Find Nearby Plumbers In Las Vegas, Nevada

Delta Mechanical demonstrates strong technical competence and professionalism in individual technician performance, with many reviews praising specific installers' knowledge, efficiency, and courteous demeanor. However, the company is significantly undermined by pervasive pricing concerns—numerous customers report excessive installation fees, hidden charges, and quotes substantially higher than competitors—and critical operational failures including missed appointments, poor communication, scheduling errors, and unresponsiveness to customer issues. While project completion rates are generally acceptable when technicians show up, the frequency of no-shows and rescheduling problems creates substantial reliability concerns. The company's Home Depot contractor status provides a guaranteed customer base despite these documented issues.

• PRICING PATTERN: Systematic complaints about inflated installation fees (often 2-3x competitor quotes), hidden charges, and bait-and-switch tactics appear across 60+ reviews spanning 2013-2025. This is the single most consistent complaint.
• SCHEDULING & NO-SHOW CRISIS: At least 35+ reviews document missed appointments, no-calls, rescheduling without customer notification, and technicians arriving hours late. This pattern is severe and recurring.
• CUSTOMER SERVICE BREAKDOWN: Multiple reviews report difficulty reaching the company, unanswered voicemails, rude phone staff, and unresponsiveness to complaints and follow-up requests.
• QUALITY CONTROL VARIANCE: Extreme inconsistency—some technicians receive glowing praise while others are described as rude, unprofessional, or careless. Damage incidents (scratched paint, bent pans, damaged breaker boxes, flooring damage) reported in 8+ reviews.
• FOLLOW-UP & WARRANTY ISSUES: Several reviews document failure to honor warranties, incomplete inspections, missing permits, and refusal to address installation defects.
• RECENCY: Negative patterns persist across entire review timeline (2007-2025), with no evidence of systemic improvement. Recent 2025 reviews show same pricing and scheduling complaints.
• FAKE REVIEW RISK - LIMITED: While many 5-star reviews lack detail, the volume of specific, detailed negative reviews with consistent complaint patterns suggests authenticity. Positive reviews often name specific technicians and describe work in detail, reducing fake review likelihood.
• CONTRACTOR DEPENDENCY: Company's Home Depot exclusivity appears to insulate them from market pressure despite poor reviews, potentially explaining lack of service improvement.

This WW Score of 72.8 should be interpreted with caution: while individual technician competence is genuinely strong (HIGH confidence), the company's operational and pricing practices are severely problematic. The score reflects a company with excellent technical workers undermined by corporate-level failures in scheduling, communication, and pricing transparency. Customers should expect quality workmanship but should anticipate scheduling difficulties, high costs, and potential unresponsiveness to issues. The HIGH overall confidence reflects the large volume of consistent, detailed reviews, but the score itself masks a company with significant structural problems beyond technician control.

Elite Plumbing, Heating & Air Conditioning demonstrates strong technical expertise and generally professional service delivery, with many customers praising technician knowledge and punctuality. However, the company is significantly hampered by persistent pricing concerns—multiple reviews cite aggressive upselling, opaque pricing structures, and quotes perceived as inflated or dishonest. Project completion shows mixed results, with some customers experiencing follow-through failures, scheduling issues, and unresolved callbacks. The substantial volume of negative reviews alleging misdiagnosis, unnecessary repairs, and predatory sales tactics (particularly targeting elderly customers) creates material trust concerns that offset the positive experiences reported by loyal, satisfied customers.

• CRITICAL: Multiple reviews (at least 15+) allege deliberate misdiagnosis and unnecessary upselling, including claims of intentionally breaking equipment to force upgrades. This pattern suggests potential systemic sales pressure culture.
• PRICING RED FLAG: Consistent complaints about opaque pricing, refusal to provide hourly rates, and quotes that are 5-10x higher than competitor estimates for identical repairs (e.g., $300 capacitor vs. $11 part cost; $10,000 coil replacement; $7,300 vague plumbing quote).
• CUSTOMER SERVICE FAILURES: Multiple reports of no-call/no-shows, missed appointments, rude staff (particularly phone representatives), ignored callbacks, and poor communication despite paid service plans.
• ELDERLY EXPLOITATION: At least 2 explicit reviews describe targeting elderly/vulnerable customers with inflated quotes ($10,000 for coil/condenser; aggressive upselling to seniors on fixed income).
• FAKE REVIEW PATTERN DETECTED: Approximately 40-50 reviews from June 2025 and March 2025 show near-identical phrasing, generic praise with minimal specifics, and suspiciously clustered 5-star ratings with empty text fields. These appear artificially generated or bulk-submitted to inflate ratings. Confidence reduced accordingly.
• INCONSISTENT QUALITY: Reviews explicitly note technician quality varies dramatically—some techs praised as excellent, others accused of incompetence or dishonesty. Suggests inconsistent training/oversight.
• WARRANTY DISPUTES: Multiple customers report company refusing to honor manufacturer warranties or claiming parts unavailable when competitors easily source them.
• RECENCY BIAS: Most negative reviews are from 2018-2024; recent reviews (2025) are overwhelmingly positive and appear artificially generated. This temporal pattern is suspicious.

This WW Score should be treated with CAUTION. While the numerical score of 72.8 reflects genuine high-confidence data across all dimensions, the presence of substantial fake/artificially generated reviews (particularly the 40+ identical 5-star reviews from June 2025) artificially inflates the overall rating. The company demonstrates real technical competence and professionalism in service delivery, but is severely compromised by credible, detailed allegations of predatory sales practices, misdiagnosis-driven upselling, and poor customer service. Customers should independently verify any major repair recommendations and obtain second opinions before authorizing work, particularly for expensive replacements.

Focus Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism and technical expertise, with technicians consistently praised for punctuality, courtesy, and knowledge. However, pricing emerges as a significant weakness, with numerous complaints about markups on parts (particularly igniter assemblies at 17x market value), high labor rates ($280-410/hour), and undisclosed fees. Project completion is generally solid with same-day service and thorough work, though some older reviews cite incomplete jobs and follow-up failures. The company shows a troubling pattern of pricing opacity and aggressive upselling that substantially undermines customer trust despite strong individual technician performance.

• PRICING PATTERN: Multiple independent reviews (2023-2024) report identical complaint: igniter parts charged at $341-410 when market value is ~$20. This suggests systematic overcharging on parts, not isolated incidents.
• COMMUNICATION FAILURES: At least 6 reviews document failure to return calls, provide quotes, or follow up on promised callbacks, indicating systemic operational issues.
• AGGRESSIVE DRIVING: 3 separate reviews report reckless/dangerous driving by Focus Plumbing vehicles (2023-2024), suggesting safety/culture concerns.
• QUOTE INCONSISTENCY: Multiple reviews report being quoted one price then charged another, or charged for estimates when told they were free.
• SERVICE FEE DISPUTES: Recurring complaints about $69 service fee being charged even for simple jobs or follow-ups on work Focus previously completed.
• RECENCY CONCERN: Most negative reviews cluster in 2023-2024 (recent), while oldest reviews (2011-2015) are predominantly positive, suggesting service quality or pricing practices have deteriorated.
• FAKE REVIEW RISK - MODERATE: 4 reviews contain only ratings with no text or generic single-sentence praise ('unknown' text field). However, majority of reviews contain specific details and are not suspicious.

This WW Score of 72.8 is reliable but reflects a company in decline: strong technician professionalism and experience are substantially offset by systematic pricing opacity, parts markups, and communication failures that have intensified in the past 2 years. The score should be trusted as representative of current performance, but customers should expect pricing disputes and should obtain detailed written estimates before authorizing work.

Jenni Plumber demonstrates strong technical expertise and generally professional service delivery, with many customers praising individual technicians' knowledge and courteous demeanor. However, the company is significantly hampered by persistent pricing concerns—multiple customers report overcharging, hidden fees, inflated permit charges, and billing for unauthorized work. Project completion issues are also notable, with several complaints about rescheduling, no-shows, and incomplete follow-through on callbacks. While recent reviews (2024-2025) are predominantly positive, older reviews reveal a pattern of customer service failures and ethical concerns that suggest systemic issues beyond individual technician performance.

• PRICING RED FLAG: Multiple independent complaints about overcharging, hidden fees, and inflated permit costs (e.g., $200 permit fee when actual cost is $41-77). This pattern appears across different time periods and customers, suggesting systemic pricing practices rather than isolated incidents.
• PROJECT COMPLETION CONCERNS: Documented cases of rescheduling, no-shows without adequate notice, and failure to honor callbacks. One customer reported being rescheduled three times with 48-hour notice requirements for condo work.
• ETHICAL CONCERNS: Allegations of billing for unauthorized work, double-charging, and refusing refunds despite acknowledged errors. One customer reported being charged for 7 labor hours for 3 fittings.
• CUSTOMER SERVICE INCONSISTENCY: Multiple complaints about difficulty reaching management, unresponsive follow-up, and dismissive phone staff. Contrasts sharply with positive recent reviews.
• RECENCY BIAS DETECTED: Reviews from 2024-2025 are overwhelmingly 5-star with minimal detail, while older reviews (2012-2020) contain more substantive criticism. This temporal pattern warrants caution—recent reviews may not reflect full service experience.
• POTENTIAL FAKE REVIEW PATTERN: Several 5-star reviews with no text or minimal text (e.g., '...', '.', 'unknown') appear clustered on specific dates (2016-06-10, 2014-06-23, etc.), suggesting possible review padding.
• SERIOUS INCIDENTS: One customer alleged theft of diamond earrings by technician; another reported dangerous gas line installation requiring emergency correction. Owner reportedly unresponsive to serious complaints.
• QUALITY CONTROL ISSUES: Multiple reports of incomplete initial work requiring callbacks, improper installations, and technicians lacking knowledge for specific systems (e.g., sump pumps, Manabloc systems).

This WW Score of 72.8 should be treated with MODERATE-TO-HIGH caution: while the score reflects genuine strengths in technical expertise and professionalism among individual technicians, it masks significant and persistent weaknesses in pricing transparency, project completion reliability, and customer service responsiveness that are documented across multiple years and customer accounts. Recent positive reviews are encouraging but do not fully offset the pattern of ethical and operational concerns evident in historical data. Prospective customers should obtain detailed written estimates, verify permit costs independently, and establish clear communication protocols before engaging this company.

DMS Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism and technical expertise, with consistently positive feedback on punctuality, friendliness, and workmanship quality. However, significant pricing concerns emerge across multiple reviews, with customers reporting substantial overcharges, lack of transparency in estimates, and aggressive upselling tactics—particularly in emergency situations. Project completion is generally reliable, though some reviews indicate incomplete diagnostics and follow-up issues. The company shows a pattern of inconsistent service quality depending on which technician is assigned, and several negative reviews suggest opportunistic pricing practices when customers are vulnerable.

• PRICING RED FLAG: Multiple reviews (at least 12) explicitly cite price gouging, overcharging, and lack of estimate transparency. Examples include: $2,700 quote for non-existent main line leak, $1,800 cash charge for water damage work (vs. $3,800 insurance billing), $395 for 2-3 minute drain clearing, $2,000 estimate vs. $400-450 phone quote. This pattern suggests systematic overpricing in emergency situations.
• INCONSISTENT SERVICE QUALITY: Reviews show stark variation in technician professionalism. Named technicians (Doug, TJ, Anthony) receive consistent 5-star praise, while unnamed or other technicians (Diego, Tony, unnamed tech) appear in multiple negative reviews citing rudeness, incompetence, and poor attitude.
• EMERGENCY EXPLOITATION: Multiple reviews indicate company targets customers in emergency situations with inflated pricing. One customer was quoted $2,700 for a non-existent problem; another was charged $1,800 cash when insurance would have billed $3,800.
• DIAGNOSTIC FAILURES: Several reviews report technicians failing to properly diagnose issues or recommending unnecessary work (e.g., main line replacement when irrigation switch was the problem, $4,000 front yard replacement when simple fix existed).
• FOLLOW-UP ISSUES: Multiple reviews report callbacks for same issues, repeated visits for water heater problems, and warranty disputes (3-month warranty claimed but not honored in some cases).
• COMMUNICATION PROBLEMS: Reviews cite lack of callbacks, missed appointments, late arrivals (30 mins to 2 hours), and poor responsiveness to customer concerns about overcharging.
• FAKE REVIEW PATTERN DETECTED: Approximately 35-40 reviews from June 8, 2024 show suspicious clustering with nearly identical phrasing ('super friendly,' 'quick,' 'professional,' 'reasonable pricing') and all 5-star ratings with minimal detail. This date concentration and repetitive language suggests potential review manipulation.
• 24/7 SERVICE MISREPRESENTATION: Multiple reviews cite false advertising of 24-hour service availability; company claims 24/7 but does not actually provide it.
• PERMIT AND CODE VIOLATIONS: One detailed review documents failure to obtain required building permits and failure to install required hammer arrestors, resulting in contractor board citation and fines.

This WW Score of 72.8 should be treated with caution: while the HIGH confidence reflects substantial review volume, the data reveals a deeply polarized company with excellent service from specific technicians (Doug, TJ, Anthony) but systematic pricing exploitation and inconsistent quality from others. The suspicious clustering of positive reviews in June 2024 further reduces confidence in the overall rating. Customers should expect strong technical work but should obtain multiple estimates, verify all charges in writing, and specifically request named technicians to minimize risk of overcharging.

Johnny's Plumbing demonstrates strong technical expertise and professionalism from individual technicians, with many recent reviews (2025) praising specific workers like Gabriel, Eddie Vargas, and Jeff for their knowledge, politeness, and efficiency. However, the company is significantly hampered by chronic office management and customer service failures, including rude receptionists, missed appointments, no-shows, poor communication, and unresponsiveness to callbacks. Pricing is generally perceived as fair and reasonable, though some older reviews cite dramatic quote increases and billing disputes. Project completion is inconsistent—while many jobs are finished promptly and thoroughly, there are documented cases of incomplete work, callbacks required to fix initial mistakes, and abandoned projects. The stark contrast between positive technician-level reviews and negative office/management reviews suggests systemic organizational dysfunction despite individual worker competence.

• CRITICAL: Severe office management and customer service issues documented across multiple years (2012-2022). Receptionist 'Brianna' and unnamed office staff repeatedly described as rude, unprofessional, and hostile in at least 6 separate reviews.
• PATTERN: Multiple no-show and missed appointment complaints spanning 2015-2022, indicating scheduling/communication breakdown at organizational level.
• PATTERN: Significant number of negative reviews (15+ one-star ratings) concentrated in 2012-2018 period, with some improvement in recent years (2021-2025), but office issues persist.
• CONCERN: Recent reviews (June 2025) show only 5-star ratings with minimal detail and some empty review text fields (3 blank reviews rated 5.0), suggesting possible review manipulation or incomplete data entry.
• INCONSISTENCY: Owner 'Johnny' receives individual praise for honesty and professionalism in older reviews, but is also cited as dismissive and unwilling to address customer complaints in 2018 reviews.
• QUALITY CONTROL: Multiple documented cases of incorrect diagnoses, incomplete repairs requiring callbacks, and work that had to be redone by competitors (2015-2018 period).
• RECENCY BIAS: Overwhelming majority of recent reviews (2025, 2024, 2023) are 5-star with generic praise, while detailed negative reviews are older (2012-2018). This temporal pattern warrants caution.

This WW Score of 72.8 should be treated with MODERATE-TO-HIGH caution: while the score reflects genuine high-quality technical work from field technicians, it masks severe and persistent organizational dysfunction in office management and customer service that directly impacts customer experience and project completion. The recent flood of 5-star reviews lacks specificity and may not fully represent current operational reality. Customers should expect excellent workmanship but should prepare for potential communication, scheduling, and responsiveness challenges with the office.