Find Nearby Plumbers In Livermore, California

Thompson Plumbing demonstrates strong overall performance across all dimensions. Professionalism is a clear strength with 89 mentions highlighting punctuality, courteous staff, and responsive communication. Project completion is consistently praised with 78 mentions of timely work and follow-through, though a small number of no-show incidents slightly temper this score. Technical expertise and workmanship are well-documented across 68 mentions, with customers frequently noting knowledgeable staff and quality solutions. Pricing receives a solid score of 81 based on 32 mentions, though some customers report higher costs relative to competitors, and one negative review cited aggressive upselling tactics. The company's willingness to go above and beyond—working late hours, providing free estimates, and offering preventive work—significantly strengthens confidence in the scores.

• Three significant no-show/cancellation incidents (2022-02-02, 2021-02-25, 2021-01-17) indicate occasional scheduling reliability issues despite otherwise strong professionalism scores.
• One serious safety incident reported (2019-03-20) involving a water heater left plugged in that caught fire; company response to this incident was criticized as dismissive.
• One customer reported feeling pressured to leave 5-star reviews on multiple platforms and alleged blackmail/scam tactics when declining to do so (2022-10-06); another reported aggressive upselling of a $500 garbage disposal with additional electrical costs (2021-10-06).
• Multiple empty or minimal-text reviews (marked 'unknown', '.', or blank) comprise approximately 5% of dataset; these do not affect scoring but suggest some review data quality issues.
• Pricing feedback is mixed: while many praise fair/competitive rates, several customers report costs significantly higher than competitors, suggesting pricing may vary substantially by job type or technician.
• One review (2022-07-28) documents a prior installation error (loose, leaking faucet) that required a callback four months later, though the company did make it right.

This WW Score of 84.2 is highly reliable, based on 127 reviews with strong mention counts across all dimensions (32–89 mentions per dimension). The company demonstrates consistent excellence in professionalism and project completion, with solid technical expertise. However, the score is tempered by documented scheduling failures, one serious safety incident, and occasional pricing concerns; customers should be aware that while Thompson Plumbing generally delivers quality work at fair prices, isolated incidents of poor communication and upselling have occurred. The preponderance of positive, detailed, and specific reviews (120+ five-star ratings with substantive comments) outweighs the negative feedback, but the negative incidents are serious enough to warrant caution rather than blind trust.

URV Projects Plumbing demonstrates strong overall performance across all measured dimensions. Professionalism is a clear strength, with 68 mentions highlighting punctuality, communication, politeness, and responsiveness—particularly praising technicians Roman, Bair, and others for their courteous demeanor and attention to detail. Project completion is consistently reliable with 72 mentions showing jobs finished on time, callbacks honored, and follow-through on promised work. Experience scores reflect solid technical competency (83.0) with 45 mentions of skilled workmanship and problem-solving, though a few reviews note equipment limitations (e.g., snake length). Pricing is competitive (81.0) with 32 mentions, though some customers noted higher costs relative to competitors and occasional quote discrepancies. Three negative reviews (ratings 1–2) involving attitude issues, equipment damage, and incomplete diagnostics prevent a higher score, but the overwhelming majority of 97 five-star reviews demonstrate consistent customer satisfaction.

• Three low-rated reviews (1.0, 1.0, 2.0) indicate occasional service failures: one involving attitude/overcharging, one involving equipment damage (rusted snake scratching toilet bowl), and one involving incomplete diagnostic work ($399 smoke test that failed to identify problem). These are legitimate complaints, not fake reviews.
• One review (2024-03-14, 1.0 stars) describes a Home Depot contract dispute where customer was allegedly charged extra and given attitude—this suggests possible inconsistency in handling third-party contracts.
• One review (2024-01-06, 1.0 stars) describes a $399 diagnostic test that failed to identify the root cause, requiring a second plumber. This raises questions about diagnostic thoroughness.
• One review (2021-11-16, 1.0 stars) reports $200 overcharge from original quote and inadequate cleanup of sewage backup—suggests occasional pricing transparency and service scope issues.
• Recency note: 68 of 100 reviews are from 2024 or late 2023, indicating strong recent performance. Older reviews (2018–2020) are uniformly positive, suggesting consistent quality over time.
• No evidence of fake reviews detected. Reviews show specific details, varied language, named technicians, and realistic problem descriptions. Positive reviews are detailed and credible.

This WW Score of 84.2 is highly reliable, based on 100 reviews with strong data density across all dimensions (32–72 mentions per dimension). The score reflects genuine strengths in professionalism and project completion, offset by legitimate service failures documented in three low-rated reviews. Recent reviews (past 12 months) dominate the dataset and show consistent quality, supporting confidence in current performance.

Mr. Handyman demonstrates strong overall performance across all measured dimensions. Professionalism is a clear strength, with 35 mentions highlighting punctuality, friendliness, communication, and respectful conduct. Project completion shows solid execution with 28 mentions of finished work and follow-through, though one significant negative review (1-star) involving Brian's failure to complete a project and non-responsiveness creates material concern. Experience is well-documented with 26 mentions of skilled workmanship, problem-solving, and technical knowledge. Pricing receives moderate support with 8 mentions, generally described as reasonable and fair, though one review noted a significant cost overrun. The company benefits from consistent positive feedback across multiple technicians (Oscar, Tim, Greg, Ron, Brian, Vince, Connor), suggesting systemic quality, but the single severe failure case warrants caution.

• One critical negative review (1-star, dated 2025-05-10) involving Brian: promised project completion by March 21, not delivered, failed to return six phone calls. This represents a serious project completion and responsiveness failure that significantly impacts overall trustworthiness.
• Three reviews contain no text content (empty reviews with 5.0, 4.0, and 5.0 ratings on 2025-01-10 and 2024-10-12), making them unusable for dimension scoring.
• Multiple reviews are generic and brief (e.g., 'Great good! On Time clean work', 'He did a awesome job', 'Tim did a great job 👏'), which limits depth of analysis but does not suggest fabrication.
• Significant recency skew: 38 of 57 reviews (67%) are from 2024-2025, with only 9 reviews from 2019 or earlier. This creates a potential bias toward recent performance.
• One review (Jim's granite countertop work, 2016) mentions a $200 quote that became $350, suggesting pricing transparency issues in some cases.
• Overall review distribution shows heavy concentration of 5-star ratings (48 of 57 = 84%), which is unusually high and may indicate selection bias or customer satisfaction skew, though the presence of multiple 4-star and one 1-star review provides some balance.

This WW Score of 84.2 is moderately reliable but should be interpreted with caution due to the presence of one severe project completion failure (non-delivery and non-responsiveness) that directly contradicts the otherwise positive trend, combined with high recency bias and an unusually high concentration of 5-star ratings that may not fully represent the complete customer experience spectrum.

Walker Plumbing demonstrates strong overall performance with a WW Score of 82.3, driven by consistently high marks in professionalism (85.2) and technical experience (86.4). The company excels in responsiveness, punctuality, and staff courtesy across 127 mentions of professional conduct. Pricing is competitive and fair (83.1 across 68 mentions), with customers frequently noting value and transparency. However, project completion shows the lowest score (78.5 across 89 mentions), reflecting a pattern of callbacks, incomplete initial work, and occasional follow-up issues that required multiple visits. While the vast majority of reviews are highly positive (5-star ratings), the negative reviews consistently cite specific failures in execution and communication that warrant attention.

• PATTERN DETECTED: Multiple negative reviews (8 one-star and 2 two-star ratings) describe similar issues: incomplete work on first visit requiring callbacks, miscommunication, and refusal to honor warranty or return visits without additional charges. Examples include shower valve repair (4 trips, $800 in missed work), sump pump installation errors (repeated failures over 18 months), and water shut-off valve damage.
• RECENCY BIAS: Approximately 40% of reviews are clustered on 2025-06-09, 2025-05-26, 2025-05-19, 2025-05-10, and 2025-04-10 (recent months), while negative reviews span 2017-2024. Recent reviews are overwhelmingly positive (5-star), suggesting possible review management or seasonal variation.
• FAKE REVIEW INDICATORS: Several reviews contain generic praise with minimal specifics ('Walker is the best', 'Just the best!', 'Absolutely the best in town') and empty review text fields with 5-star ratings (at least 8 instances). However, the majority of reviews contain detailed, specific accounts of work performed, technician names, and pricing details, suggesting most reviews are authentic.
• COMMUNICATION FAILURES: Multiple reviews mention lack of follow-up, no-shows without notification, and failure to return calls or respond to online contact forms. One review explicitly states they waited until end of week with no response after online contact.
• QUALITY CONTROL INCONSISTENCY: Negative reviews describe technician errors (stripped valve mounts, incorrect pump installation, improper tub installation, broken water shut-off valves) that suggest inconsistent quality control or inadequate training oversight.
• PRICING DISPUTES: Two reviews mention unexpected charges or disputes over 'trip charges' despite company claims of no trip charge, and one review describes being charged $1,300 for a pump that should have been installed correctly initially.
• OWNER CONDUCT: One review from 2019 alleges the owner (Robert Walker) used abusive language during a billing dispute, which if accurate represents a serious professionalism concern.

This WW Score of 82.3 is reliable for understanding Walker Plumbing's overall reputation, supported by 227 reviews with high confidence across all dimensions. However, the score masks a significant quality control issue: while the company excels in responsiveness, friendliness, and pricing, a consistent pattern of incomplete initial work requiring callbacks and occasional technician errors suggests customers should expect potential follow-up visits. The score is most trustworthy for assessing professionalism and pricing, but less reliable for predicting first-time project completion. Recent reviews are overwhelmingly positive, but this may not fully reflect the documented pattern of callbacks and rework issues present in the historical record.

Superior Mechanical Services demonstrates strong professionalism and technical expertise, with consistently positive feedback on punctuality, communication, and skilled workmanship across 42 and 35 mentions respectively. Project completion is solid but shows some concerns, with 28 mentions revealing occasional scheduling issues, delayed callbacks, and incomplete work requiring return visits. Pricing emerges as the weakest dimension (68.0) based on 11 explicit mentions, with multiple customers reporting inflated quotes, hidden charges (travel time), and quotes significantly above market rates, though some reviews praise competitive pricing. The company's long operational history (since 1948) and union workforce contribute to the experience score, but pricing transparency and project follow-through consistency prevent a higher overall score.

• PRICING INCONSISTENCY: Multiple reviews (2020-05-28, 2018-01-22, 2015-05-08) report quotes 2-3x higher than market rate or competitor bids. One customer received a $99 diagnosis followed by a $700+ quote that was resolved with a $70 second opinion and cleaning. This pattern suggests either aggressive upselling or inconsistent diagnostic practices.
• PROJECT COMPLETION ISSUES: Four reviews (2018-05-31, 2018-05-29, 2018-03-23, 2015-05-08) document significant scheduling failures, no-shows without notice, incomplete work requiring multiple return visits, and poor communication about delays. One customer waited 1.5 months without heat due to failed follow-up.
• PERMIT/COMPLIANCE CONCERN: One review (2019-10-16) reports the company was 'busted for working without a permit' and subsequently billed for maintenance when technician never showed.
• FLOOR DAMAGE DISPUTE: Review from 2023-10-04 documents property damage (six vent holes cut into flooring) with company initially denying responsibility, then blaming customer's flooring installation. Customer felt company was dismissive and unaccountable.
• COMMUNICATION GAPS: Multiple reviews note poor phone reception, unhelpful receptionists, vague scheduling windows, and failure to report diagnostic findings to landlords/third parties.
• RECENCY NOTE: Most reviews are 5+ years old (2009-2018). Only 8 reviews are from 2020 or later. Recent reviews (2023-2024) show mixed signals: one 5-star institutional client (Oakland Zoo) and one 1-star dispute over floor damage and accountability.
• POSITIVE PATTERN: Approximately 80% of reviews are 5-star ratings with specific technician names and detailed praise, which is typical for legitimate reviews but warrants noting the high concentration of glowing feedback.

This WW Score of 82.3 is reliable for assessing professionalism and technical expertise (HIGH confidence), but should be interpreted cautiously regarding pricing and project completion consistency. The pricing dimension is based on limited mentions (11) and shows a clear pattern of customer dissatisfaction with quote accuracy and transparency. Project completion concerns are documented across multiple time periods and warrant serious consideration despite the overall high volume of positive reviews. The company's union status and long history support the experience rating, but recent reviews suggest ongoing issues with accountability and communication that have not been fully resolved.

The overwhelming majority of reviews praise professionalism, punctuality, friendliness, and communication across both the 535 Plumbing and Plumbing Works entities represented in this dataset. Pricing is generally rated favorably with many reviewers explicitly noting competitive or fair quotes, though a handful of negative reviews cite overcharging, hidden fees, and pricing significantly above competitors — pulling the pricing score down meaningfully. Project completion is strong overall, but several notable failures exist: one reviewer reported a shower valve repair that required three visits and was ultimately never fixed, causing them to hire another plumber; another noted a wrong water heater was ordered leaving a permanent cosmetic issue; and one reviewer paid $900 twice for drain cleanouts with a backup recurring four days after the second service. Experience scores well given the volume of reviews citing technical knowledge, problem-solving, and skilled workmanship, though the failed shower valve repair and misdiagnosis incidents prevent a higher score. Overall this is a well-reviewed operation with a strong track record, tempered by a consistent minority of negative experiences around pricing transparency and incomplete resolutions.

• MIXED ENTITY ALERT: This review set appears to contain reviews for at least two distinct businesses — '535 Plumbing' (Hawaii-based) and 'Plumbing Works' (Los Angeles/California-based). These are almost certainly separate companies. Scores reflect the blended dataset but should not be treated as a single contractor's profile. Scores for each entity individually may differ significantly.
• DUPLICATE REVIEW DETECTED: Two reviews dated 2024-04-12 are word-for-word identical ('Really great service, they showed up on time, and the price they quoted me was by far the best after looking around at a dozen other plumbers.') — likely a fake or accidental duplicate submission.
• DUPLICATE REVIEW DETECTED: Two reviews from 2023-02-04 and 2023-02-10 for Plumbing Works are word-for-word identical regarding 'Anthinio' and mobile homes — likely a duplicate submission, possibly fake.
• FAKE REVIEW RISK — MODERATE: A significant portion of reviews, particularly for Plumbing Works, are highly generic (e.g., 'Best plumbers in town,' 'highly recommend,' no specific job details) and several appear to be SEO-keyword-stuffed (repeated mentions of 'tankless water heater installation,' 'drain cleaning,' 'hydro jetting,' 'repipe'). This pattern is consistent with review padding.
• RECENCY NOTE: A substantial number of reviews date from 2013–2020, some as old as 2006. These older reviews carry reduced weight. The most recent reviews (2025) are concentrated on 535 Plumbing and are generally positive, but the older Plumbing Works reviews include several negative experiences that remain relevant to the overall score.
• NEGATIVE PATTERN — PRICING: At least 3 reviews explicitly cite overcharging, hidden fees, or pricing far above competitors (1-star review citing $303 vs quoted $130; 2-star review citing $20,000 equivalent vs $4,200 competitor quote; 1-star review citing $360 for a misdiagnosis). This is a meaningful signal despite the high volume of positive pricing mentions.
• NEGATIVE PATTERN — INCOMPLETE WORK / CALLBACKS IGNORED: One reviewer reported a shower valve repair that was attempted three times and never resolved, with the company eventually stopping returning calls. One reviewer reported a plumbing inspection was never completed and no report or bill was ever delivered despite multiple follow-up attempts. These are serious project completion failures.
• UNRESOLVED COMPLAINT: One 3-star review (2025-04-10) states 'Disappointed that there are still no answers' regarding an unresolved outcome — no follow-up or resolution is evident in the review data.

This WW Score carries HIGH data confidence due to the large volume of reviews, but its reliability as a single-contractor score is significantly undermined by the apparent mixing of two separate business entities (535 Plumbing and Plumbing Works), the presence of duplicate and potentially fake reviews, and a consistent minority of serious negative experiences involving pricing transparency, incomplete repairs, and ignored callbacks — consumers should treat this score as directional only and verify which specific entity they are engaging.