Find Nearby Plumbers In Wilmington, North Carolina

Only a single review is available for analysis, which severely limits the reliability of any scoring. The review speaks positively to responsiveness and communication — the contractor came out the same day to detect a slab leak and scheduled the repair promptly, which reflects well on professionalism. Project completion receives a conservative score because the review confirms scheduling and detection but does not explicitly confirm the repair was fully completed to the customer's satisfaction. Experience is inferred from the contractor's ability to detect a slab leak, a technically demanding task, but no detail on workmanship quality is provided. Pricing is entirely unmentioned and cannot be scored.

• Only 1 review analyzed — WW Score cannot be calculated reliably per minimum threshold of 3 reviews.
• Project completion score is conservative: the review confirms scheduling and detection but does not explicitly state the repair was finished or the outcome was satisfactory.
• All dimension scores are based on a single mention and should be treated as very low confidence indicators only.
• No pricing information mentioned in any review — Pricing dimension has no data.

This score report is based on a single review and should not be used to make any meaningful judgment about this contractor's overall quality or reliability.

Insufficient Data — cannot calculate WW Score reliably. Only 1 review was analyzed. While this single review is positive across all dimensions (promptness and courtesy for professionalism, fantastic pricing, ability to fix issues for both completion and experience), a reliable WW Score requires a minimum of 3 reviews. All dimension scores are based on LIMITED evidence from a single data point.

• Only 1 review provided — below minimum threshold of 3 reviews needed for reliable scoring
• Review is from 2023 (over 1 year old) — recency is limited
• All dimensions mentioned only once — confidence is LIMITED across the board

This analysis cannot produce a trustworthy WW Score with only 1 review; minimum 3 reviews are required for reliable assessment.

Only one review is available for analysis, which is insufficient to calculate a reliable WW Score. The single review praises Mike's professionalism (honesty, niceness, responsiveness), technical expertise (proper appliance placement, breaker mapping), and fair pricing (free estimate). However, with only one data point and no information about project completion or follow-through, no overall score can be responsibly calculated.

• Insufficient data — only 1 review provided. Minimum 3 reviews required for reliable WW Score calculation.
• Review is from 2015 (9+ years old) — does not reflect current service quality or recent performance.
• No project completion data available — cannot assess whether work was finished on time or callbacks were honored.

This analysis cannot produce a trustworthy WW Score due to insufficient review volume and age of the single available review.

The single review available is a 1-star complaint describing serious failures across all four dimensions. The contractor misdiagnosed the problem (recommending an unnecessary disposal replacement when the issue was electrical), demonstrating poor technical experience. The installation was incomplete — missing screws caused a leak — indicating a clear project completion failure. The customer was charged for an unneeded part, raising significant pricing and transparency concerns. Professionalism is also implicated given the misdiagnosis, improper work, and apparent lack of quality control before leaving the job site.

• Only 1 review is available — WW Score cannot be calculated reliably per minimum threshold of 3 reviews.
• The sole review is a 1-star complaint describing misdiagnosis, improper installation, and a resulting leak — all serious red flags.
• Contractor allegedly recommended and charged for an unnecessary disposal replacement, which may indicate upselling or incompetence.
• Review is dated 2015 — this data is over 9 years old and may not reflect current contractor performance. Treat with significant caution.
• No positive reviews are present to provide balance; all scores are based on a single negative data point and should be considered extremely low confidence.

This WW Score report is based on a single review from 2015 and cannot be considered reliable — consumers should seek more recent and numerous reviews before making any hiring decision.

Insufficient Data — cannot calculate WW Score reliably. Only one review was provided. The single review explicitly praises professionalism (courtesy, niceness, politeness of personnel), but contains no information about pricing, project completion, or technical experience. A minimum of 3 reviews is required to produce a reliable WW Score.

• Only 1 review provided — below minimum threshold of 3 reviews for reliable scoring
• Review is from 2017 (7+ years old) — recency is a concern
• No data on pricing, project completion, or experience dimensions
• Generic praise without specific project details or outcomes

This analysis cannot produce a trustworthy WW Score due to insufficient review volume and age of the single review provided.

Only a single review exists for this contractor, which describes a no-show appointment with no communication or follow-up. Professionalism scored near zero due to the confirmed appointment being missed entirely and no notification provided to the customer. Project completion scored near zero as the contracted service was never performed and no callback or resolution was mentioned. Pricing and experience could not be scored as neither was referenced in the review.

• Only 1 review available — WW Score cannot be calculated reliably per minimum threshold of 3 reviews.
• The sole review is a 1-star complaint describing a no-show with zero communication, which is a serious service failure indicator.
• Insufficient review volume to detect fake review patterns, but also insufficient to establish any positive baseline.

This score is based on a single negative review and should be considered extremely low confidence — no meaningful conclusions about overall contractor quality can be drawn from this data alone.