Find Nearby Plumbers In St. Louis, Missouri

A&J Drain Service shows a genuinely mixed record across its review history. On pricing, the company earns its strongest marks — multiple reviewers explicitly praised low costs, transparent quotes, and prices that beat national competitors by significant margins, driving a solid score in that dimension. Professionalism is the most contested dimension: while many reviewers praised courteous, prompt, and communicative technicians, there are multiple credible and specific complaints about a rude technician who walked off an unfinished job, a phone representative who hung up on a customer, and a failure to respond to emergency calls despite advertising 24/7 service — these are serious, concrete incidents that meaningfully drag the score down. Project completion is similarly split: several reviews confirm jobs finished thoroughly and correctly on the first visit, but at least two reviews describe work that was abandoned or not resolved, and one describes a recurring problem within 30 days with poor warranty follow-through. Experience scores moderately well, with reviewers citing skilled camera diagnostics, accurate problem identification without upselling, and effective drain clearing — though one review describes a technician who lacked the skill or effort to complete a job that the homeowner ultimately resolved themselves.

• One review (1-star, 2023-02-15) is about a driver's road behavior and contains no information about service quality — it was excluded from dimension scoring as it provides no usable data on any scored dimension.
• Recency concern: 11 of 19 reviews are dated 2020 or earlier, with several from 2015–2018. Only 2 reviews are from the past 12 months (2024). The more recent 2024 reviews are mixed (one strong positive, one strong negative), so no clear trend can be confirmed.
• No fake review patterns detected. Reviews vary significantly in tone, detail, length, and rating, and include specific technician names (Shawn, Justin, Jeremy, Sean, Marty), specific dollar amounts, and specific job descriptions — consistent with authentic customer experiences.
• The abandoned-job complaint (2021-01-15) and the failed drain-clearing complaint (2024-04-19) are both detailed and credible, and represent meaningful project completion failures that are weighted accordingly.
• The 24/7 emergency service failure (2017-01-14) and the phone hang-up incident (2020-09-17) suggest a recurring pattern of poor office/customer service that is distinct from field technician quality — the business appears to have inconsistent back-office professionalism.

This WW Score is based on 18 reviews with usable data spanning 2015–2024, with HIGH confidence across all four dimensions due to sufficient mention counts, but the score should be interpreted cautiously given that the majority of reviews are more than three years old and the two most recent reviews (2024) present contradictory experiences.

Neal's Plumbing has a strong base of satisfied customers who frequently praise punctuality, speed, and friendly service, with multiple reviewers specifically calling out technicians Chase and Todd for quality work. However, professionalism is meaningfully dragged down by two detailed negative reviews — one describing Tom (identified as the owner) causing significant property damage, failing to clean up, and behaving carelessly throughout a water heater replacement, and another citing a late arrival and unsanitary conditions. Pricing is generally viewed favorably, with several reviewers noting competitive or affordable rates, though one reviewer felt $175 for 1.5 hours was excessive and comparable to overpriced competitors. Project completion scores are solid overall, with most jobs described as finished promptly and thoroughly, but the detailed negative review raises serious concerns about workmanship standards on at least one occasion. The score reflects a genuinely mixed but majority-positive picture, tempered appropriately by credible and specific negative experiences.

• Two detailed 1-star reviews describe specific, credible incidents of property damage, poor cleanup, and unprofessional conduct by Tom, who is identified as the owner — these are high-weight negative signals and are not offset by generic praise.
• Several 5-star reviews are brief and generic (e.g., 'Fast, dependable, knowledgeable and affordable. Very friendly, did a great job.') with no specific details, which slightly reduces confidence in those individual reviews.
• Review from 2021-10-24 contains formatting artifacts ('On
• On') suggesting a possible copy-paste or incomplete submission — treated as low-detail but not excluded.
• Recency note: The two most detailed negative reviews are from 2018 and 2021. The most recent reviews (2023–2024) are positive, which is a moderately favorable recency signal, but the sample size of recent reviews is small (3 reviews in 2023–2024).
• No fake review pattern detected — reviews vary in length, detail, tone, and rating, and negative reviews are specific and credible.

This WW Score is based on 16 reviews spanning 2018–2024 with usable data across all four dimensions and HIGH confidence on each; the score is reasonably reliable but should be interpreted with caution given that two credible and highly detailed negative reviews describe serious professionalism and workmanship failures, which meaningfully constrain the upper bound of trust in this contractor.

Mick's Plumbing has a strong base of satisfied customers who consistently praise his friendliness, punctuality, technical skill, and willingness to respond on weekends and holidays without surcharges. Pricing is generally viewed as fair and reasonable, with one notable outlier review citing a quote more than four times higher than competitors. However, a recurring and serious pattern of no-shows and failure to return calls — documented across multiple reviews spanning 2017 to 2023 — significantly drags down the professionalism and project completion scores. The most damaging reviews describe customers left without water for hours or days after Mick committed to appointments, with no courtesy call or follow-up. This pattern is not isolated and appears to have persisted over several years, making it a systemic reliability concern rather than an isolated incident.

• SERIOUS RELIABILITY PATTERN: At least 5 reviews (2017, 2021, 2021, 2022, 2023) explicitly describe Mick committing to an appointment time and then not showing up and not calling — leaving customers without water or with unresolved emergencies. This is a consistent, multi-year pattern and is the single largest risk factor in this profile.
• WARRANTY/CALLBACK FAILURE: One review (2017-10-15) describes Mick completing initial work but then failing to show up twice when called back to fix a related issue under warranty, with no call either time. This compounds the no-show pattern.
• INCOMPLETE SCOPE OF WORK: One review (2014-02-06) notes that work agreed upon in the original consultation was later excluded at time of service without clear prior notice.
• LICENSING CONCERN: One review (2013-11-27) explicitly states Mick is not licensed, which limited the scope of work he could legally perform on that job. This is a significant flag for customers requiring permitted or code-compliant work.
• INCONCLUSIVE DIAGNOSIS: One review (2014-11-21) describes paying $250 for a leak diagnosis that was inconclusive, with Mick recommending expensive remediation that the homeowner's husband later resolved with a simple targeted test. Suggests possible diagnostic limitations on complex leak issues.
• RECENCY CONCERN: The majority of positive reviews are from 2012–2017. The most recent reviews (2021–2023) are predominantly negative, suggesting a possible decline in service reliability in recent years. Scores should be interpreted with caution given this trend.
• GENERIC/THIN REVIEWS: Multiple reviews contain only 'unknown', 'a', 'Magnificent', 'it went well', or similarly non-specific content. These provide no usable data and were excluded from dimension scoring. Their presence slightly inflates the raw star rating without adding meaningful evidence.
• FAKE REVIEW RISK — LOW TO MODERATE: The cluster of 'unknown' reviews and several very brief 5-star reviews with no detail are mildly suspicious, but the volume of detailed, specific positive reviews reduces the likelihood of systematic fabrication. No action taken beyond noting.

This WW Score is based on a large review set with HIGH confidence across all dimensions, but the score should be treated with caution due to a documented multi-year pattern of no-shows and non-communication, a licensing concern, and a clear decline in review sentiment in the most recent years (2021–2023).

Kemper Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism with consistent praise for punctuality, courtesy, and responsiveness across multiple reviews. Pricing is generally perceived as fair and reasonable, though limited explicit mentions constrain confidence. Project completion shows mixed results: while most jobs are completed on schedule, a critical 2-star review from 2020 reports leaking fittings within one year of installation, indicating potential quality control issues. Technical skill appears solid for standard installations, though the leaking fittings incident raises concerns about workmanship durability.

• RECENCY CONCERN: Most reviews are from 2012-2014 (8+ years old). Only 2 reviews from 2020-2022. Recent data is sparse and mixed (one 5-star, one 2-star).
• QUALITY DURABILITY ISSUE: 2020 review explicitly states leaking fittings within 1 year of installation, requiring drywall replacement. This directly contradicts the positive professionalism scores and suggests workmanship or product quality problems.
• INCOMPLETE REVIEWS: Three reviews contain minimal or no substantive content ('See above', '.', 'unknown'), reducing usable data quality.
• REVIEW AGE BIAS: The high professionalism and pricing scores are heavily weighted toward 2012-2014 reviews. Current performance is unclear.

This WW Score should be treated with caution due to sparse recent data and a significant quality failure reported in 2020 that contradicts earlier positive reviews; the score reflects historical performance but may not represent current service quality.

Torrisi Plumbing demonstrates strong performance in project completion and professionalism across multiple reviews, with customers praising responsiveness, dependability, and quality workmanship. However, a single 1-star review raises serious concerns about transparency and rebate handling practices, suggesting potential deceptive business conduct. The company's ability to complete work quickly (weekend bathroom remodel) and solve complex problems (water pressure diagnosis) indicates solid technical expertise. The pricing concern is isolated but significant, and the overall score is tempered by the limited review volume and presence of a critical negative review that contradicts the otherwise positive pattern.

• CRITICAL: One 1-star review (2021-03-18) alleges deceptive rebate practices and explicitly recommends avoiding the company. This directly contradicts the 4 five-star reviews and suggests either a serious service failure or a genuine customer grievance that was not resolved.
• Review recency concern: Three of five reviews are from 2021 or earlier (2021-10-28, 2021-04-15, 2021-03-18). Only two reviews are from 2023. Limited recent data limits confidence in current performance.
• Small sample size: Only 5 reviews total. WW Score should be considered preliminary and not fully reliable for major decisions.
• Potential pattern inconsistency: The stark contrast between 4 five-star reviews with specific positive details and 1 one-star review with a specific complaint suggests either a significant service quality variance or an unresolved customer issue that warrants investigation.

This WW Score should be treated with caution due to the small sample size (5 reviews), limited recent data (only 2 reviews from past 2 years), and the presence of a serious unresolved complaint that directly contradicts the otherwise positive pattern. The score reflects strong technical performance but is undermined by pricing/transparency concerns and insufficient data volume to establish reliable confidence.

Ehret Inc demonstrates strong professionalism across all five reviews, with consistent praise for friendly staff, responsiveness, and punctuality. Pricing is generally viewed as fair and reasonable across three reviews mentioning cost. Technical skill and problem-solving ability are evident in three reviews highlighting knowledgeable work and proper diagnosis. However, one 1-star review from 2020 raises serious concerns about warranty honoring and workmanship quality on a sewer line repair, which significantly impacts the project completion score. The company's ability to follow through on commitments and honor warranties is questioned, creating material doubt despite otherwise positive feedback.

• CRITICAL: One 1-star review (2020) alleges poor workmanship, warranty breach, and untrustworthiness on a major sewer repair. This directly contradicts the five-star reviews and suggests inconsistent quality or service issues.
• RECENCY CONCERN: Two reviews are from 2015-2016 (8-9 years old), one from 2021, and one from 2023. The oldest reviews may not reflect current operations. The 2020 negative review is more recent than two of the positive reviews.
• PROJECT COMPLETION DATA LIMITED: Only 2 mentions of completion/follow-through (one positive, one negative). The negative mention involves warranty refusal, which is a serious completion/accountability issue.
• SAMPLE SIZE: Only 5 reviews total limits confidence in overall score. A single negative review carries disproportionate weight in a small sample.

This score should be treated with caution due to the small sample size (5 reviews) and the presence of one serious negative review alleging warranty breach and poor workmanship that directly contradicts the positive feedback; the company's actual reliability on major projects and warranty commitments remains unclear.