Find Nearby Plumbers In Prescott, Arizona

Stellar Plumbing demonstrates strong overall performance across all four dimensions, earning a WW Score of 84.2. The company excels in professionalism (87.5), with extensive evidence of punctuality, responsiveness, and courteous technicians across 287 reviews. Experience is also a clear strength (86.0), with 201 mentions highlighting skilled, knowledgeable technicians who solve complex problems efficiently. Project completion scores well at 85.5 with 198 mentions confirming timely, thorough work. Pricing is the relative weak point at 81.0, though still solid, with 156 mentions showing generally fair rates but occasional complaints about unexpected charges or estimates that increased significantly during work. The company's consistency across multiple technicians (Duane, Curtis, Gus, Carlos, Jeff, and others) and geographic locations suggests a strong operational foundation.

• FAKE REVIEW PATTERN DETECTED: Multiple reviews from June 2025 (future dates) with suspiciously generic praise and identical 5-star ratings with minimal detail suggest potential review manipulation or data entry errors. These 6 reviews lack specificity compared to authentic reviews.
• PRICING CONCERNS: 8 reviews (1-star and 2-3 star ratings) explicitly mention overcharging, unexpected price increases mid-job, or bills 40-60% higher than initial estimates. One review documents a bill 60% higher than agreed price; another reports $1,600 charged for work another plumber completed in 30 minutes.
• PROFESSIONALISM GAPS: 5 reviews document poor follow-up (no callbacks for days/weeks), one instance of threatening legal action over a quote dispute, and one report of technician arriving with dirty boots and laying dirty tools on customer's counters.
• LICENSING/COMPLIANCE ISSUES: One 2020 review explicitly states 'Not a licensed contractor' appears on company website; another 2015 review documents illegal gas line work and permit violations that resulted in gas company shutoff.
• QUALITY CONTROL INCONSISTENCY: Multiple reviews (2014-2015) document significant rework required due to code violations, improper fittings, and poor workmanship by certain technicians, suggesting variable quality depending on which technician is assigned.
• RECENCY NOTE: Majority of reviews are from 2018-2025 with strong concentration in 2024-2025, indicating recent high volume of business. However, the 6 future-dated reviews from June 2025 are anomalous and reduce confidence slightly.

This WW Score of 84.2 is highly reliable based on 515 usable reviews with strong data across all dimensions, but customers should be aware that pricing transparency and consistency appear to be genuine weak points, and technician quality varies—requesting specific experienced technicians (Duane, Curtis, Gus) by name may improve outcomes based on review patterns.

Gold Star Plumbing demonstrates strong overall performance driven by consistently high marks in professionalism, project completion, and technical expertise. The company excels at punctuality, communication, friendliness, and workmanship quality, with 89 reviews explicitly praising professional conduct and 72 reviews confirming timely job completion. However, pricing emerges as a notable weakness, with 18 reviews citing concerns about high costs, lack of transparency, or unfair pricing relative to competitors. Recent reviews (past 12 months) are overwhelmingly positive, though older reviews reveal occasional service failures and communication lapses that were sometimes remedied by management intervention.

• PRICING CONCERN: Multiple reviews (2024, 2021, 2020) explicitly criticize pricing as excessive or unfair. One customer reported being quoted $2,700 for water heater replacement when another company charged $1,800 with better warranty. Another noted $500+ for one hour of work. This pattern suggests pricing may not align with market rates despite quality work.
• SERVICE FAILURES WITH RECOVERY: Three reviews (2024, 2022, 2020) describe incomplete work, misdiagnosis, or poor technician behavior. However, in most cases, management intervened and corrected issues, suggesting accountability exists but initial service quality can be inconsistent.
• COMMUNICATION LAPSES: One 2020 review (3-star) reported poor communication and unresponsiveness despite company claims of 24-hour availability.
• RECENT REVIEW CONCENTRATION: Approximately 50+ reviews are dated June 2025 (future date - likely data entry error or system artifact). All are 5-star with minimal detail. While not necessarily fake, the clustering and brevity warrant caution. However, detailed reviews from 2024-2025 corroborate the positive pattern.
• EMPTY REVIEWS: Two reviews contain no text, only 5-star ratings (June 2025, May 2025). These provide no usable data.

This WW Score of 84.2 is highly reliable for assessing professionalism, completion, and experience (all HIGH confidence with 68+ mentions each), but the pricing dimension carries only MODERATE confidence due to limited explicit mentions (18) and conflicting signals—some reviews praise fair pricing while others criticize it as excessive. The company's strong recent performance is offset by documented pricing concerns and occasional service failures, though management responsiveness mitigates risk. Recommend this score for general guidance but advise obtaining competitive quotes before engaging.

Bee Plumbing receives consistently strong praise across all four dimensions, with professionalism being the most frequently cited strength — reviewers repeatedly highlight punctuality, courteous communication, and reliability. Pricing is described as fair, competitive, and transparent across multiple reviews, with one reviewer noting a charge lower than all competing quotes. Project completion is generally strong, including a notable example of a complex basement rebuild finished on time, but is meaningfully penalized by one 1-star review in which the crew left water in the basement after completing work — a direct completion and workmanship concern. Technical skill and problem-solving ability are well-supported, with reviewers citing successful handling of emergency situations, complex installs, and proactive identification of additional issues. The single negative review prevents a higher score and introduces a legitimate flag around job-site cleanliness and follow-through.

• One 1-star review (2023-11-06) explicitly states the crew left water in the basement after completing work, raising a concern about job-site cleanliness and potential property damage — this directly impacts the project_completion score.
• Several reviews use warm, effusive language about the owner Scott by name, which is genuine-sounding but worth noting as a pattern. However, reviews contain specific details (Christmas Eve pipe burst, sump pump install, expansion tank repair) that suggest authenticity rather than fabrication.
• Three reviews are older than 3 years (2013, 2020, 2021) and were given reduced weight in scoring. The majority of reviews are from 2023–2024, which supports reasonable recency confidence.
• Total review count is 13, which is sufficient for scoring but represents a relatively small sample. Scores should be interpreted with that context in mind.

This WW Score is moderately reliable — the review set is small but spans multiple years, contains specific job details suggesting authenticity, and includes at least one critical review that meaningfully tests the scoring system; the HIGH confidence ratings reflect mention volume, not review count, so consumers should weigh this score as a solid directional signal rather than a definitive assessment.

Star Plumbing demonstrates strong overall performance with a WW Score of 82.3, driven by consistently high marks in pricing (85.5) and experience (87.0). The company excels at fair pricing, transparent quotes, and skilled workmanship across water heater replacements and complex repairs. Professionalism (81.0) and project completion (79.0) are solid but slightly lower, reflecting occasional issues with communication delays, scheduling inconsistencies, and isolated incidents of rudeness. The vast majority of reviews (54 of 60) are 5-star ratings praising responsiveness, honesty, and quality work, though three 1-star reviews document serious failures in follow-up communication and professional conduct.

• CRITICAL: Two severe negative reviews (Jake and unnamed plumber) describe unprofessional behavior—property damage without disclosure, rudeness to customers, and failure to respond to follow-up communications. These are not isolated complaints but documented service failures.
• RECENCY CONCERN: Most reviews are 3+ years old (2014–2018). Only 8 reviews are from 2023–2024, limiting confidence in current service quality. The two most recent 1-star reviews (Sept 2024 and Feb 2020) suggest ongoing issues despite historical positive reputation.
• INCONSISTENCY ALERT: Multiple reviews mention different plumber names (Mark, John/Jon, Jason, Bruce, Chris, Mike, Scott) with varying quality experiences. One 2015 review documents five cancellations and rescheduling failures over 3+ months for a single job, indicating systemic scheduling problems.
• COMMUNICATION FAILURES: Three reviews explicitly cite lack of follow-up on estimates and quotes (Feb 2020, Mar 2015), suggesting a pattern of poor administrative responsiveness despite strong field performance.
• PATTERN ANALYSIS: Positive reviews are detailed and specific (mentioning names, job types, pricing comparisons); negative reviews are equally detailed and credible. This is NOT a fake review pattern—both praise and criticism are substantive.

This WW Score of 82.3 is reliable for historical performance but should be treated with caution for current service expectations. The HIGH confidence is supported by 60 reviews with consistent mention counts across all dimensions; however, the age of most reviews (pre-2020) and recent 1-star complaints suggest the company may be experiencing quality or management changes. Customers should verify current responsiveness and professionalism before booking, particularly for non-emergency work requiring follow-up communication.

Burgie's/Briggs Plumbing has a strong overall reputation built on a large volume of reviews spanning nearly a decade, with consistent praise for professionalism, punctuality, friendliness, and fair pricing. Technicians like Josh, JD, Logan, and Travis/Briggs are repeatedly cited by name for being knowledgeable, courteous, and thorough. Pricing is generally regarded as reasonable and transparent, with multiple reviewers noting they were quoted upfront and that the final bill matched expectations — though one reviewer felt a travel surcharge was excessive and one noted a 20-minute late arrival with a questionable diagnostic approach. Project completion is mostly strong, but three negative reviews (1-star) raise meaningful concerns: one job failed to resolve the problem and the technician left quickly, one involved a recurring clog the same day with the company refusing a free callback, and one involved a refusal to take on a shower faucet replacement job. These incidents temper what would otherwise be a near-excellent completion score. The score is reliable given the high volume of mentions across all dimensions.

• Two reviews contain no text content — only a 5-star rating with no written feedback. These were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable data.
• Several reviews appear to reference 'Briggs Plumbing' rather than 'Burgie's Plumbing' — it is unclear if these are the same business or if reviews from a different contractor have been mixed in. This could inflate or distort the score if they are separate entities.
• Three negative reviews (1-star) highlight meaningful project completion failures: one technician left without solving the problem, one refused a free callback for a same-day recurring clog, and one declined to perform a requested job (shower faucet replacement). These are weighted into the project completion score.
• One 3-star review explicitly flagged a pricing dispute involving an undisclosed travel surcharge added after the initial quote — this is a transparency concern.
• Recency note: A significant portion of reviews (roughly 30+) are older than 12 months, with many dating back to 2014–2021. More recent reviews (2024–2025) are fewer in number but remain positive. The score reflects the full dataset with appropriate conservative weighting.
• No strong fake review patterns detected. Reviews vary in length, specificity, and tone. Named technicians, specific job types, and occasional negative feedback all support authenticity.

This WW Score is based on 53 reviews with usable data spanning approximately 11 years, with HIGH confidence across all four dimensions due to strong mention counts — however, consumers should note the mixed business name issue (Briggs vs. Burgie's) and three substantive negative reviews that indicate occasional project completion and callback failures.

Dick's Fix-It demonstrates strong overall performance with particular strength in professionalism (87.5) and experience (85.0), supported by consistent positive mentions across recent and historical reviews. Project completion scores solidly at 82.0, though three significant negative reviews from 2023, 2018, and 2016 document serious failures including improper AC installation causing equipment damage and repeated breaker trips. Pricing is fair but not exceptional (78.0), with some customers noting surprise at travel-time billing practices. The business shows a long track record of reliability and problem-solving, but the documented installation defects and failure to properly resolve them represent material concerns that prevent a higher score.

• Three 1-star reviews document serious technical failures: improper AC installation (2023) causing power cable damage, reputation for non-repairs (2018), and follow-up AC failure with tripped breaker (2016). These are not isolated complaints but indicate systemic quality control issues.
• Significant recency bias in dataset: 10 of 30 reviews are from 2024-2022 (mostly 5-star), while 20 reviews are from 2010 or earlier. Recent negative review (2023) suggests quality issues may be ongoing despite older positive reviews.
• Multiple reviews from 2002-2006 are extremely generic ('unknown', 'Very satisfied', 'Very well!') with minimal detail, raising questions about data integrity for that period.
• Negative reviews contain specific technical complaints (improper installation, breaker failures, non-functional repairs) while many positive reviews are vague or generic, suggesting selective reporting bias.
• One 2008 review explicitly notes customer confusion about billing practices (travel time charges), indicating potential communication gaps on pricing.

This score should be treated with MODERATE-to-HIGH caution: while the dataset is substantial and recent reviews are detailed, three documented technical failures involving improper AC installation and failure to resolve resulting damage represent serious red flags that outweigh the volume of positive historical reviews. The score of 81.2 reflects genuine strengths in professionalism and responsiveness, but the material project completion failures—particularly the 2023 review documenting $300 in additional charges to fix installation errors—suggest the current score may be artificially inflated by older reviews and should not be interpreted as a guarantee of quality.