Find Nearby Plumbers In Long Beach, California

Gorsuch Plumbing shows a deeply polarized customer base with significant quality inconsistency. While many customers praise individual technicians (Noel, Leo, Gerald, Brent, Daniel) for professionalism and skill, numerous reviews document serious failures in project completion, follow-through on callbacks, and pricing transparency. The company struggles with communication, frequently fails to complete jobs on first visit, and has multiple documented instances of damage caused by poor workmanship. Pricing complaints are pervasive, with customers reporting inflated charges, hidden fees, and billing for work not completed. The owner's combative customer service interactions further damage trust.

• SEVERE QUALITY INCONSISTENCY: Stark contrast between 5-star reviews praising specific technicians and 1-star reviews documenting serious failures. This suggests individual technician quality varies dramatically.
• CALLBACK AND FOLLOW-UP FAILURES: Multiple reviews (2024-2025) document company failing to return calls, not showing up for scheduled appointments, or refusing to fix problems they caused.
• PRICING TRANSPARENCY ISSUES: Consistent pattern of customers reporting unexpected charges, billing for time not worked, charges for incomplete jobs, and inflated estimates. At least 15+ reviews cite pricing concerns.
• OWNER CONDUCT CONCERNS: Multiple reviews document owner (Matthew/Matt) being verbally abusive, combative, yelling at customers, and refusing to honor warranties or address complaints.
• PROJECT COMPLETION FAILURES: Numerous documented cases of incomplete work, damage to property during repairs, work that failed immediately after completion, and refusal to return for warranty repairs.
• RECENCY MATTERS: Most recent reviews (2024-2025) are predominantly negative (1-star), suggesting deterioration in service quality. Older positive reviews (2009-2013) may not reflect current operations.
• DUPLICATE REVIEWS: Two identical reviews from 2024-08-17 (kitchen sink issue with hydrojetting) appear to be duplicates, suggesting possible data entry error but not fake review pattern.
• COMMUNICATION BREAKDOWN: Consistent complaints about unresponsiveness, missed callbacks, lack of updates on projects, and poor coordination across multiple visits.

This WW Score of 62.8 should be treated with caution despite HIGH overall confidence, as it masks a severely bifurcated company: individual technicians often deliver excellent work, but systemic failures in project management, pricing practices, customer service, and follow-through are pervasive and well-documented across 127 reviews spanning 20 years. Recent reviews (2024-2025) are predominantly negative, suggesting current operations may be worse than the aggregate score indicates. Customers should expect inconsistent service quality and should carefully verify all pricing and warranty terms in writing before engaging this company.

NexGen HVAC & Plumbing presents a deeply polarized review profile. On the positive side, a large number of individual technicians — Justin, Roger, Noah, Felipe, Jervon, Dylan, Aaron, Christian, and many others — receive consistent praise for professionalism, punctuality, knowledge, and courteous communication, driving the professionalism and experience scores into the moderate range. However, the pricing dimension is severely damaged by a very high volume of explicit complaints about gross overcharging, price gouging, wildly inflated part markups, high-pressure upselling tactics, and quotes that were routinely 2x to 10x what competitors charged for identical work — this is one of the most consistently negative pricing signals seen across any contractor review set. Project completion is also significantly impacted by recurring patterns of no-shows, repeated appointment cancellations, jobs left incomplete for months, permit failures, and post-service damage that went unresolved. The overall WW Score of 62.1 reflects a company with genuinely skilled and professional field technicians undermined by systemic pricing dishonesty, unreliable scheduling, and poor follow-through on completed work.

• FAKE REVIEW SUSPICION: A notable cluster of reviews dated 2025-05-25 and 2024-06-08 are blank (no review text) with 5-star ratings. These are likely padding reviews and have been excluded from scoring. Additionally, several reviews are extremely brief and generic ('Great service', 'Very professional', 'Good job') with no specifics, which is consistent with solicited or incentivized reviews.
• REVIEW SOLICITATION CONFIRMED: Multiple reviewers explicitly state they were asked by the company to leave a review via text message, and at least one reviewer states a technician sat in their home until they posted a photo review. This artificially inflates the positive review count.
• PRICING FRAUD PATTERN: An exceptionally high number of reviewers (50+) independently report being quoted prices 2x to 10x higher than competitors for identical work. Multiple reviewers confirmed this by obtaining second opinions. Specific examples include: $22k quote for a unit fixed for free by cleaning; $17k quote for a unit fixed for $250; $13,800 quote for a repair done for $220; $400 capacitor that costs $6 at Home Depot; $7,000 water heater quote vs $1,700-$2,500 elsewhere; $28k HVAC quote vs $15k elsewhere. This is a systemic pattern, not isolated incidents.
• PROJECT COMPLETION FAILURES: Multiple reviews document jobs abandoned for months, permits never obtained (one case lasted 7+ months), repeated no-shows across multiple appointments, and post-installation damage (holes in walls, water leaks caused by technicians, broken units) left unresolved for extended periods.
• DISHONEST DIAGNOSIS PATTERN: Numerous reviewers report technicians fabricating or exaggerating problems to justify expensive repairs or full system replacements. Second opinions consistently revealed the actual repairs were minor and inexpensive. This pattern appears across HVAC and plumbing divisions.
• HIGH-PRESSURE SALES TACTICS: Multiple reviews describe managers being called in during service visits to pressure customers into immediate decisions, financing offers pushed aggressively, and threats about system safety used to coerce purchases.
• RECENCY NOTE: All reviews analyzed are from 2021 through June 2025. The negative patterns regarding pricing, no-shows, and dishonest diagnosis are consistent across the entire date range and show no improvement trend in recent months.

This WW Score is based on a very large sample of 622 reviews and carries HIGH statistical confidence; however, the score should be interpreted with caution because confirmed review solicitation practices and a significant number of blank 5-star reviews artificially inflate the positive signal, meaning the true customer satisfaction level — particularly for pricing and project completion — is likely lower than the calculated score reflects.

Absolute Airflow (formerly Specialty Air) presents a deeply split profile across its review history. Individual technicians — particularly in earlier years and in recent positive reviews — are frequently praised for professionalism, punctuality, knowledge, and friendliness, which props up the professionalism and experience scores. However, a substantial and consistent volume of negative reviews spanning 2016 through 2024 documents serious systemic failures: repeated no-shows, broken warranty commitments, poor internal communication, and a pattern of recommending unnecessary or grossly overpriced repairs that multiple customers verified were unneeded via second opinions. Pricing is the weakest dimension, with numerous reviewers explicitly describing inflated quotes, bait-and-switch tactics, high-pressure upselling, and charges for work not performed. Project completion suffers significantly from documented cases of abandoned jobs, unresolved warranty claims, and work left incomplete — including a particularly egregious multi-week warranty failure during a heatwave. The company's earlier incarnation as Specialty Air carried a stronger reputation, but the post-rebrand period shows a marked and well-documented decline in service consistency.

• UPSELLING AND FRAUD PATTERN: Multiple independent reviewers (at least 6) report being quoted for unnecessary repairs — including full system replacements — that second-opinion technicians confirmed were not needed. In several cases, only a capacitor replacement costing under $300 was required after quotes of $2,500–$20,000 were given.
• WARRANTY FAILURES: At least 4 reviews document customers who purchased systems costing $16,000–$19,000 and experienced warranty non-fulfillment, including being left without AC during heatwaves for 5–18+ days with no resolution.
• NO-SHOW AND SCHEDULING FAILURES: At least 10 reviews explicitly describe technicians failing to appear for scheduled appointments with no call or notification, spanning from 2013 through 2024, indicating a persistent and unresolved operational problem.
• INCOMPLETE WORK AND BILLING DISPUTES: At least 3 reviews describe being billed for services not rendered, including one detailed account of a $9,000 contract where only a fraction of the work was completed and the company pursued full payment.
• COMMUNICATION BREAKDOWN: Numerous reviews describe inability to reach managers, unreturned calls, and a disconnect between sales/scheduling staff and field technicians — a pattern consistent across multiple years.
• RECENCY NOTE: The majority of negative reviews are concentrated in 2023–2024, suggesting the company's service quality has deteriorated significantly in recent years. Positive reviews from the Specialty Air era (2011–2016) reflect a substantially different operational standard and should be weighted less heavily.
• FAKE REVIEW SUSPICION — LOW LEVEL: A small cluster of 5-star reviews for specific technicians (e.g., Ivan Moreno receiving three near-identical glowing reviews in June 2024, and multiple reviews for 'Christian Valdez' in November 2024 within days of each other) show repetitive structure and generic praise. These may be solicited reviews. Confidence in the positive score pool is slightly reduced as a result.
• COMPANY IDENTITY NOTE: Reviews span two business identities — 'Specialty Air' (pre-approximately 2018) and 'Absolute Airflow' (post-rebrand). The Specialty Air era reviews are generally more positive. This score reflects the combined entity but the current operational standard appears significantly lower than historical performance.

This WW Score is based on a large review set (125 reviews) with HIGH statistical confidence across all four dimensions, but the score should be interpreted cautiously given the severe and well-documented pattern of upselling, warranty failures, and scheduling breakdowns that dominate the most recent 24 months of reviews — the score of 61.4 likely flatters current operational performance due to the weight of historically positive Specialty Air-era reviews.

Daniel's Plumbing shows significant inconsistency across dimensions. While experience and technical skill are consistently praised (82/100), professionalism is severely hampered by chronic no-shows, missed appointment windows, poor communication, and lack of follow-up—issues mentioned in 35 reviews. Project completion suffers from incomplete work, failure to verify functionality before leaving, and unfinished jobs requiring multiple callbacks. Pricing is generally fair (78/100) with transparent quotes, though some customers report inflated estimates. The company demonstrates strong capability when present but unreliable execution undermines customer trust.

• CRITICAL: Severe pattern of no-shows and missed appointment windows documented in at least 12 reviews spanning 2013-2024. This is the dominant complaint across the entire dataset.
• CRITICAL: Multiple reviews (2022-2024) document incomplete work, failure to verify services are operational before leaving, and customers left without hot water, water to faucets, or functional fixtures.
• Pattern of poor communication: customers report being hung up on, promises to call back never honored, and lack of courtesy calls when technicians don't arrive.
• Inconsistent quality: same company receives both 5-star reviews praising specific technicians (Manuel, Jimmy, Kevin, Jesus, Art) and 1-star reviews from same period, suggesting highly variable technician performance.
• Recency concern: negative reviews cluster heavily in 2019-2024 period, while most glowing reviews are from 2014-2018, suggesting potential service degradation over time.
• One review (2022-10-31) alleges leaving feces and urine on kitchen floor for 24+ hours and owner lying about it publicly—serious sanitation/integrity allegation.
• Multiple reviews document dishonesty: quotes given verbally differ from written estimates, technicians contradict office staff, and blame-shifting when problems occur.
• Suspicious pattern: reviews praising 'Manuel,' 'Jimmy,' 'Kevin,' 'Jesus,' 'Art,' and 'Daniel Jr.' by first name only may indicate some positive reviews are from company insiders or referrals, though language variation suggests genuine customers.

This WW Score of 68.2 should be treated with CAUTION. While based on 60 reviews (sufficient volume), the company exhibits a stark bifurcation: strong technical capability and fair pricing undermined by severe operational failures (no-shows, incomplete work, poor communication). The score reflects this contradiction. Customers should expect inconsistent service quality heavily dependent on which technician is assigned and whether the company actually shows up. Recent reviews (2022-2024) are more negative than historical reviews, suggesting declining reliability. The company is NOT recommended for time-sensitive work or customers who cannot supervise on-site.

J&L Plumbing shows significant internal inconsistency across reviews spanning 2006–2025. Professionalism scores well (72.5) with many customers praising punctuality, courtesy, and communication, particularly in recent reviews featuring Jared. However, project completion is severely compromised (54.3) by numerous documented failures: no-shows, abandoned jobs, incomplete repairs requiring callbacks, and unresolved issues lasting months. Pricing is moderate (68.0) with some customers reporting fair rates while others cite price gouging and upselling. Experience is solid (76.0) when work is completed, but many reviews reveal inadequate diagnostics, lack of tools, and poor problem-solving. The company appears to have undergone significant changes, with recent Jared-focused reviews (2025, undated) being uniformly excellent, while older reviews (2016–2022) contain severe complaints about the owner and core operations.

• CRITICAL: Potential fake review cluster detected. Six recent reviews (all featuring 'Jared', dated 2025 or undated) are suspiciously uniform in praise, lack specificity about problems solved, and use similar phrasing ('amazing,' 'above and beyond,' 'highly recommend'). These contrast sharply with the mixed historical record and may represent coordinated positive reviews.
• SEVERE INCONSISTENCY: Company exhibits a stark two-tier pattern. Pre-2023 reviews (especially 2016–2022) contain serious allegations: abandoned jobs, false permits, lying to customers, no-shows, poor diagnostics, and refusal to complete work. Post-2024 reviews (especially Jared reviews) are uniformly 5-star with no critical details. This suggests either major operational change or review manipulation.
• MULTIPLE NO-SHOW INCIDENTS: At least 4 reviews explicitly document no-shows, cancellations without notice, or failure to return for scheduled callbacks. This is a critical project completion failure.
• ABANDONED/INCOMPLETE WORK: Multiple reviews document jobs left unfinished for weeks or months (shower handle repair 2+ months unresolved, bathroom remodel incomplete, main supply line job abandoned after partial completion).
• DISHONESTY ALLEGATIONS: Three reviews allege fraudulent behavior: false permit claims, lying about hydrostatic tests performed, misdiagnosis to justify upselling (RO system instead of faucet repair, floor excavation instead of simple part replacement).
• HOME WARRANTY PATTERN: Numerous reviews involve home warranty claims. Multiple customers report the company either refusing work, providing inadequate service, or blaming warranty companies. This suggests potential systemic issues with warranty-covered jobs.
• RECENCY BIAS RISK: Recent reviews (2025, undated) are overwhelmingly positive and lack critical detail. Older reviews (2014–2022) are more mixed and specific. The shift is dramatic and warrants skepticism.
• REVIEW DATE ANOMALY: Six reviews have no date or are dated 2025-05-26 (future date relative to analysis). This is unusual and may indicate data entry errors or review manipulation.

This WW Score of 62.8 should be treated with CAUTION. While the score reflects genuine mixed performance across dimensions, the data is heavily compromised by a suspected cluster of fake positive reviews (Jared reviews) that artificially inflate professionalism and experience scores. The historical record (2014–2022) reveals serious concerns about project completion, honesty, and follow-through. Recent reviews (2024–2025) show dramatic improvement, but the uniformity and lack of specificity in the newest reviews suggest they may not be reliable. Customers should weight older, detailed reviews more heavily and verify current operational practices independently before engaging this company.

This plumbing supply business demonstrates strong technical expertise and problem-solving ability, with multiple reviews praising staff knowledge and ability to locate obscure parts. However, professionalism scores are significantly dragged down by consistent complaints about poor customer service, dismissive attitudes, lack of greeting/acknowledgment, and unprofessional behavior toward non-contractor customers. Pricing is mixed—some customers find value while others report overpricing. The business appears to prioritize contractor relationships over retail customers, creating a divided experience. No data available on project completion as this is primarily a supply store, not a service contractor.

• CRITICAL: Severe and consistent professionalism complaints across multiple years (2013-2020). At least 8 reviews explicitly describe being ignored, stared at, dismissed, or treated with hostility upon entry. This is a pattern, not isolated incidents.
• Potential fake review concern: Several highly detailed 5-star reviews (2017-03-05, 2016-10-27) contain unusually specific praise for named employees (Jose, Carlos, Edwin) and read as testimonials rather than typical customer reviews. However, these are corroborated by other reviews mentioning same employees positively, so likely authentic.
• Recency issue: Most negative reviews are from 2013-2017 (older than 6 years). More recent reviews (2019-2023) show improvement in tone, suggesting possible management/staff changes. Weight recent data more heavily.
• Business model mismatch: This is a wholesale/contractor-focused supply store, not a retail service business. Many negative reviews come from retail customers with unrealistic expectations. This context is important but does not excuse poor customer service.
• Pricing perception: Described as both 'fantastic' and 'way overpriced' depending on customer type and expectations. Contractor pricing appears competitive; retail pricing appears high.

This score should be treated with MODERATE confidence. While experience/expertise scores are well-supported (HIGH confidence), the professionalism dimension is heavily weighted and shows a clear pattern of poor customer service, though recent reviews suggest improvement. The business model (wholesale-focused) creates inherent tension with retail customers, which inflates negative professionalism ratings. The WW Score of 62.8 reflects a business with strong technical capability but significant interpersonal/service delivery weaknesses, particularly for non-contractor customers.