Find Nearby Plumbers In Salt Lake City, Utah

The overwhelming majority of reviews praise professionalism, punctuality, same-day responsiveness, and friendly communication, driving a strong professionalism score. Project completion is also well-supported, with multiple reviewers noting jobs finished on time, technicians staying late to complete work, and follow-through on quoted scope. Experience scores are solid, with several reviewers specifically calling out technical knowledge, problem-solving of unexpected issues, and quality of workmanship. However, the pricing dimension is meaningfully dragged down by one detailed 1-star review describing a $600 labor charge for 40 minutes of work with no upfront disclosure — a serious transparency failure that offsets the many positive pricing mentions. The WW Score reflects a generally strong contractor with one significant and credible pricing/transparency complaint that cannot be ignored.

• FAKE REVIEW RISK — MODERATE: A large proportion of reviews (roughly 15 out of 26) have no date attached. This makes recency weighting impossible and raises the possibility that some reviews are older, imported, or unverifiable. Confidence in the overall dataset is reduced slightly.
• REPETITIVE PRAISE PATTERN: Multiple undated reviews use nearly identical language structures ('prompt, professional, honest', 'quick and professional', 'fast, affordable and professional'). While not conclusive, this pattern warrants caution and may indicate templated or coached reviews.
• RECENCY CONCERN: Only 4 reviews have confirmed dates. The most recent dated review (2024-04-26) is the sole 1-star review and describes a significant pricing transparency failure. The next most recent dated review is from 2021. The bulk of positive reviews may be significantly older than 3 years.
• PRICING TRANSPARENCY FAILURE: The 1-star review from April 2024 explicitly describes a $600 labor charge disclosed only after work began, with no upfront quote provided. This is a concrete, specific, and credible complaint that materially impacts the pricing score and warrants consumer caution.
• COMPANY NAME INCONSISTENCY: Reviews reference at least two different business names — 'Low Price Water Heaters' and 'Nearby Plumbing' — which may indicate a rebranding, merged review pool, or data aggregation across entities. Scores may not reflect a single consistent business.

This WW Score carries moderate-to-high reliability for general service quality but should be treated with caution on pricing transparency, given a specific and credible recent complaint, a large volume of undated reviews, and minor indicators of potentially coached or templated positive feedback.

Manwill Plumbing & Heating demonstrates strong technical competence and professionalism across most service dimensions, with particularly high marks for experience and skill level (84.5). The company excels at project completion and follow-through, with many customers praising timely service and thorough work. However, pricing emerges as a significant weakness (68.0), with numerous complaints about markups on parts, labor rates, and overall costs relative to market alternatives. While individual technicians (Mark, Aldo, EJ, Katy, etc.) receive consistent praise for friendliness and knowledge, systemic pricing concerns and occasional service failures prevent a higher overall score.

• PRICING PATTERN: Multiple reviews (at least 15+) explicitly cite price gouging, excessive markups on parts (Freon at $228/lb vs. market ~$20/lb; thermostats marked up $700 over retail; $190 for $30 parts), and labor rates perceived as unreasonable. This is the most consistent negative theme across the dataset.
• DUPLICATE REVIEWS DETECTED: The exact same review text appears 3 times (Kody Johnstun sewer drain review dated 2025-06-07, 2025-06-04, and similar phrasing in other reviews). Additionally, 'John was his usual pleasant self' review appears twice (2025-06-06 and 2025-06-03). Multiple empty reviews (5-star with no text) suggest possible review padding.
• DISHONEST SALES PRACTICES ALLEGED: At least 5 reviews allege misdiagnosis or pressure to replace equipment unnecessarily (cracked heat exchanger scam, oversized furnace, unnecessary AC/furnace replacement). While some customers report owner follow-up and refunds, the pattern suggests systemic issues with diagnostic integrity.
• RECENCY BIAS: Approximately 60% of reviews are from 2025 (past 6 months), with a sharp concentration in May-June 2025. Older reviews (2012-2017) tend to be more positive; recent reviews show more pricing complaints. This temporal shift warrants caution.
• OWNER RESPONSE PATTERN: Multiple reviews mention owner 'Brian J' or 'Brian' responding to negative reviews, sometimes defensively. One customer explicitly states the owner is 'vindictive' and disparages negative reviews rather than resolving issues.
• INCONSISTENT SERVICE QUALITY: Wide variance in technician performance noted (some exceptional, others unprofessional or incompetent). Several reviews mention technicians lacking knowledge or requiring phone support to diagnose problems.
• FOLLOW-UP FAILURES: Multiple reviews cite promised callbacks that never materialized, delayed service (2+ weeks), or incomplete work requiring multiple visits.

This WW Score of 78.2 is reliable for assessing technical competence and professionalism but should be heavily weighted toward pricing concerns when making a decision; the company's pricing practices are well-documented across a large sample and represent a material risk to customer satisfaction despite strong workmanship ratings.

True Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism with consistently punctual technicians, courteous communication, and responsive scheduling across 187 mentions. Project completion is reliable with most jobs finished on time and callbacks honored, supported by 156 mentions. Technical expertise is solid with skilled diagnosticians and quality workmanship noted in 142 reviews. However, pricing emerges as a significant weakness: 89 mentions reveal recurring complaints about markups ranging from 3-5x fair market value, excessive service call fees ($25-$75 for estimates), and quotes perceived as inflated or dishonest. While individual technicians are frequently praised, the company's pricing structure and post-ownership (November 2023) service quality decline are persistent concerns that suppress the overall score.

• PRICING PATTERN: Systematic overcharging documented across multiple reviews. Examples include $831 for a $65 cartridge replacement, $486 for a $5 copper elbow (15 min work), $900 for a $30 toilet flange, and $1200 for 3 hours emergency work. This pattern suggests either intentional markup strategy or poor cost estimation practices.
• OWNERSHIP CHANGE IMPACT: Multiple long-term customers (10+ years) report significant service quality decline after November 2023 ownership change. Pre-2023 reviews are predominantly 5-star; post-2023 shows increased 1-2 star ratings for communication, scheduling, and pricing issues.
• SERVICE FEE CONTROVERSY: Repeated complaints about $25-$75 diagnostic/estimate fees, particularly when quotes are not accepted. Some customers report being charged for estimates on jobs exceeding $10,000.
• COMMUNICATION INCONSISTENCY: Several reviews cite delayed follow-ups (3 weeks without estimate), missed callbacks, failed appointment notifications, and rescheduling without proper notice. This contrasts sharply with earlier reviews praising responsiveness.
• FAKE REVIEW RISK - LIMITED: While most reviews appear genuine with specific details, there is a cluster of 15-20 very brief, generic 5-star reviews with minimal detail (e.g., empty text fields, single sentences like 'Great service!!') dated 2025-06-02 to 2025-06-09. These lack specificity and may inflate recent ratings artificially.
• RECENCY CONCERN: Reviews from past 6 months (2025) show higher concentration of 5-star ratings with less detail, while 2024-2023 reviews contain more balanced criticism. This temporal pattern warrants caution in weighting recent scores.
• INCONSISTENT QUALITY: Multiple reviews document technician-to-technician variance. Some technicians (Derek, Ryan, Cody, Sam, Chris) are specifically requested and praised; others are criticized for poor communication or sloppy work. This suggests inconsistent training or quality control.

This WW Score of 78.2 is reliable for assessing professionalism and project completion (both HIGH confidence with 150+ mentions each), but the pricing dimension (68.0, HIGH confidence with 89 mentions) is the primary driver of the lower overall score and reflects genuine, documented customer dissatisfaction with value-for-money. The post-November 2023 ownership change has materially impacted service consistency; customers should weight pre-2023 reviews more heavily for historical baseline and expect potential pricing negotiations. The cluster of generic 5-star reviews in June 2025 suggests recent rating inflation and should be discounted.

Towers/Valley Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism with consistent praise for punctuality, courtesy, and responsiveness across 127 reviews. Project completion is reliable with 82/100 score based on 98 mentions showing timely work and follow-through. Technical experience scores 83/100 with 89 mentions highlighting skilled diagnostics and quality workmanship. However, pricing is a significant weakness at 65/100 based on 31 explicit mentions—multiple customers report charges 2-4x higher than competitors for identical work, with complaints about inflated labor rates and undisclosed service charges. The company shows strong operational execution but struggles with pricing transparency and value perception.

• PRICING PATTERN: Multiple reviews (2024-2019) document excessive pricing: $540 for $20 toilet parts, $1200 for 1.44-hour job, $428 for $90 pressure regulator, $450 for $20 valve installation. This is a systemic issue, not isolated incidents.
• FAKE REVIEW RISK - MODERATE: Approximately 15-20 reviews from 2025-06-02 to 2025-05-10 show suspicious clustering with generic praise, minimal detail, and identical 5-star ratings within same date ranges. However, older reviews (2006-2020) provide substantive detail and mixed ratings, suggesting core authenticity.
• RECENCY BIAS: 40% of reviews are from past 12 months (2025 and late 2024), heavily weighted toward 5-star ratings. Older reviews (2006-2015) show more balanced distribution with legitimate 1-2 star complaints about pricing and no-shows.
• NO-SHOW/SCHEDULING ISSUES: Four separate 1-star reviews (2021, 2020, 2016) document appointment failures, no-call cancellations, and 2-4 hour delays. This pattern suggests operational inconsistency despite recent positive reviews.
• WATER DAMAGE LIABILITY: One 2023 review documents technician negligence (failed to reconnect washing machine hose) causing floor flooding; company refused full reimbursement. Indicates potential liability and dispute resolution issues.
• PRICING TRANSPARENCY: Multiple reviews note undisclosed 'QSC' service plan charges ($79) added without customer awareness, suggesting aggressive upselling practices.

This WW Score of 78.2 is reliable for assessing operational competence and professionalism (HIGH confidence), but the pricing dimension (65/100) is understated due to limited explicit mentions relative to the severity of complaints; actual customer value perception is likely lower than the overall score suggests. Recent review clustering raises moderate concerns about data authenticity, but historical reviews provide sufficient substantive evidence to validate core findings. Recommend treating this score as strong on execution but weak on value proposition.

Expert Services demonstrates strong professionalism with consistently punctual arrivals, friendly technicians, and responsive communication across 58 reviews. Technical competence is solid with 35 mentions of skilled workmanship and problem-solving. Project completion is reliable with 42 mentions of finished work and follow-through. However, pricing is a significant weakness: 24 reviews explicitly mention high costs, with recurring complaints about excessive hourly rates ($195–$340/hr), inflated quotes, aggressive upselling, and lack of transparency. Several customers report being charged for estimates and feeling overcharged relative to market rates. This pricing concern substantially reduces the overall score despite strong execution quality.

• PRICING PATTERN: Consistent complaints across multiple years (2016–2024) about high labor rates and aggressive pricing. At least 8 reviews explicitly state prices were excessive or felt like 'rip-offs.' This is not isolated—it is systemic.
• QUOTE FEES: Multiple reviews (2019, 2024) report being charged $30–$89 for estimates/quotes, which customers found unusual and excessive.
• UPSELLING CONCERNS: Several reviews suggest technicians recommend unnecessary replacements (water heaters, garbage disposals) at inflated prices. Customers report getting second opinions and finding the original diagnosis was wrong or overpriced.
• TRANSPARENCY ISSUES: One review (2024) reports being charged $860 initially for 1.5 hours of work, then refunded $300 after manager intervention—suggesting billing errors or lack of upfront clarity.
• INVOICE DISCREPANCIES: One review (2020) reports being charged under a different company name (Munsons Mechanical) instead of Expert Plumbing, and a promised $50 credit was never applied.
• BILLING DISPUTES: One review (2019) reports receiving an invoice double the agreed price the morning of scheduled work, with services not agreed upon.
• POSITIVE RECOVERY: One detailed review (2016) shows the company does respond to complaints and can make things right when contacted, which is a mitigating factor.
• RECENCY: Most negative pricing reviews are from 2018–2024, indicating this is an ongoing issue, not historical. Recent reviews (2024) still contain pricing complaints.
• REVIEW AUTHENTICITY: No evidence of fake reviews detected. Reviews show varied specificity, mixed ratings, and detailed complaints that appear genuine. Negative reviews are detailed and credible.

This WW Score of 78.2 is reliable and should be trusted. It is based on 75 reviews with strong data across all dimensions. The company excels in professionalism and technical competence but is significantly hampered by documented pricing concerns that appear systemic and recurring. Customers should expect quality work but should obtain multiple quotes and carefully review all charges before committing.

Fix-It Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism, competitive pricing, and technical expertise across most dimensions. Juan and his team consistently receive praise for responsiveness, friendliness, honest communication, and quality workmanship on complex jobs like repiping and sewer line replacement. However, project completion reliability is notably weaker, with multiple documented instances of no-shows, missed appointments, delayed callbacks, and jobs running significantly over estimated timelines. This inconsistency in follow-through and scheduling reliability significantly impacts the overall score despite otherwise strong performance in professionalism and experience.

• CRITICAL: Multiple no-show and missed appointment complaints (2016, 2017, 2019) indicate systemic scheduling/communication issues that contradict claims of 10-minute callback guarantee
• Project completion delays documented: one job ran 10+ days vs. 4-day estimate (2009); another took weeks longer than promised (2014); scheduling frustrations noted in 2017 and 2019 reviews
• Quality control inconsistencies: one review documents poor workmanship (incorrect measurements requiring drywall/granite replacement, warranty installation failure, 2014); another reports inadequate diagnosis and unnecessary upselling (2018)
• Pricing complaints in minority of reviews suggest occasional overcharging for commercial/multi-unit properties (2017: $1,850 bid for 2-hour job; 2014: warranty installation issues)
• Negative reviews span 2009-2019, suggesting long-standing operational issues rather than isolated incidents
• One review (2014) documents extended non-responsiveness and failure to follow up on warranty issues over 2+ months
• Recency note: Most recent reviews (2025, 2024, 2023) are predominantly 5-star with minimal detail; older reviews (2009-2019) contain more substantive criticism, suggesting possible review quality degradation or selection bias in recent submissions

This WW Score of 78.2 should be trusted with HIGH confidence due to large sample size (56 reviews) and consistent data across dimensions, but the score masks a critical vulnerability: while Juan excels at technical expertise and initial customer relations, the company has a documented pattern of scheduling unreliability and project delays that directly contradicts its professionalism claims. Customers should expect quality work but should not rely on promised timelines or guaranteed callbacks.