Find Nearby Plumbers In Campbell, California

Mitchell Partin of Maximum Plumbing demonstrates exceptional professionalism across all five reviews, with consistent praise for punctuality, communication, politeness, and technical competence. Project completion is strong, with all jobs finished promptly and thoroughly, including follow-up work and problem-solving. Experience is well-documented with 19 years as a plumber and owner, reflected in knowledgeable diagnostics and quality workmanship. Pricing data is limited to one explicit mention of 'extremely reasonable' rates, which prevents a higher confidence score on that dimension. All reviews are 5-star ratings from 2019–2020, showing consistent satisfaction over time.

• All five reviews are 5-star ratings with no critical feedback or complaints—this uniformity is unusual and warrants caution, though reviews do contain specific details about work performed rather than generic praise.
• Reviews are dated 2019–2020 (4–5 years old); no recent reviews from past 12 months limits ability to assess current service quality.
• Pricing dimension based on only one mention; insufficient data to confidently assess value proposition.
• Small sample size (5 reviews) limits statistical reliability despite high individual review quality.

This score should be treated with moderate caution due to small sample size, age of reviews, and lack of recent feedback, despite strong consistency in the available data.

Walter of Rall Plumbing receives consistently strong marks across all four dimensions from his seven reviewers. Professionalism is a standout theme, with multiple reviewers explicitly noting punctuality, responsiveness via phone and text, cleanliness, and a courteous, communicative approach. Pricing is described as reasonable, fair, and transparent across the majority of reviews, with one reviewer noting a callback was honored free of charge before a new issue was identified and billed fairly. Project completion is well-supported, with reviewers describing jobs finished on time, tested properly, and followed up on when needed. Experience is clearly evidenced by references to 25+ years in the trades, thorough problem diagnosis, and successful handling of complex jobs such as full re-pipes and difficult tub installations.

• All 7 reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative feedback of any kind — this warrants mild caution, though the reviews do contain specific job details and varied language that reduce the likelihood of fabrication.
• All reviews are dated between February 2018 and September 2018 — all reviews are older than 6 years. There is no recent data to confirm current performance standards. Score reliability for present-day hiring decisions is reduced.
• Sample size is small (7 reviews). While all dimensions show HIGH confidence per the mention-count rule, the absolute number of data points is limited and scores should be interpreted conservatively.
• Slight repetition in praise themes (punctual, professional, reasonable pricing) across reviews, though specific job descriptions vary sufficiently to avoid a fake review flag.

This WW Score carries moderate overall reliability due to consistent and specific reviewer feedback, but is significantly limited by the small total review count and the fact that all reviews are over 6 years old, making it difficult to assess Walter's current performance with confidence.

Eric at EV Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism across all five reviews, with consistent praise for calm communication, clear explanations, and courteous behavior. His technical expertise is evident in multiple emergency responses and complex diagnostics (sewer camera work, drain cleaning, water heater installation). Project completion is solid, with fast turnaround times and problems resolved on-site. Pricing appears fair and transparent based on three mentions, though one 2010 review noted a minor follow-up issue (missing screen) that was never addressed. The score reflects reliable, professional service with strong customer satisfaction.

• One review from 2010 (13+ years old) describes a callback that was never completed, suggesting potential follow-through issues in the past. However, all recent reviews (2023, 2023, 2023, 2007) show no such problems.
• Most reviews are from 2023 (three of five), providing strong recent data. Two older reviews (2010, 2007) are significantly dated and carry less weight.
• No evidence of fake reviews detected. Reviews contain specific details (fiber optic camera, sewer line diagnosis, water heater installation specifics, emergency response times) and vary in narrative structure.

This score is moderately reliable, based on five reviews with strong recent data (three from 2023). Professionalism and experience dimensions carry HIGH confidence due to consistent mentions across all reviews. Pricing and project completion are MODERATE confidence due to fewer explicit mentions and one historical callback issue, though recent reviews show no such problems.

A&W Plumbing has a strong overall reputation built on a large volume of reviews spanning over a decade, with the majority of customers praising Matt and Steve for responsiveness, technical knowledge, and willingness to go above and beyond — including weekend and same-day service. Professionalism scores are tempered by a meaningful cluster of negative reviews citing no-shows, missed appointments, unreturned calls, a reported instance of the owner yelling at a customer, and at least one allegation of price changes mid-job. Pricing is generally praised as fair and reasonable, but is pulled down by two credible complaints of charges exceeding quoted amounts and one allegation of undisclosed fees. Project completion scores reflect strong follow-through in the majority of cases, but are significantly penalized by multiple reviews describing abandoned jobs, failure to return after initial visits, and one detailed account of work left incomplete. Experience scores are the strongest dimension, with numerous reviewers specifically citing technical skill, problem-solving ability, and deep plumbing knowledge across a wide range of job types.

• Multiple credible 1-star reviews describe serious professionalism failures: no-shows, missed appointments, unreturned calls, and in one case the owner allegedly yelling at and hanging up on a customer (2015 review). These are not isolated incidents and span multiple years.
• At least two reviews (2023 and 2017) describe pricing that exceeded the original quote — one by $800 on a $6,500 job, another involving disputed inspection hour charges. These are specific and credible complaints that reduce confidence in pricing consistency.
• One 2022 review contains a detailed and serious allegation that Matt filed a false report with a home warranty company to avoid returning to a crawl space job. This is a significant integrity concern, though it is a single account and may reflect a disputed situation.
• One 2016 review alleges Matt made no attempt to diagnose a problem, demanded payment for a 5-minute visit, and became agitated. One 2013 review describes Steve arriving without proper equipment and failing to return as promised. These suggest inconsistent service quality across technicians.
• Several reviews from 2013–2016 describe Steve cancelling multiple times or failing to respond to scheduling requests. A 2018 review describes a no-show on a confirmed Saturday appointment followed by the owner dismissing the customer. These patterns suggest recurring scheduling reliability issues in earlier years.
• The review corpus spans from 2009 to 2025. Reviews from 2025 and 2024 are predominantly 5-star and positive, which may reflect genuine improvement over time or selection bias. The negative reviews are concentrated in 2013–2018, with a few in 2022–2023. Recency weighting favors the current score but the historical pattern warrants acknowledgment.
• Several reviews mention both Matt and Steve as separate individuals, and some reference additional crew members (Israel, Glen, Kevin). This is a multi-person operation, and quality and professionalism appear to vary by technician. Scores reflect the aggregate across all personnel.
• No strong fake review pattern detected. Reviews contain specific job details, named individuals, varied writing styles, and include a realistic distribution of negative feedback. The review set appears largely authentic.

This WW Score is based on a large and diverse review set spanning 16 years with HIGH confidence across all four dimensions, but should be interpreted with caution given a documented pattern of scheduling failures, at least two credible pricing disputes, and one serious integrity allegation — the score reflects a genuinely mixed track record rather than a uniformly excellent one.

Xtreme Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism with responsive communication, punctuality, and courteous technicians (particularly Steven, Isaiah, and Mike). Pricing is generally fair and competitive, though some customers report unexpected cost increases or aggressive upselling. Project completion is reliable for straightforward jobs, but several reviews indicate incomplete work, follow-up failures, and quality issues (broken cables left behind, improper grading, drainage problems recurring). Technical expertise is solid for standard repairs, though some complex diagnostics and long-term solutions show gaps. The business appears to have experienced operational challenges including scheduling delays and inconsistent follow-through on callbacks.

• CRITICAL: One review (2023-08-10) indicates the business may no longer be operational — website inactive and calls go to voicemail. This is a major red flag suggesting the company may have closed.
• Multiple negative reviews (2018-07-17, 2018-07-04, 2018-06-13) document serious follow-up failures, ghosting, and poor diagnostic work that caused customer financial loss.
• Pricing inconsistency: At least 2 reviews (2019-02-13, 2019-04-23) report bait-and-switch tactics or aggressive upselling (50% price increase at job site, limited options presented to justify expensive repairs).
• Quality control issues: Broken plumber's cable left in drain (2018-07-17), improper trench compacting causing recurrent drainage problems (2018-07-04), incomplete work requiring customer callbacks (2018-08-11).
• Owner communication problems: Multiple reviews (2021-02-01, 2019-04-14, 2018-06-13) describe Mike (owner) as rude, unprofessional, dismissive, and unwilling to take responsibility.
• Professionalism concerns: One review (2021-05-09) documents manager showing up without mask and using profanity when asked about it.
• Scheduling reliability: Several reviews note delays, rescheduling, and hour-plus delays past appointment windows (2018-08-11).
• Most reviews are from 2016-2019 (4-8 years old). Only 3 reviews from 2020 onward, with the most recent (2023-08-10) suggesting business closure. Recency is a significant concern.

This WW Score should be treated with CAUTION due to business closure indicators, age of review data (majority 4-8 years old), documented quality failures and follow-up issues, and evidence of owner unprofessionalism. While many individual technicians received praise, systemic problems with project completion, pricing transparency, and management accountability are well-documented. The score reflects historical performance but may not be relevant if the business is no longer operating.

JMB Plumbing & Construction demonstrates strong overall performance with particular strengths in workmanship quality, project completion, and professionalism. The company excels at complex multi-phase projects, attention to detail, and customer communication during work execution. However, pricing transparency and responsiveness to initial inquiries present vulnerabilities, with several negative reviews citing unclear billing practices and communication failures at the intake stage. The majority of reviews are highly positive and detailed, but the presence of 4 one-star reviews—primarily focused on communication breakdowns and billing disputes—prevents a higher score despite the predominance of five-star ratings.

• DUPLICATE REVIEWS DETECTED: The Dan & Judy review (Newark CA, comprehensive 3-round project) appears 3 times with identical or near-identical text (dates: 2024-06-09, 2023-11-18, and undated). This suggests either data duplication or potential review manipulation. Confidence slightly reduced.
• REPETITIVE POSITIVE REVIEWS: Multiple reviews about copper repiping and bathroom remodels use nearly identical phrasing ('crew showed up on time every day,' 'left work area in perfect condition,' 'magic the team had worked'). While these may be genuine, the pattern warrants caution.
• CRITICAL NEGATIVE REVIEWS: Four 1-star reviews (2022-03-17, 2021-02-22, 2019-01-26, 2012-10-23) reveal systemic issues with communication, responsiveness, and billing transparency. These are not isolated complaints but suggest recurring operational problems.
• COMMUNICATION FAILURES: Two reviews explicitly cite ghosting/non-responsiveness (2021-02-22: 'ghosted,' ignored texts/voicemails; 2019-01-26: no callback despite promises). This contradicts the professionalism claims in positive reviews.
• BILLING DISPUTES: Review from 2017-11-02 reveals deceptive quoting practice ($97/hour per worker vs. per job), and 2022-03-17 review cites refusal to itemize charges despite repeated requests.
• RECENCY BIAS: Most positive reviews are from 2013–2024, but several negative reviews are older (2012, 2019, 2021). However, the 2022 billing complaint is recent and suggests ongoing issues.
• UNDATED REVIEWS: 5 reviews have no date provided, limiting recency assessment for those entries.

This WW Score of 78.2 is reliable at HIGH confidence due to substantial mention counts across all dimensions (20+ reviews per category), but the score is artificially suppressed by genuine negative reviews revealing communication and billing transparency failures that contradict the overwhelmingly positive narrative. Customers should expect excellent workmanship and project execution but should obtain detailed, itemized written estimates and establish clear communication protocols upfront to mitigate intake and billing risks.