Find Nearby Plumbers In Phoenix, Arizona

Frederick & Sons demonstrates strong technical competence and generally fair pricing, with many customers praising quick response times, knowledgeable technicians, and honest diagnostics. However, professionalism scores are significantly dragged down by multiple documented instances of rudeness from owner Leonard, incomplete project work, and one severe incident of customer abandonment mid-job. The company shows inconsistency: excellent service from technicians like Levi, Manuel, and Edward contrasts sharply with poor owner behavior and occasional service failures. Recent reviews (2024-2025) show both exceptional service and serious complaints about excessive time on-site and disrespect for customer schedules.

• OWNER BEHAVIOR PATTERN: Multiple independent reviews (2017-2020) document Leonard (owner) as 'incredibly rude,' 'fairly rude,' and 'unpleasant.' One customer reported Leonard abandoning a large remodeling project mid-completion, leaving customer without kitchen, dishwasher, or bathroom fixtures 24 hours before moving day and Easter gathering.
• PROJECT COMPLETION FAILURES: At least 3 reviews document incomplete or defective work requiring callbacks: shower drain installed 2 inches above ground, bathtub drain broken/dirty/banged up, and incomplete work on remodeling project.
• SAFETY/CARE INCIDENT: One 2019 review reports technician locked customer's cat in a closet for unknown duration without food, water, or litter.
• PRICING INCONSISTENCY: One 2021 review reports sudden price increases after 8 years of service ($320 for freon top-off on nearly new units). One 2015 review documents overcharging and dishonesty about required work, with customer finding significantly cheaper quotes elsewhere.
• TRANSPARENCY ISSUES: One 2018 review reports invoice with no itemized breakdown of parts, labor, or tax, making it impossible to verify charges.
• RECENT NEGATIVE TREND: Most recent review (2025-02-09) reports 7+ hours on-site with apparent lack of productivity, arriving early without customer choice, causing sleep deprivation before night shift work.
• POSITIVE PATTERN: Majority of reviews (approximately 70%) are 5-star with consistent praise for Levi (son), technicians Manuel, Edward, Brandon, and others. Suggests quality varies significantly by technician assigned.
• RECENCY NOTE: Most reviews are 2013-2020 (older than 1 year). Only 2 reviews from 2024-2025, creating uncertainty about current service standards.

This WW Score of 78.2 should be treated with caution: while technical competence and pricing are generally solid (HIGH confidence), the professionalism dimension is severely compromised by documented owner rudeness, project abandonment, and safety incidents. The company's reliability depends heavily on which technician is assigned; Levi and experienced techs deliver excellent service, but owner Leonard's behavior and recent complaints about time management suggest inconsistent customer experience. Recommend requesting specific technicians and obtaining detailed written estimates with itemized breakdowns before committing to work.

William's Handyman Services demonstrates strong professionalism with consistent punctuality, friendly communication, and polite demeanor across 35 reviews. Project completion shows solid execution with timely delivery, though three negative reviews (pricing dispute, non-responsiveness, and rework required) introduce material concerns. Pricing feedback is mixed: most reviews praise fair rates and transparency, but one detailed 2024 review alleges price gouging on time estimates, and another 2023 review noted failure to follow up on estimates. Experience and workmanship are generally strong with skilled execution across diverse tasks, though one 2017 review required rework due to poor product selection.

• RECENCY BIAS: 32 of 47 reviews (68%) are from 2023-2024; only 4 reviews predate 2022. Recent reviews are overwhelmingly positive (5-star), while older reviews (2016-2017) contain more critical feedback, suggesting possible service quality changes or review platform differences.
• PRICING CONCERN: April 2024 review provides detailed allegation of inflated time estimates and price gouging. Reviewer claims 3-hour estimate for simple checklist work was excessive compared to professional home inspection standards. Company response was defensive rather than clarifying, reducing credibility on this dimension.
• RESPONSIVENESS INCONSISTENCY: December 2023 review reports complete non-responsiveness (no voicemail/text returns), contradicting the 'quick response' claim in 20+ other reviews. May indicate inconsistent communication practices or staffing issues.
• PROJECT COMPLETION RED FLAGS: May 2023 review notes last-minute cancellation of hydro jetting job due to lack of equipment, plus failure to provide promised sprinkler estimate. June 2017 review required rework 2 months post-completion due to poor product selection. April 2017 review describes deposit cashed, appointment cancelled, and refund withheld despite multiple contact attempts.
• PATTERN IN NEGATIVE REVIEWS: All three 1-star reviews (April 2024, December 2023, May 2023) involve either pricing disputes, communication failures, or follow-through issues—not workmanship. This suggests systemic operational/business practice concerns rather than skill deficits.
• OLDER REVIEWS QUALITY: 2016-2017 reviews show more nuance and detail (e.g., 'meticulous but slow,' 'perfectionist,' 'works alone'). Recent reviews are more generic praise with less specificity, which may indicate review authenticity variance, though no clear fake review pattern detected.

This WW Score of 78.2 is reliable for assessing professionalism and experience (both HIGH confidence), but should be interpreted cautiously regarding pricing and project completion due to material negative evidence on those dimensions. The score reflects a business with strong day-to-day execution and customer service, but documented concerns about pricing transparency, responsiveness consistency, and follow-through on commitments. Recent reviews are heavily positive, but three substantive negative reviews from 2023-2024 and historical issues from 2017 suggest operational vulnerabilities that may resurface. Recommend requesting detailed time estimates in writing and clarifying scope before engaging.

Charity Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism with responsive communication and courteous technicians consistently praised across 28 reviews. Pricing is competitive and fair, with multiple customers noting significant savings compared to competitors (16 mentions). Project completion shows solid execution but is tempered by several documented failures including incomplete work, miscommunication on scope, and unresolved issues, reducing confidence in this dimension. Technical experience is generally strong with skilled technicians, though a few reviews note less experienced staff and one instance of misdiagnosis (upselling unnecessary water heater replacement). The company's community-focused business model and willingness to make things right when problems occur are notable strengths.

• RECENCY BIAS: 32 of 50 reviews (64%) are from 2017-2019, with only 4 reviews from 2024. Most data is 5+ years old, limiting reliability for current service assessment.
• INCONSISTENT SERVICE QUALITY: Multiple reviews document significant failures (miscommunication, incomplete work, unresolved issues, unprepared technicians) alongside glowing praise, suggesting inconsistent execution or variable technician quality.
• SPECIFIC CONCERN - ERIC/BILL UPSELLING: Review from 2024-05-16 documents aggressive upselling of unnecessary water heater replacement and dismissal of actual customer problem (water softener). This is a recent red flag.
• SPECIFIC CONCERN - COMMUNICATION FAILURES: Multiple reviews (2020, 2022, 2018) document poor office communication, unresponsive phone lines, and miscommunication between office and technicians causing customer frustration and additional costs.
• SPECIFIC CONCERN - INCOMPLETE/ABANDONED WORK: Reviews from 2018 document incomplete work (hole left open, barrier not replaced) and one instance of technician not returning to complete job.
• DISCRIMINATION ALLEGATION: Review from 2023-05-09 alleges transphobic behavior by employee. Company did not appear to address privately. This is a serious cultural/conduct concern.
• PATTERN OF DEFENSIVE RESPONSES: Review from 2022 indicates owner backed up technician against customer complaint rather than investigating merit, suggesting potential accountability issues.
• PRICING INCONSISTENCY: One review (2018-11-18) documents extreme price gouging ($800 dropped to $180 for toilet replacement), suggesting possible predatory pricing practices or lack of standardized estimates.

This WW Score of 78.2 should be treated with MODERATE-TO-HIGH caution: while based on 50 reviews with adequate mention counts, 64% of data is 5+ years old and may not reflect current operations. Recent reviews (2024, 2023) reveal serious concerns including upselling, discrimination allegations, and communication failures that contradict the predominantly positive historical narrative. The company shows genuine strengths in responsiveness and pricing, but documented inconsistencies in service quality, project completion, and professional conduct suggest the score may overstate reliability. Prospective customers should request recent references and clarify scope/pricing in writing before engaging.

Sunrise Plumbing demonstrates strong technical competence and generally reliable service delivery, with most customers praising workmanship quality and professional demeanor. However, the company faces significant pricing concerns raised in multiple recent reviews (2021-2022), with customers reporting substantial markups, inflated labor rates, and aggressive collection tactics that undermine trust. Professionalism scores are tempered by documented no-shows, poor communication during scheduling, and defensive owner responses to complaints. While older reviews (2019-2020) and long-term customers express high satisfaction, more recent negative experiences suggest operational or management issues that warrant caution.

• PRICING VOLATILITY: Three detailed negative reviews (2021-01-15, 2021-01-15, 2022-06-07) document significant pricing concerns including 262% markups, labor rates exceeding $165/hour, and aggressive collection tactics. These are specific, detailed complaints—not generic criticism.
• NO-SHOW AND COMMUNICATION FAILURES: Review dated 2021-03-05 documents a complete no-show with no call notification; review dated 2021-01-15 documents repeated scheduling failures and forgotten details despite multiple communications.
• DAMAGE LIABILITY DISPUTES: Review dated 2021-12-21 indicates the company initially refused responsibility for collateral damage (broken sprinkler system) caused during plumbing work, requiring owner escalation.
• RECENCY PATTERN: Most negative reviews cluster in 2021-2022 (recent period), while most 5-star reviews are from 2019-2020 or earlier. This suggests potential service degradation over time.
• OWNER CONDUCT: Multiple reviews cite unprofessional, argumentative, or defensive behavior from owner Wayne when complaints are raised, contrasting sharply with positive comments about field technicians.
• POTENTIAL FAKE REVIEW SIGNAL: While most positive reviews contain specific details (names, job types, timelines), the density of 5-star reviews with minimal critical content is notable. However, sufficient variation in detail and some negative reviews present suggest this is not a systematic fake review campaign.

This score should be treated with MODERATE-TO-HIGH caution: while technical competence and professionalism appear genuine based on consistent field-level praise, the documented pricing disputes and communication failures in recent reviews (2021-2022) are serious and specific enough to warrant independent verification before engaging this company, particularly for large projects or time-sensitive work.

Hummell Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism and technical expertise across most engagements, with consistent praise for punctuality, communication, and skilled technicians. However, the company shows significant inconsistency in project completion and follow-through, particularly when working through home warranty contracts. Several reviews document serious failures in communication, missed appointments, and incomplete problem resolution that substantially lower the overall score. Pricing is generally perceived as fair and reasonable, though some customers report unexpected additional charges and concerns about warranty-related work quality.

• CRITICAL: Multiple reviews (4 of 16) report severe service failures including no-shows, poor communication, and incomplete repairs—all involving home warranty contracts. This suggests systemic issues with warranty work handling.
• Pattern detected: Negative reviews (1-star ratings from 2017-2020) consistently cite communication breakdowns, missed appointments, and refusal to follow up. Positive reviews (5-star) are more recent (2021-2024) or describe single-visit jobs.
• Home warranty work appears to be a liability: Reviews 2020-09-08, 2019-01-30, and 2017-01-11 all describe poor outcomes when warranty companies contracted Hummell. This may indicate different service standards or resource allocation for warranty vs. direct-pay customers.
• One review (2017-01-11) describes technical incompetence: bypassing a circulating pump instead of repairing it, then refusing to correct the work. This raises concerns about problem-solving ability under warranty constraints.
• Recency bias noted: Most recent reviews (2021-2024) are uniformly positive; older reviews (2017-2020) contain multiple serious complaints. This could indicate service improvement or selective review removal.

This score should be treated with caution. While recent reviews are strongly positive and the company demonstrates genuine technical skill and professionalism in direct-pay work, the pattern of serious failures in home warranty contracts and documented communication/follow-up issues in 2017-2020 suggest the overall score may not reflect consistent reliability across all customer types. The WW Score of 78.2 is reliable for customers paying directly, but significantly overstates reliability for warranty-based work.

Zoom Drain demonstrates strong professionalism across multiple reviews, with consistent praise for communication, responsiveness (30-minute to 2-hour arrival times), and courteous technicians. Project completion is solid with jobs finished as promised and cleanup completed. Technical expertise is evident through customer descriptions of knowledgeable and informative service. Pricing is the weakest dimension, with one explicit complaint about a $349 minimum charge being high relative to local competitors, though another review confirmed transparent, accurate estimates. The small sample size (5 reviews) and all 5-star ratings warrant moderate confidence overall.

• All 5 reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative feedback — this uniformity is somewhat unusual and suggests potential selection bias or that dissatisfied customers may not have left reviews
• Sample size is very small (n=5); scores should be considered preliminary and updated as more reviews accumulate
• Pricing dimension based on only 2 mentions; one review explicitly criticizes pricing as high relative to local alternatives, which may not be fully representative of customer sentiment

This WW Score should be treated as preliminary due to the small sample size (5 reviews) and lack of negative feedback, which limits confidence in the overall assessment. The score is most reliable for professionalism and project completion; pricing assessment is limited by only 2 mentions.