Find Nearby Plumbers In Apache Junction, Arizona

All Star Plumbing earns strong marks across professionalism, project completion, and experience, with the vast majority of reviewers praising courteous, knowledgeable technicians who arrive on time and complete jobs thoroughly. Recurring technicians such as Kyle, Manny, Jerry, Anthony, Toan, Bobby, and Johnny are cited repeatedly for going above and beyond, explaining issues clearly, and leaving work areas clean. Project completion is a clear strength, with many reviews noting same-day or next-day service, jobs finished as promised, and follow-through on callbacks. Pricing is the weakest dimension: while many reviewers describe costs as fair or competitive, a meaningful minority of negative reviews cite quotes that were significantly higher than competitors, unexpected charges, or price discrepancies between phone estimates and final invoices. A small but notable cluster of negative reviews also flags instances of no-shows, poor communication, rude behavior, and at least one case of faulty workmanship with no warranty honored, which moderately suppresses the professionalism and project completion scores.

• DUPLICATE REVIEW DETECTED: Two reviews with identical text ('Great customer service he did what needed to be done. Our kitchen sink stopped up. Knew exactly what to do.') were posted two days apart (2025-06-06 and 2025-06-08) with the same 5-star rating. This is a likely fake or duplicate submission and was counted only once for scoring purposes.
• REVIEW SCOPE CONCERN: This review set appears to aggregate reviews from multiple distinct All Star Plumbing businesses across different cities and states (Fresno CA, Fairfield CA, Napa CA, Corona CA, Greensboro NC, Minneapolis MN area, Arizona, and others). These are almost certainly separate, unrelated businesses operating under the same or similar name. Scores and narratives may reflect a blended profile of multiple companies rather than a single contractor, significantly reducing the reliability of any aggregate score.
• RECENCY NOTE: Reviews span from approximately 2005 to June 2025. A substantial portion of reviews predate 2022 and reflect business conditions, staff, and ownership that may no longer be current. Recent reviews (2024-2025) are weighted more heavily in scoring but older reviews still influence the aggregate.
• NEGATIVE REVIEW PATTERN: Approximately 20-25 reviews (roughly 5-6% of the total) are 1-2 star ratings citing: price gouging or bait-and-switch pricing, no-shows or failure to return calls, rude or dismissive technicians, faulty workmanship with no warranty honored, and pressure tactics. These are distributed across the review history and are not isolated incidents.
• GENERIC PRAISE PATTERN: A significant number of short reviews (e.g., 'Great service!', 'Professional', 'Excellent and friendly service', 'Best experience') contain no specific detail and cannot be reliably scored. These were excluded from dimension scoring but counted toward total reviews analyzed.
• BLANK REVIEWS: Approximately 10 reviews contained no text (only a star rating). These were excluded from dimension scoring.

This WW Score carries HIGH data confidence due to the large volume of detailed reviews, but its practical reliability is MODERATE-to-LIMITED as a guide for hiring any single contractor, because the review pool almost certainly blends feedback for multiple unrelated businesses operating under the 'All Star Plumbing' name across different states and regions — consumers should verify they are reading reviews specific to their local branch before making a hiring decision.

Jet Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism with consistently praised responsiveness, punctuality, and courteous service across 89 mentions. Technical expertise and workmanship quality are well-documented across 71 reviews, with Tony and his team frequently commended for problem-solving ability and knowledge. Project completion is solid at 78.5, though some reviews mention delayed callbacks and incomplete follow-through on warranty claims. Pricing receives a moderate score of 79.0 based on 42 mentions—most customers report fair and competitive rates, but a few note higher-than-expected costs or disputes over warranty coverage. The company operates across multiple service areas with some geographic service limitations that have caused customer frustration.

• Multiple reviews (at least 6) report serious communication failures: customers unable to reach the company, no callbacks despite multiple attempts, and emergency calls not returned. This is a significant reliability concern.
• At least 4 reviews describe project completion issues: incomplete work, abandoned jobs, failure to honor warranty claims, and lack of follow-up on warranty company submissions.
• One detailed 2021 review describes aggressive behavior (yelling, profanities, threats to remove repair) during a warranty dispute, which is a serious professionalism red flag.
• Geographic service area confusion appears in multiple reviews—customers were told the company services their area but were later told they do not, causing emergency situations to worsen.
• Several blank/empty reviews with only ratings (no text) suggest possible review manipulation or incomplete submissions; however, these are minimal in number.
• One 2021 review alleges the owner called the customer unsolicited to complain about a negative review, raising privacy and professionalism concerns.
• Inconsistency in service quality: some reviews mention different owner names (Tony, Taff, Sean, Joe, Nick) across different time periods and locations, suggesting either multiple locations/franchises or name inconsistencies that create confusion.
• Review recency: approximately 40% of reviews are from 2020 or earlier; more recent reviews (2024-2025) show mixed quality with some serious complaints about responsiveness.

This WW Score of 81.2 should be treated with caution despite HIGH overall confidence. While the company excels in professionalism and technical expertise based on substantial evidence, the recurring pattern of communication failures, incomplete project follow-through, and at least one documented incident of aggressive customer interaction significantly undermines trustworthiness. The score reflects strong technical capability but inconsistent execution and customer service reliability. Prospective customers should verify service area coverage in advance and establish clear communication protocols before hiring.

Kenneth Booth (KB Home Fix) demonstrates strong performance across all dimensions. Professionalism is consistently praised with mentions of quick response times (same-day and 20-30 minute arrivals), clear communication, pleasant demeanor, and willingness to work outside standard hours. Project completion is excellent with all jobs finished promptly and customers expressing satisfaction with results. Pricing is fair and transparent, with customers noting competitive rates and honest quotes. Technical skill is evident across diverse projects (plumbing, electrical, carpentry, HVAC). The primary limitation is the small sample size (7 reviews) and recency concerns—most reviews are from 2019, with only 2 from 2022-2024.

• RECENCY CONCERN: 5 of 7 reviews (71%) are from 2019, over 4 years old. Only 2 reviews from past 12 months. Recent performance data is limited.
• POTENTIAL FAKE REVIEW PATTERN: All 7 reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative feedback whatsoever. No complaints, no reservations, no constructive criticism. This is statistically unusual and suggests possible review curation or fake reviews.
• GENERIC PRAISE: Several reviews use similar enthusiastic language ('highly recommend,' 'absolutely love,' 'fantastic job') without specific technical details about what made the work exceptional.
• SMALL SAMPLE SIZE: Only 7 total reviews limits statistical reliability despite high individual scores.

This WW Score of 89.3 should be treated with caution. While the available reviews are uniformly positive and support strong professionalism and project completion, the small sample size, heavy skew toward 2019 data, and suspicious absence of any negative feedback reduce confidence in the overall reliability of this score. Recent performance (past 12 months) is underrepresented.

Hindsight Plumbing demonstrates strong performance across all measured dimensions. Professionalism is consistently praised with explicit mentions of punctuality, politeness, knowledge, and friendly demeanor across multiple reviews. Project completion is evidenced by successful resolution of various plumbing tasks including faucet installation, valve replacement, and system installation with timely service. Technical expertise is demonstrated through knowledgeable diagnosis and problem-solving. Pricing receives positive mention as fair and reasonable, though fewer reviews explicitly address cost. The WW Score of 88.3 reflects solid, reliable service with high customer satisfaction.

• All 5 reviews are 5-star ratings with no critical feedback or complaints — this uniformity warrants caution, though reviews do contain specific details about work performed
• Most reviews are older than 12 months (4 of 5 from 2020-2021); only 1 review from 2023 provides recent data
• Small sample size (5 reviews) limits statistical confidence; recommend collecting additional recent reviews for more robust scoring
• Pricing dimension based on only 2 mentions; insufficient data to make strong claims about value proposition

This score should be treated with moderate caution due to small sample size, age of most reviews, and perfect 5-star rating pattern; the score reflects positive sentiment but would benefit from additional recent reviews to validate consistency.

Denny's Plumbing demonstrates strong overall performance with particular strengths in project completion (85.0) and experience/workmanship (84.0), both backed by high-confidence data from 28-38 mentions. Professionalism scores solidly at 82.5 across 42 reviews, reflecting consistent punctuality, communication, and courteous behavior from technicians. However, pricing emerges as a notable weakness at 68.0, with 13 explicit mentions revealing customer concerns about unexpected charges, labor multipliers not disclosed upfront, and significant price increases year-over-year. Recent reviews (2024-2025) are predominantly positive, but older reviews (2016-2019) contain serious complaints about billing practices and transparency. The company shows responsiveness and technical competence but struggles with pricing clarity and customer communication around costs.

• PRICING TRANSPARENCY ISSUE: Multiple reviews (2019, 2023) explicitly cite surprise charges, undisclosed labor multipliers (per-man charges), and dramatic price increases for identical services. This is a material concern affecting trust.
• CONFLICT RESPONSE PATTERN: Review dated 2025-02-09 is a lengthy defensive response from management (Will Cordelo, Service Manager) to a negative customer review. While it provides context, the tone and length suggest potential customer service friction. This review itself does not rate the service but defends against criticism.
• OLDER NEGATIVE REVIEWS (2016-2019): Four 1-star reviews from 2016-2019 cite billing disputes, gas leak safety issues, slow work, and lack of transparency. These predate the overwhelmingly positive 2023-2025 reviews, suggesting possible operational changes or review platform dynamics.
• RECENCY BIAS: 80% of reviews are from 2023 onward, with a concentration in June 2024 and May 2025. Older reviews (2015-2019) are sparse and more negative. Recent reviews show dramatic improvement in sentiment.
• ONE BLANK REVIEW: One review dated 2024-06-09 contains only a 5-star rating with no text, contributing no data.
• POTENTIAL REVIEW CLUSTERING: Multiple reviews on identical dates (2024-06-09, 2025-05-10) with similar positive phrasing warrant attention, though language varies sufficiently to avoid flagging as definitively fake.

This WW Score of 78.2 is reliable for assessing professionalism, completion, and technical skill (all HIGH confidence), but should be interpreted with caution regarding pricing—the 68.0 pricing score reflects genuine customer concerns about transparency and cost escalation that are not fully resolved by recent positive reviews. The company appears to have improved operations in 2023-2025, but historical billing disputes (2016-2019) suggest structural pricing communication issues that may persist.

Encore Plumbing shows strong technical expertise and workmanship, with consistent praise for skill and problem-solving ability across multiple reviews. However, professionalism is significantly undermined by serious follow-through failures: two detailed reviews describe ghosting after payment and non-responsiveness to callbacks, while another reports multiple no-shows and scheduling difficulties. Pricing feedback is mixed, with some customers praising fair value and same-day service, while others report overpricing. The company demonstrates excellent work quality when engaged, but reliability and communication issues create material risk for customers.

• CRITICAL: Two separate detailed reviews (2023-05-22 and 2019-09-24) describe ghosting behavior after payment and failure to follow up on promised work. These are not vague complaints but specific, documented instances with timelines.
• CRITICAL: One review (2022-10-13) reports multiple no-shows and consistent scheduling refusals, describing Paul as 'impossible to work with.'
• RECENCY CONCERN: Most positive reviews are from 2018 or earlier. The two most recent negative reviews (2023-05-22 and 2023-11-24) show a pattern of inconsistency, with one 5-star praising them and one 2-star describing ghosting in the same year.
• PRICING INCONSISTENCY: Reviews range from 'reasonably priced' and 'affordable' to 'way overpriced' and complaints about hidden travel charges. No clear consensus on value.
• POTENTIAL CAPACITY ISSUE: Multiple reviews mention being 'booked solid' or difficulty scheduling, which may correlate with follow-through problems.

This score should be treated with CAUTION. While technical skill appears genuine and well-documented, the pattern of ghosting, no-shows, and follow-through failures in recent reviews (particularly 2023 and 2022) represents a material risk that contradicts the positive historical reputation. The WW Score reflects strong experience and occasional professionalism, but is significantly dragged down by documented project completion failures. Customers should be aware of scheduling and responsiveness risks before engaging.