Find Nearby Plumbers In Lakewood, California

Dave's Plumbing Dynamics demonstrates exceptional performance across all four dimensions. Professionalism is consistently praised with mentions of punctuality, courteous communication, respectful demeanor, and responsiveness to urgent calls. Pricing is explicitly noted as fair, reasonable, and transparent with no hidden charges across multiple reviews. Project completion is strong, with jobs finished efficiently, inspections passed, and long-term reliability demonstrated over 22+ years of service. Technical expertise is evident through complex work (re-copper projects, sewer line replacements, sprinkler diagnostics) executed with skill and clean workmanship. All eight reviews are recent or span a long-term relationship, with no negative indicators.

• All 8 reviews are 5-star ratings with uniformly positive language. While the reviews contain specific details (garage ADU, kitchen drain, sprinkler systems, garbage disposal, re-copper project) that suggest authenticity, the 100% positive rating is unusual and warrants noting. However, specific project descriptions and varied contexts reduce concern about fabrication.
• Review dates span 2021–2024 with a concentration in 2023–2024, indicating recent strong performance. One review mentions 22-year customer relationship, suggesting exceptional long-term reliability.

This WW Score of 91.4 is highly reliable. It is based on 8 reviews with strong mention counts across all dimensions (5–7 mentions each), all scoring in the 88–93 range. The consistency of positive feedback, combined with specific project details and a long-term customer relationship, supports confidence in this assessment. The uniformity of 5-star ratings is noted but does not undermine the score given the specificity of project descriptions.

Korkis Plumbing demonstrates exceptional performance across all four dimensions. Professionalism is consistently praised with 32 mentions highlighting punctuality, responsiveness, communication, and courteous demeanor. Project completion is strong with 28 mentions confirming jobs finished thoroughly and on schedule. Experience is well-documented with 26 mentions of skilled diagnostics, quality workmanship, and problem-solving ability. Pricing receives solid marks with 18 mentions emphasizing fair value, transparency, and honest quotes that often save customers money compared to competitors. The single 1-star review from 2020 regarding cash payment and missing receipt is an outlier and does not reflect the overwhelming pattern of satisfaction.

• One negative review (2020-10-30) alleges cash payment without receipt and non-responsiveness. This is a significant outlier among 37 reviews and may indicate a legitimate service failure or dispute, but the pattern does not repeat in any other review. Treated as isolated incident rather than systemic issue.
• All reviews are 5-star except one 4-star (2019-02-28) and one 1-star (2020-10-30). The 4-star review is substantive and positive. The 1-star review is substantive but isolated. No evidence of fake review patterns detected—reviews contain specific details, varied language, different situations, and authentic-sounding narratives.
• Review dates span 2019-2024 with strong concentration in 2019 (13 reviews) and 2024 (3 reviews). Most reviews are 4+ years old, which may limit recency relevance, but recent 2024 reviews confirm continued quality.

This WW Score of 88.2 is highly reliable, based on 37 substantive reviews with consistent positive feedback across all dimensions and high mention counts (18-32 per dimension). The single negative review appears isolated and does not undermine the overall pattern. Recommend this score with confidence for decision-making purposes.

All City Heating Air and Plumbing receives overwhelmingly positive feedback across all four dimensions, with professionalism and experience being the most frequently praised attributes. James Carthon is repeatedly described as honest, knowledgeable, courteous, and thorough, and multiple reviewers highlight his habit of explaining work clearly and transparently. Project completion scores well, with several detailed accounts of complex jobs being seen through to the end, including a multi-week sewer line replacement. Pricing is generally described as fair and reasonable, with one reviewer noting a yearly maintenance plan at a very reasonable price and another praising fair estimates, though one negative review alleges a $600 charge for a refrigerant fix that failed within 11 months, and another alleges a $1,000 thermostat upcharge. Two no-show incidents and one complaint about dishonesty prevent the scores from reaching the highest tier.

• DUPLICATE REVIEWS DETECTED: Two reviews are near-identical word-for-word (James Carthon nicest person, complete new Heating and AC System review) posted on different dates (2021-06-10 and 2020-12-02). Similarly, two reviews about James being the nicest man on a hot Saturday afternoon are near-identical (2018-06-11 and 2017-07-08). Two reviews praising James as knowledgeable, thorough and honest are near-identical (2017-06-11 and 2016-09-30). These duplicates suggest possible review manipulation or reposting and have been counted only once each for scoring purposes.
• NEGATIVE REVIEW — NO-SHOW: One reviewer (2022-06-10, 1-star) reports two consecutive missed appointments with no call, and the technician arriving over two hours after the second window closed. This is a direct professionalism failure.
• NEGATIVE REVIEW — DISHONESTY ALLEGATION: One reviewer (2023-06-10, 1-star) alleges the technician was a liar, attempted to upcharge, and refused to fix an 83-year-old woman's heater, instead demanding $1,000 for a thermostat installation.
• NEGATIVE REVIEW — WORKMANSHIP CONCERN: One reviewer (2020-06-10, 1-star) reports the same AC problem recurring within 11 months of a $600 refrigerant repair, raising a question about the quality or honesty of that diagnosis.
• RECENCY NOTE: A significant portion of reviews (roughly 15+) are dated 2024-06-09 with identical timestamps, which may indicate batch-imported or backdated reviews rather than organically submitted ones. This reduces confidence in the exact date distribution.
• GENERIC REVIEWS: Four reviews contain no text at all (blank body, 5-star rating only) and were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable data.
• OVERALL FAKE REVIEW RISK: MODERATE — The combination of duplicate reviews, blank reviews, and a cluster of same-date reviews warrants caution. The score has been kept conservative as a result.

This WW Score is based on a reasonably large review set with HIGH mention counts across all dimensions, but reliability is moderately reduced due to detected duplicate reviews, several blank reviews, a cluster of suspiciously same-dated entries, and three substantive negative reviews that raise concerns about consistency in punctuality, honesty, and workmanship quality.

Western Heating, Air Conditioning & Plumbing demonstrates strong overall performance with a WW Score of 82.3. The company excels in professionalism (87.5) with consistent praise for punctuality, courteous staff, and responsive communication across 156 reviews. Technical expertise and workmanship are solid (86.0 across 112 mentions), with technicians like Rick and Frank frequently commended for diagnostic accuracy and thorough explanations. Project completion is reliable (85.0 across 89 mentions), though some callbacks and follow-up issues are noted. Pricing emerges as the weakest dimension (72.0 across 48 mentions), with recurring complaints about high costs, unexpected charges, and parts markups that exceed market rates. Several customers report feeling overcharged despite acknowledging quality work.

• POTENTIAL FAKE REVIEWS DETECTED: Two identical reviews dated 2024-08-13 and 2024-08-10 with text 'Excellent service, very reliable and honest' (5.0 rating each) suggest possible review manipulation or duplicate submissions.
• PRICING CONCERNS: Multiple reviews explicitly state pricing is high or excessive. Review from 2024-06-06 reports $655 for a $150 garbage disposal installation (more than 4x markup). Review from 2024-08-13 mentions $754.69 estimate vs. competitor quote of significantly less. This pattern suggests systematic overpricing or aggressive upselling.
• FOLLOW-UP FAILURES: Review from 2023-09-03 (appears twice with minor variations) describes company taking $95 diagnostic fee and never providing promised quote after 3 weeks. Review from 2016-12-18 reports no-show appointment with no follow-up contact.
• INCONSISTENT SERVICE QUALITY: Review from 2017-03-14 criticizes brief 8-10 minute furnace inspection with no attic entry and no documentation provided. Review from 2013-08-29 describes technician performing bare minimum work and leaving without proper explanation.
• COMMUNICATION GAPS: Review from 2016-09-26 reports estimate provided but no follow-up. Review from 2015-09-10 criticizes service area restrictions despite 25-mile advertisement.
• RECENCY NOTE: Most reviews are from 2013-2020 (older than 12 months). Recent reviews (2024) are limited to 4 entries, with 2 being suspicious duplicates. This limits confidence in current service quality assessment.

This WW Score of 82.3 is reliable for assessing historical performance but should be treated with caution regarding current service quality due to the age of most reviews and recent pricing complaints. The HIGH confidence in professionalism and experience is well-supported by 156 and 112 mentions respectively, but the MODERATE confidence in pricing (48 mentions) reflects genuine concerns about cost competitiveness that warrant further investigation before engaging this company.

Peter demonstrates exceptional performance across all four dimensions based on three detailed reviews spanning 2016–2020. Professionalism is consistently praised (punctuality, communication, attitude, organization, responsiveness to complex requirements). Pricing is described as fair, reasonable, and transparent with no hidden charges mentioned. Project completion is exemplary—all projects finished on time and on budget, with complex multi-month jobs coordinated flawlessly. Experience and workmanship are highlighted as terrific, with strong problem-solving ability demonstrated on challenging foundation, custom window, and historic rehab work. However, the sample size of only 3 reviews limits confidence, and all reviews are older than 12 months (most from 2016), which may not reflect current service levels.

• All three reviews are 5-star ratings with no critical feedback or complaints—this is atypical and suggests a potentially curated or incomplete review set.
• Two of three reviews (2016 dates) are significantly older than 12 months; only one review from 2020 provides recent data.
• Review sample size is very small (n=3); scores should be treated as preliminary and not definitive.
• The second and third reviews contain unusually detailed, enthusiastic language and personal relationship claims that, while credible, lack the specificity of independent verification.

This WW Score of 91.7 should be treated with caution due to the small sample size (3 reviews) and age of most data; while the reviews are detailed and credible, a minimum of 5–8 recent reviews would be needed to establish high confidence in this contractor's current performance.

Quick Rooter has a strong overall track record built on decades of reviews, with the majority of customers praising prompt response times, polite technicians, and jobs completed efficiently. Pricing is frequently described as fair, reasonable, and transparent, with several reviewers specifically noting that final charges matched quoted amounts. However, three notable negative reviews meaningfully drag down scores across all dimensions: one details a dispatcher using obscene language toward a customer, one describes unauthorized charges, upselling, incomplete work, and threatening behavior from the owner, and one describes a failed unclogging attempt followed by an undisclosed $170 fee. These incidents reveal systemic risks around billing transparency, communication under pressure, and service consistency. The high volume of positive reviews provides statistical confidence, but the severity of the negative incidents — particularly the pricing and conduct complaints — prevents top-tier scores.

• Two reviews (1-star and 3-star) describe serious pricing misconduct: undisclosed fees, charges exceeding quoted amounts, and work left incomplete. These are not isolated complaints and directly contradict the many positive pricing mentions.
• One review (1-star, 2023) describes a dispatcher using explicit obscenities toward a customer who called about a parking issue. This is a significant professionalism red flag at the organizational level, not just technician level.
• The 3-star review was originally 1-star and was updated after the owner issued a refund — this suggests the underlying conduct issue was real and confirmed by the company's own remediation action.
• Two reviews contain no text (only a 5-star rating) and were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable data.
• Several older reviews (2009, 2014, 2016, 2017) are more than 5 years old. While they contribute to volume, they were given reduced weight given the recency of negative incidents in 2021–2023.
• A mild pattern of generic praise exists in some shorter reviews ('great service,' 'quick and dependable,' 'highly recommend'), but the majority include specific names, situations, and details, so no fake review flag is raised at this time.
• The owner (Anthony) is personally named in both positive and negative reviews, suggesting he is directly involved in operations — meaning conduct issues are not easily attributed to a single rogue employee.

This WW Score is based on a substantial volume of 47 reviews spanning 15 years and carries HIGH overall confidence, but prospective customers should weigh the serious billing and conduct complaints from 2021–2023 carefully, as they suggest meaningful inconsistency in service quality and business ethics that the aggregate score alone does not fully capture.