned messages — a severe professionalism failure.
• WORKMANSHIP FAILURE: The 2022 review describes a paid repair that was not fixed, left a toxic mess, and resulted in flood damage and insurance claims — a critical experience and project completion failure.
• LOW REVIEW VOLUME: Only 7 reviews total. Scores are based on limited data and should be treated with caution. The WW Score is directionally useful but not statistically robust.
• POSITIVE REVIEWS ARE OLDER: All 4 positive reviews date from 2018–2022. No positive reviews exist in the past 24 months, which significantly undermines confidence in current service quality.

This WW Score carries LIMITED overall reliability due to only 7 reviews, a clear negative trend in the most recent reviews, and serious documented failures in core service dimensions; prospective customers should treat this score as a warning signal rather than a balanced assessment.

Tru-Flo demonstrates severe deficiencies across all measured dimensions. While one recent review (Jan 2024) praised quick and professional service, three detailed negative reviews document critical failures: misdiagnosis of plumbing issues, incorrect parts installation, unprofessional owner conduct, and lack of accountability. The company charged $450 for a $15 fix and failed to complete work properly, requiring customers to hire competitors for corrections. Owner Tim is explicitly cited for unprofessionalism and lack of compassion. The weight of evidence strongly suggests systemic problems with technical competence and customer service.

• CRITICAL: Three of four reviews are severely negative with specific, detailed complaints about misdiagnosis, incorrect parts, and owner unprofessionalism. These are not generic complaints but documented service failures.
• RECENCY CONCERN: Most negative reviews are from 2020-2021, but the pattern of complaints (misdiagnosis, wrong parts, owner attitude) suggests ongoing systemic issues rather than isolated incidents.
• The single positive review (Jan 2024) is generic and lacks specifics, while negative reviews contain extensive detail and verifiable claims (city DPS verification, competitor diagnosis). This asymmetry suggests the positive review may be less reliable.
• Owner Tim is named in multiple complaints for unprofessionalism and lack of accountability, indicating leadership-level issues.

This score should be trusted with moderate-to-high confidence. While based on only 4 reviews, the three negative reviews contain specific, detailed, and verifiable complaints about technical incompetence and unprofessional conduct, corroborated by third-party verification (city DPS, competitor plumber). The single positive review lacks detail and appears inconsistent with the pattern of documented failures.