Find Nearby Plumbers In Folsom, California

Matt Williams Plumbing demonstrates exceptional performance across all four dimensions. Professionalism is consistently praised with 11 mentions highlighting punctuality, responsiveness, communication, and friendly demeanor. Project completion is the strongest dimension with 12 mentions showing reliable follow-through, same-day service, and thorough problem-solving even on complex issues like tree root removal. Experience is well-documented across 10 mentions with customers noting skilled workmanship, technical knowledge, and ability to diagnose problems other plumbers missed. Pricing receives strong marks from 5 mentions, with customers noting fair and reasonable rates compared to competitors. The WW Score of 89.2 reflects a highly reliable contractor with consistent quality across all service dimensions.

• All 13 reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative feedback, which is statistically unusual and warrants some caution
• Review dates span 2013-2022 with most reviews older than 2 years; only 2 reviews from past 12 months limits recency assessment
• One review (2015-01-21) contains detailed self-reflection about customer error rather than contractor fault, which actually strengthens credibility by showing balanced perspective
• No reviews mention negative experiences, complaints, or service failures, which could indicate selection bias in review platform or genuine excellence

This WW Score of 89.2 is highly reliable given the consistent positive evidence across all four dimensions with strong mention counts (5+ per dimension), though the absence of any critical feedback and predominance of older reviews suggest caution in treating this as current performance; recommend prioritizing the two most recent reviews (2021-2022) as most indicative of present-day service quality.

Allied Sewer and Drain, operated by Keenan, receives consistently strong marks across all four dimensions based on seven reviews spanning roughly four months in 2023. Professionalism is the most frequently cited strength, with every reviewer noting responsiveness, courteous communication, and respectful conduct. Project completion scores are high as well, with multiple reviewers confirming same-day or next-day service and jobs finished cleanly and thoroughly. Experience is well-supported by references to Keenan's diagnostic ability, technical knowledge, and going beyond the scope of the job to educate customers. Pricing is mentioned positively in three reviews, with customers noting fair rates and no upselling, though the smaller mention count warrants moderate confidence on that dimension.

• All 7 reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative or mixed feedback, which warrants mild caution.
• Several reviews share similar phrasing patterns (e.g., 'goes above and beyond,' 'will definitely refer'), which could indicate coached or templated responses, though each review contains enough specific detail to be considered plausibly genuine.
• Review window is narrow — all 7 reviews fall within a 4-month period (May–September 2023), which limits long-term reliability assessment.
• No reviews are available from the past 12 months relative to a current evaluation date beyond late 2023, so recency should be considered when interpreting this score.

This WW Score carries moderate-to-high reliability given that all dimensions are supported by multiple specific reviews, though the all-5-star pattern and narrow review window introduce a small degree of uncertainty that prevents full confidence.

PJ Plumbing (Peter) earns exceptionally strong marks across all four dimensions, driven by an enormous volume of detailed, specific reviews spanning nearly a decade. Professionalism is the standout dimension, with dozens of reviewers explicitly praising responsiveness, punctuality, communication, and personal warmth — including after-hours calls, vacation-time follow-ups, and no-charge house calls. Pricing is consistently described as fair, reasonable, and well below competitor quotes, with multiple reviewers citing specific dollar comparisons. Project completion scores slightly lower due to one credible 1-star review (January 2024) in which a customer alleged Peter used a Sharkbite connector against explicit instructions and the job had to be entirely redone by another plumber — this is a meaningful data point that prevents a near-perfect score. Experience is broadly affirmed across dozens of reviews citing technical knowledge, efficient diagnosis, and quality workmanship, though the same 1-star review raises a legitimate craftsmanship concern that tempers the score modestly.

• ONE SIGNIFICANT NEGATIVE REVIEW: The January 2024 1-star review is specific, credible, and serious — alleging that Peter used a Sharkbite connector after being explicitly told not to, hid it in a wall, and the entire job had to be redone at the customer's expense. This is not a vague complaint and directly impacts project_completion and experience scores.
• POTENTIAL REVIEW VOLUME SKEW: The overwhelming ratio of 5-star reviews (82 out of 83) warrants mild scrutiny. However, the majority of reviews contain specific job details, named individuals, described scenarios, and varied writing styles, which substantially reduces the likelihood of coordinated fake reviews.
• RECENCY NOTE: The majority of reviews are from 2021–2024, which is favorable. A small number of reviews date to 2014–2019 and were given reduced weight. The negative review is from January 2024, making it recent and relevant.
• GENERIC PRAISE PATTERN (MINOR): A small subset of reviews (roughly 8–10) contain only brief, non-specific praise (e.g., 'best plumber ever,' 'always the best') with no job details. These were counted for mention purposes but given reduced scoring weight due to lack of specificity.
• NAME INCONSISTENCY: One review references 'Paul' rather than 'Peter' — this may be a misdirected review or a name error, and was treated as low-confidence data.

This WW Score is based on a large, predominantly recent, and largely specific review set and should be considered highly reliable, with the primary caveat being one credible negative review regarding workmanship that prospective customers should weigh carefully.

Ken of Payless Plumbing receives overwhelmingly positive feedback across nearly all dimensions, with particular strength in pricing transparency and responsiveness. Customers consistently praise his fast arrival times, phone quotes that he honors, and charges that are described as significantly below competitors. Project completion is strong, with the vast majority of reviews describing jobs finished promptly and correctly, often within the same visit. However, one 1-star review from 2019 describes a confirmed no-show and unresponsiveness, which is a meaningful outlier that prevents a higher project completion score and introduces a reliability concern. Experience scores are solid, with multiple reviewers noting Ken's technical competence and problem-solving ability across a range of plumbing tasks.

• One 1-star review (2019-03-26) explicitly describes a no-show after a confirmed appointment and repeated unresponsiveness — this is a direct contradiction to the otherwise positive pattern and must be weighted seriously.
• The majority of reviews are older than 12 months; only 1 review falls within the past 12 months (2023-06-26). Most reviews date from 2012–2021, which limits confidence in how current the service quality is.
• Several reviews use similar phrasing around honesty, speed, and reasonable pricing, but most include specific job details (toilet replacement, pipe repair, faucet work, etc.), which reduces fake review concern. No strong fake review pattern detected.
• Two reviews mention Ken only accepts checks as payment — this is a practical note for prospective customers and not a quality flag, but worth surfacing.

This WW Score is based on a reasonably large review set with high mention counts across all four dimensions, making it statistically meaningful, but the score should be interpreted with caution given that the vast majority of reviews are more than two years old and only one recent review exists to confirm current service quality.

Paradise Plumbing Pros (also operating as My Drain Service Pro) earns strong marks across professionalism and experience, with dozens of reviewers explicitly praising Jon's punctuality, communication, friendliness, and technical skill. Project completion is generally solid, with most jobs described as resolved quickly and completely, and a warranty callback honored in at least one case — however, one detailed 1-star review describes a $365 charge for a job that was never actually fixed, and another 1-star review describes a warranty dispute over a leaking pipe repair at 13 months. Pricing is the weakest dimension: while many reviewers call costs 'reasonable' or 'fair,' two substantive reviews — one rating 3 stars and one rating 4 stars — explicitly flag the pricing as high or non-transparent, with one customer calculating an effective rate of $316/hour. The five blank-text reviews with 5-star ratings slightly inflate the review count without contributing usable data and are a minor concern. Overall, the contractor demonstrates genuine quality but has a meaningful and recurring pricing transparency problem that prospective customers should investigate before hiring.

• 5 reviews contain no text whatsoever — only a 5-star rating. These contribute no usable data and inflate the total review count. They have been excluded from dimension scoring.
• One review (April 2024, 1-star) describes a serious project completion failure: $365 charged for a dishwasher drain issue that was never resolved, with management refusing a refund. This is a significant outlier that materially impacts the project completion score.
• One review (July 2023, 1-star) describes a warranty dispute: a faucet replacement failed at 13 months and the company declined to repair it under warranty. This raises concerns about follow-through and warranty integrity.
• Two reviews (March 2024, 3-star and May 2025, 4-star) explicitly flag pricing as high or non-transparent. The March 2024 reviewer calculated an effective hourly rate of approximately $316/hour and noted the company would not provide any ballpark pricing before the technician arrived.
• Several reviews are older than 3 years (2018–2021). While they are consistent in tone, they reflect a different business name (My Drain Service Pro) and may not fully represent current service quality. More recent reviews (2024–2025) dominate and are weighted more heavily.
• One review (May 2025) explicitly notes the job had not yet been completed at time of writing and promised a follow-up review that does not appear in the dataset. This review was treated with caution for project completion scoring.
• No strong fake review patterns detected. Reviews vary in length, specificity, and rating. The presence of two 1-star and one 3-star review with detailed complaints supports overall authenticity.

This WW Score is based on 53 reviews with usable content spanning 2018–2025, with a strong concentration of recent reviews; the score carries HIGH overall confidence but prospective customers should weigh the documented pricing transparency issues and the unresolved job complaint from April 2024 before hiring.

Water Heaters Only demonstrates strong overall performance with a WW Score of 82.3, driven primarily by exceptional professionalism (87.5) and solid project completion rates (85.2). Technicians consistently receive praise for punctuality, courtesy, and technical knowledge. However, pricing emerges as a notable weakness (72.0), with recurring complaints about quotes that exceed phone estimates, high labor charges, and perceived overpricing relative to competitors. Experience ratings remain solid (84.8), reflecting skilled installations and knowledgeable staff. The company's 24/7 availability and same-day service capabilities are frequently highlighted as major strengths.

• PRICING CONCERNS: Multiple reviews (15-20%) report significant discrepancies between phone quotes and final invoices, with technicians quoting $300-$1,500+ above initial estimates. Some customers report being charged for service calls that were supposed to be free estimates.
• BAIT-AND-SWITCH PATTERN: Several reviews describe a pattern where phone representatives quote lower prices, but technicians arrive and quote substantially higher amounts, claiming 'the office doesn't know what it costs.' This undermines trust and suggests potential systemic pricing issues.
• INCONSISTENT SERVICE QUALITY: While most reviews are 5-star, there are scattered reports of no-shows, missed appointment windows, poor communication about time slots, and technicians arriving outside promised windows without proper notification.
• FAKE REVIEW RISK - MODERATE: The dataset contains an unusually high concentration of 5-star reviews (approximately 85-90%) with very similar positive language patterns. Many reviews use nearly identical phrasing ('professional,' 'knowledgeable,' 'friendly,' 'efficient') and follow similar narrative structures. However, the presence of legitimate 1-2 star reviews with specific complaints and the geographic/temporal diversity of reviews suggest this is a real customer base rather than entirely fabricated reviews. The pattern is consistent with a company that actively encourages satisfied customers to leave reviews.
• COMMUNICATION GAPS: Several customers report confusion about appointment windows, with the company claiming 4-hour windows are standard but not clearly communicating this upfront. Some technicians arrived outside promised windows without adequate notice.
• WARRANTY AND FOLLOW-UP ISSUES: A few reviews mention warranty disputes, difficulty getting callbacks for post-installation issues, and refusal to service certain water heater types despite company name suggesting they handle all water heaters.
• GEOGRAPHIC INCONSISTENCY: Some reviews indicate the company refuses service in certain areas or claims they don't service specific water heater models, despite website claims of comprehensive service.

This WW Score of 82.3 is highly reliable for assessing professionalism and project completion, supported by 612 and 521 mentions respectively across a large, diverse review dataset. However, the pricing dimension (72.0) should be weighted heavily in decision-making, as it represents a genuine and recurring customer pain point with substantial evidence. Prospective customers should obtain detailed written quotes and clarify all costs before committing, as the gap between phone estimates and final invoices appears to be a systemic issue rather than isolated incidents.