Find Nearby Plumbers In Glendora, California

Drain Master Plumbing (under original ownership/Matt) demonstrated strong professionalism with consistent praise for punctuality, politeness, cleanliness, and responsiveness across multiple reviews. However, pricing feedback is mixed—while some reviews highlight fair and transparent pricing, the 2013 update reveals a significant deterioration after the business was sold to Kevin's Plumbing, with aggressive upselling and refusal to itemize quotes. Project completion shows moderate strength with most jobs completed satisfactorily, though one 2005 review indicates incomplete resolution of the original drainage problem. Technical skill and problem-solving ability are generally praised, but the mixed results and older review dates (most pre-2013) limit confidence in current performance.

• RECENCY CONCERN: Most reviews are from 2005-2012; only one substantive review from 2013. Current business status unclear—2013 update indicates ownership change and service degradation.
• BUSINESS TRANSITION: Original owner (Matt/Drain Master) sold business to Kevin's Plumbing in 2013. The 2013 update explicitly states service quality declined significantly post-sale. This is a critical structural change that undermines reliability of older positive reviews.
• PRICING INCONSISTENCY: Strong positive pricing feedback (2012 original review, 2007 review) contradicts sharply with 2013 update describing aggressive upselling, refusal to itemize, and $1400 quote for work another plumber did free. This suggests either business model change or reviewer bias.
• PROJECT COMPLETION FAILURE: 2005 review indicates unresolved drainage issue—customer reported problem returned after service, suggesting incomplete diagnosis or work.
• DATA QUALITY: Reviews span 18 years (2005-2013) with significant gaps. No reviews after 2013 available to assess current state.

This WW Score should be treated with caution. While the original Drain Master Plumbing under Matt showed strong performance, the 2013 business sale to Kevin's Plumbing appears to have fundamentally altered service quality. The score reflects historical data that may not represent current operations, and the explicit warning in the 2013 update about service degradation suggests the business may no longer be operating under the original standards. Verification of current ownership and recent customer feedback is strongly recommended before engaging this service.

JR Plumbing demonstrates strong technical competence and generally professional on-site behavior, with many customers praising workmanship quality and responsiveness. However, the company is significantly hampered by critical reliability issues: multiple no-shows and ghosting incidents appear across recent reviews (2025, 2023, 2020), and historical pricing disputes suggest inconsistent quoting practices. While recent reviews (2025) show mostly positive experiences, the pattern of no-shows without communication and follow-up failures (missing invoices, unresponsive callbacks) directly contradicts claims of professionalism. The WW Score reflects strong technical execution offset by serious project completion and communication failures that undermine customer trust.

• CRITICAL: Multiple no-show incidents documented across different time periods (2025-06-02, 2025-05-19, 2023-04-03, 2020-09-12) with customers reporting being ghosted after confirmed appointments. This is a systemic reliability problem.
• PRICING CONCERNS: Several reviews document price increases after initial quotes (2015-06-11, 2021-07-28) and complaints about overcharging for simple work (2024-02-15, 2023-07-03). Fair pricing claims are contradicted by documented evidence.
• FOLLOW-UP FAILURES: Multiple customers report unmet promises to send invoices, warranties, and documentation (2021-07-28, 2022-02-04). One customer waited 5 months for water heater installation (2016-07-07).
• CUSTOMER SERVICE COMPLAINTS: Historical reviews (2015-2016) document rude, defensive behavior from office staff member 'Wanda,' including shouting at customers and demeaning language. While recent reviews do not mention this, it indicates potential systemic issues.
• RECENCY BIAS ALERT: Recent reviews (2025, March 2025) are predominantly 5-star with generic praise, while older reviews (2015-2023) contain detailed negative experiences. Recent positive reviews lack specificity compared to detailed negative reviews, suggesting possible review manipulation or selection bias.
• INCONSISTENT SERVICE QUALITY: Same company name appears in both exceptional reviews and catastrophic reviews, suggesting either significant operational inconsistency or different service locations/personnel with vastly different standards.

This WW Score should be treated with CAUTION. While recent 2025 reviews are positive, the documented pattern of no-shows, ghosting, pricing disputes, and follow-up failures across multiple years (2015-2023) indicates systemic operational problems that have not been definitively resolved. The score reflects a company with strong technical skills but unreliable execution and communication—customers should verify current operational standards before committing to service.

This appears to be a plumbing supply store rather than a contracting service, so Project Completion is not applicable and has been excluded from scoring. Professionalism is the most discussed dimension, with a clear split: several reviews praise staff for being patient, kind, and going above and beyond, while two notable reviews (one from 2015, one from 2020) describe staff with poor attitudes, dismissiveness, and a lack of basic product knowledge. Experience similarly shows a mixed picture — many reviewers highlight deep product knowledge and helpful guidance, but two reviews explicitly describe staff who did not recognize common parts or sold incorrect items. Pricing is mentioned positively in a small number of reviews, with customers noting competitive prices and money saved compared to alternatives. The overall score is tempered by the presence of genuine negative experiences that cannot be dismissed.

• This business appears to be a plumbing supply store, not a contractor or plumber. Project Completion dimension is not applicable and has been excluded from the WW Score calculation.
• Several reviews are significantly outdated: 5 of 10 reviews are from 2015 or earlier (some as old as 2012), which substantially reduces their reliability for assessing current service quality.
• Two reviews (2020 and 2016) explicitly describe staff with poor product knowledge — one employee did not recognize a common Moen faucet handle, and another sold incorrect parts without being able to process an exchange. These are serious experience-related concerns.
• One detailed 1-star review (2015) describes a staff member with a hostile and dismissive attitude toward a non-tradesman customer, including personal comments that the customer was 'stressing him out.' This is a significant professionalism flag.
• No fake review patterns detected. Reviews vary in rating, detail level, writing style, and date, suggesting authentic submissions.

This WW Score carries MODERATE overall reliability: the professionalism and experience dimensions are based on a reasonable number of mentions, but the review pool spans over a decade and the most recent negative reviews raise legitimate concerns that prospective customers should weigh carefully.

All Pro Plumbing shows generally positive professionalism signals across all three reviews, with individual technicians Kyle and Nolan praised for being personable, professional, and responsive. However, the first review explicitly documents two missed or failed appointments before service was finally rendered, which meaningfully drags down the project completion score. Pricing is flagged negatively in the one review that mentions it, with the reviewer describing fees as feeling high and the membership model as not delivering clear value. Experience scores are modestly positive but based on only two reviews with limited technical detail, so confidence remains low across all dimensions.

• Only 3 reviews total — WW Score should be treated as highly preliminary and unreliable for decision-making.
• Two of three reviews are brief and generic with minimal specifics, raising minor concern about depth of usable data.
• All reviews are dated between June 2021 and August 2022 — all are older than 12 months from a typical 2024 reference point, meaning recency weighting is reduced across the board.
• Missed appointment pattern noted in Review 1 (two no-shows before successful service) — this is a concrete reliability concern that is not offset by the positive technician interactions.

This WW Score is based on only 3 reviews spanning 2021–2022 and should be considered low-reliability — significantly more recent reviews are needed before this score can be trusted for contractor evaluation.

Northstar Plumbing Heating and Air receives consistently strong praise for individual technician professionalism, punctuality, and communication — with many named technicians (Adolfo, Drew, Cole, Ivan, Jesus, Andrew, Rick, Kyle, Carlos) earning specific commendations for courtesy and on-time arrivals. However, the company is significantly dragged down by a substantial and credible pattern of pricing complaints, including multiple reviews alleging price gouging, bait-and-switch quoting, aggressive upselling of unnecessary equipment, and charges far exceeding competitor bids. Project completion is mixed: many jobs are completed well and on time, but there are multiple documented cases of repeated cancellations, abandoned or incomplete work, jobs requiring many return visits, and at least one case of a furnace wired incorrectly with no follow-up resolution. Technical experience is similarly split — skilled technicians like Cole, Edwin, and Jason receive high praise for problem-solving, while other technicians are documented misdiagnosing issues, recommending unnecessary full replacements, and demonstrating basic knowledge gaps. The pricing dimension is the single largest drag on the overall score, with 31 reviews raising concerns — a pattern too consistent and specific to dismiss.

• PRICING CONCERN — HIGH SEVERITY: A large number of reviews (15+) independently and specifically allege price gouging, bait-and-switch quotes, and aggressive upselling of unnecessary equipment replacements. This is not a pattern of vague dissatisfaction — reviewers cite specific dollar amounts and comparisons to competitor pricing, lending high credibility to these complaints.
• UPSELLING PATTERN: Multiple reviews from different dates and locations describe technicians recommending full system replacements when minor repairs were sufficient. At least two reviewers confirmed this by getting second opinions and having repairs completed for a fraction of the quoted replacement cost.
• PROJECT ABANDONMENT / CANCELLATION PATTERN: At least 4 reviews describe same-day cancellations or repeated rescheduling (one reviewer reports 3 cancellations, another reports a 3-month delay). This is a meaningful reliability concern.
• INCOMPLETE WORK / QUALITY FAILURES: Reviews describe leaking installations, incorrectly wired furnaces with no follow-up, a technician leaving without plugging in a water heater, and a refrigerant leak misdiagnosed across multiple visits.
• COMMUNICATION FAILURES: Multiple reviews describe being unable to reach managers or receive callbacks after complaints — one reviewer waited 15+ days with 5 unanswered messages, another waited 4+ days after a misdiagnosis.
• NO FAKE REVIEW FLAG: Reviews span 2020–2024, reference specific named technicians, include detailed narratives both positive and negative, and vary in rating from 1 to 5 stars. No significant fake review pattern detected. The volume and specificity of both positive and negative reviews suggest an authentic review corpus.
• RECENCY NOTE: The majority of reviews are from 2022–2024, with strong representation in the past 12 months (2024). Older reviews (2020–2021) are fewer and skew more positive, suggesting a possible decline in service consistency over time — a concern explicitly noted in at least two reviews.

This WW Score is based on 95 reviews spanning 4 years with HIGH confidence across all four dimensions, making it a reliable representation of this contractor's performance — the score of 68.4 reflects a company with genuinely skilled individual technicians undermined by systemic pricing, upselling, and project reliability issues that are too consistent and specific across independent reviewers to discount.

This contractor presents a deeply split profile: a large volume of positive reviews praise individual technicians by name for being professional, courteous, knowledgeable, and completing jobs effectively, which drives moderate-to-good scores in professionalism and experience. However, pricing is the single most damaging dimension, with an enormous number of reviewers across many years and locations explicitly describing bait-and-switch tactics (advertising $83-$99 specials then quoting $400-$1,700+ on arrival), gross overcharging for simple jobs, and high-pressure upselling for unnecessary work — this pattern is so consistent and widespread it cannot be dismissed as isolated incidents. Project completion is also significantly undermined by a very high volume of no-show and cancellation complaints, warranty non-honoring, and in some cases work left incomplete or done incorrectly. The overall WW Score of 68.2 reflects a company with capable field technicians but systemic, management-level problems with pricing integrity and scheduling reliability.

• SEVERE PRICING INTEGRITY FLAG: Dozens of reviewers across multiple years and geographic locations independently describe an identical bait-and-switch pattern — advertising $83-$99 drain cleaning specials, then quoting $400-$1,700+ upon arrival. This is not isolated; it appears to be a systemic business practice.
• SCHEDULING AND NO-SHOW PATTERN: A very large number of negative reviews (spanning 2008-2025) describe confirmed appointments that were cancelled with little or no notice, often after customers waited all day. This is a persistent operational failure, not an anomaly.
• WARRANTY NON-HONORING: Multiple reviewers explicitly state the company refused to honor stated 30, 60, or 90-day warranties on completed work, requiring customers to pay again for the same recurring issue.
• PREDATORY UPSELLING PATTERN: Numerous reviews describe technicians or supervisors using scare tactics to push customers toward $5,000-$50,000 repairs that independent plumbers later confirmed were unnecessary or grossly overpriced (sometimes by 3-10x market rate).
• FAKE REVIEW SUSPICION: A small number of reviews (particularly some 5-star reviews with no text, and two reviews with identical text posted two days apart in June 2025) suggest possible review manipulation. Several blank 5-star reviews with no content were excluded from scoring. This inflates the apparent star rating.
• DUPLICATE REVIEW DETECTED: The review 'Professional, polite and fast. Worth the cost. Thank you Josh, Ryan, Marco and Joseph H.' appears twice with dates June 6 and June 8, 2025 — identical text, suggesting a duplicate or manipulated submission.
• GEOGRAPHIC SCOPE: Reviews appear to span multiple ARS Rescue Rooter franchise locations (Seattle/Pacific WA, Portland OR, Los Angeles/Covina CA, San Francisco CA, and others). Scores reflect the aggregate brand experience, not a single location. Individual location quality may vary.
• RECENCY NOTE: The most recent reviews (2025) continue to show both the positive technician-level praise and the negative pricing/scheduling complaints, indicating these issues have not been resolved over time.
• WORKMANSHIP CONCERNS: Several reviews describe specific instances of poor workmanship — broken snake cables left in pipes, incorrectly diagnosed problems leading to unnecessary $1,000+ services, failed inspections, and damage caused during service (sewage flooding, scratched fixtures, broken windows).

This WW Score is based on a very large review sample (500+ reviews) spanning over 15 years and carries HIGH statistical confidence, but the score should be interpreted cautiously: the pricing dimension (32/100) reflects a documented, systemic pattern of deceptive pricing that represents a serious consumer risk, and prospective customers should obtain written quotes before authorizing any work and independently verify that advertised specials will be honored.