Find Nearby Plumbers In Oakland, California

Moran Supply presents a deeply polarized customer experience across six-plus decades of reviews. A substantial minority of reviewers — particularly contractors, repeat customers, and those who arrived knowing what they needed — consistently praise specific staff members (Matt, Richard, Andrew, Rich, Chris) for exceptional technical knowledge, problem-solving ability, and genuine helpfulness that far exceeds big-box alternatives. However, an equally substantial number of reviewers report rude, dismissive, or condescending treatment, particularly non-contractors, women, and DIYers who needed guidance. Pricing is a recurring pain point: the no-return and restocking fee policies (20–25%) generated significant negative sentiment, and multiple reviewers found identical products 25–50% cheaper online or at Home Depot. Project completion and order fulfillment show mixed results, with several cases of delayed special orders, miscommunication, and unresolved complaints, though some staff went above and beyond to resolve issues. The experience/knowledge dimension scores highest, as even negative reviewers often acknowledged the staff's technical expertise, but inconsistent application of that expertise to all customer types drags the overall score down considerably.

• RECENCY NOTE: The review set spans 2007–2024. Approximately 35 of 62 reviews are older than 5 years, and roughly 20 are older than 10 years. Business practices, staffing, and ownership may have changed. More recent reviews (2020–2024) show a continued split between positive and negative experiences, so the pattern appears persistent rather than historical.
• GENDER/DEMOGRAPHIC BIAS PATTERN: Multiple independent reviewers across different years explicitly describe being treated worse as women or as non-contractors. This is a consistent and credible pattern, not an isolated complaint, and materially impacts the professionalism score.
• RETURN/RESTOCKING POLICY: At least 6 reviews cite the 20–25% restocking fee or no-return policy as a significant negative. This is a structural business policy that consistently generates customer dissatisfaction and is factored into the pricing score.
• STAFF INCONSISTENCY: Reviews are highly staff-dependent. Named individuals (Rich, Matt, Andrew, Chris) receive strong praise while unnamed or different staff receive strong criticism. This inconsistency is itself a reliability concern.
• NO FAKE REVIEW PATTERNS DETECTED: Reviews vary substantially in length, detail, tone, specificity, and rating. Named staff members, specific product references, and detailed narratives appear throughout. No coordinated fake review pattern identified.
• ONE UNUSABLE REVIEW: One 1-star review (2014-07-25) describes visiting to use a bathroom and finding an unflushed toilet. This review provides no usable data about the business's plumbing supply services and was excluded from scoring.

This WW Score is based on 62 reviews spanning 17 years with HIGH mention counts across all four dimensions, making the score statistically robust; however, the extreme polarization of the review set (roughly 40% clearly negative, 50% clearly positive, 10% mixed) means the score of 62.4 accurately reflects a genuinely inconsistent customer experience rather than a measurement artifact, and prospective customers should weight their own profile — contractor vs. DIYer, familiarity with plumbing, and tolerance for strict return policies — heavily when interpreting this score.

Absolute Plumbing and Drain presents a deeply divided picture across its review history. On the positive side, many customers praise individual technicians — particularly Oleg, Larry, and Reid — for being knowledgeable, courteous, prompt, and thorough, which lifts the professionalism and experience scores meaningfully. However, pricing is the single most damaging dimension: a large volume of reviews explicitly describe hidden fees, undisclosed minimum charges, bait-and-switch billing, and charges far exceeding what was quoted, resulting in one of the lowest pricing scores possible. Project completion is also significantly undermined by multiple credible accounts of abandoned jobs, unresolved repairs, misdiagnoses, and refusal to honor warranties or return to fix failed work. The owner (referred to as Rod or Hamid) is personally named in numerous negative reviews for rude, combative, and dishonest behavior, which drags the professionalism score down despite strong field technician performance.

• PRICING FRAUD PATTERN: An unusually high number of reviews (20+) describe deceptive pricing practices including undisclosed minimum charges ($448+), charges that doubled after the fact, refusal to provide cost breakdowns, and billing for diagnostic visits that were represented as free. This is a systemic pattern, not isolated incidents.
• OWNER CONDUCT: Multiple independent reviews name the owner (Rod / Hamid Tehrani) as personally rude, combative, dishonest, and in one case screaming and swearing at a customer. This is a significant red flag for business ethics.
• ABANDONED WORK: At least 4 reviews describe jobs that were started and then abandoned mid-project, including one case where raw sewage was left in an open hole covered by plywood.
• MISDIAGNOSIS / FAILED REPAIRS: Multiple reviews describe repairs that failed within days or months, incorrect diagnoses, and refusal to return under warranty.
• FAKE REVIEW SUSPICION — POSITIVE REVIEWS: A subset of recent 5-star reviews (particularly 2025) are extremely brief and generic ('Great service', 'Your service was great!!', 'Very good service on time') with no specifics. These may be authentic but warrant reduced confidence. The contrast between these and the highly detailed negative reviews is notable.
• BLANK REVIEWS: At least 4 reviews contained no text (only a star rating) and were excluded from dimension scoring but counted in total reviews analyzed.
• RECENCY NOTE: Negative reviews describing pricing deception and owner misconduct span from 2017 through 2025, indicating these are not historical issues that have been resolved. The pattern is ongoing.
• EXTERNAL PLATFORM WARNINGS: Multiple reviewers independently reference consistent 1-star ratings on Yelp and the Better Business Bureau, corroborating the negative patterns found in this review set.
• CONTRACTOR LICENSING BOARD: At least one reviewer states they filed a complaint with the California Contractor's Licensing Board, and another mentions consulting an attorney.

This WW Score carries HIGH statistical confidence due to the large volume of reviews, but the score itself should be interpreted cautiously — the business shows a pronounced split between strong individual technician performance and systemic, owner-level issues with pricing transparency, project follow-through, and ethical conduct that represent serious consumer risk.

Olsson Plumbing presents a deeply polarized review profile spanning nearly two decades, with a meaningful number of strongly positive reviews offset by a significant cluster of serious complaints. Professionalism is the most contested dimension: while several reviewers praise specific technicians like Jimmy, Adam, James, and Marcus as courteous, responsive, and communicative, multiple reviews document no-shows, missed time windows, unreturned emergency calls, and at least one incident of a receptionist using abusive language toward a customer. Pricing is a notable weak point, with multiple reviewers explicitly citing lack of itemized billing, charges above quoted amounts, and at least one instance of a $900 markup on a water heater with no breakdown provided. Project completion is similarly mixed — several reviews praise timely, thorough work, while others describe recurring problems after service, incomplete repairs, unnecessary work performed, and a job dragged two weeks beyond schedule. Experience scores moderately well due to consistent praise for specific technicians' diagnostic and technical skills, but is tempered by documented misdiagnoses and at least two cases where repairs failed within weeks and had to be redone.

• RECENCY WARNING: The majority of reviews are older than 3 years, with only 4 reviews dated within the past 24 months (2023–2024). The WW Score may not reflect current business performance.
• POLARIZATION FLAG: The review distribution is heavily bimodal — predominantly 5-star or 1-star with very few mid-range ratings. This pattern can indicate either genuine service inconsistency across different technicians, or possible review manipulation on either end. No fake review pattern was conclusively detected, but the extreme polarization warrants caution.
• PRICING CONCERN: Multiple independent reviewers across different years explicitly complained about lack of itemized billing, charges above quoted amounts, and defensive responses when questioned. This is a consistent and credible pattern.
• NO-SHOW / EMERGENCY RESPONSE FAILURE: At least three separate reviews (2018, 2021, 2015) document Olsson failing to respond to emergency calls or show up within promised windows, suggesting a systemic dispatch or after-hours reliability issue.
• WORKMANSHIP FAILURES DOCUMENTED: At least three reviews describe repairs that failed within days or weeks, requiring return visits, and one review documents a misdiagnosis that cost the customer money unnecessarily.
• STAFF CONDUCT: One review credibly documents a receptionist calling a customer a profanity, with the owner reportedly defending the behavior. This is a significant professionalism red flag.
• TECHNICIAN VARIANCE: Positive reviews are heavily concentrated around named individuals (Jimmy, Adam, James, Marcus), suggesting quality is highly dependent on which technician is assigned rather than consistent company-wide standards.

This WW Score carries HIGH statistical confidence due to the volume of reviews, but the score's practical reliability is moderated by the extreme age of most reviews, severe technician-level inconsistency, and documented systemic issues with pricing transparency and emergency responsiveness that appear across multiple independent reviewers spanning several years.

Cal Bay Plumbing has a mixed but moderately positive track record across its reviews. Professionalism scores are dragged down significantly by two serious complaints: one reviewer describes being completely ghosted after requesting warranty service on a hot water heater installation, and another reports property destruction and theft during a sewer job with no meaningful resolution. On the positive side, multiple reviewers praise responsiveness, friendliness, and weekend availability. Project completion is similarly split — several reviews highlight solid follow-through and even a callback honored with a reimbursement check, but the warranty abandonment and unresolved property damage incidents are serious red flags. Pricing and experience are generally viewed positively by those who mentioned them, with bids coming in lower than competitors and technical work described as competent.

• WARRANTY ABANDONMENT: One reviewer (2021) reports that the company installed a hot water heater in 2016 with a 6-year warranty, then refused to respond to calls, emails, and texts when warranty service was requested. This is a serious reliability concern.
• PROPERTY DAMAGE AND THEFT: A 2014 reviewer reports that crew members destroyed a fire pit, damaged plants, and stole a shovel during a sewer replacement job, with no satisfactory response from management.
• POSSIBLE NAME CHANGES: One reviewer alleges the company has operated under multiple names (A L Plumbing, Cal Bay Plumbing, American Eagle Plumbing), which may indicate attempts to obscure a negative history. This warrants caution.
• RECENCY CONCERN: Of the 8 reviews, only 2 are from 2021, 1 from 2020, and the remaining 5 are from 2014–2016. The majority of reviews are more than 5 years old, significantly limiting confidence in the current state of the business.
• SMALL SAMPLE SIZE: Only 8 reviews total. While scores are calculated, the limited volume means individual negative experiences have an outsized impact and the score should be interpreted cautiously.

This WW Score carries MODERATE reliability due to a small and largely dated review set, two serious unresolved complaints involving warranty abandonment and alleged theft, and credible allegations of the company operating under multiple business names to obscure its history.

Daniel demonstrates strong professionalism and communication skills, with multiple reviews praising his punctuality, friendliness, and ability to explain work clearly. However, the WW Score is significantly depressed by severe project completion failures documented in one detailed 1-star review alleging multiple instances of malpractice including improper water heater installation, dangerous HVAC ductwork handling, and a critical sewage lateral connection failure that required expensive remediation. While three recent reviews (2021-2022) are highly positive, the 2022 malpractice review is recent and specific, creating substantial credibility concerns that outweigh the positive feedback.

• CRITICAL: One detailed 1-star review (April 2022) alleges multiple serious failures including sewage system malpractice, improper HVAC work, and faulty water heater installation. These are specific, costly failures with potential legal implications—not vague complaints.
• RECENCY CONCERN: The most damaging review (April 2022) is recent and contradicts the positive reviews from 2021. This suggests either inconsistent work quality or a significant deterioration in service.
• POTENTIAL PATTERN: Two separate water heater issues mentioned (one positive installation in 2021, one negative connection failure in 2022), suggesting possible inconsistency.
• SAMPLE SIZE: Only 5 reviews total limits statistical reliability. The single negative review carries disproportionate weight but is substantive enough to warrant serious consideration.

This score should be treated with caution. While professionalism ratings are solid, the documented project completion failures—particularly the sewage lateral malpractice requiring expensive remediation—are severe enough to override positive feedback. The WW Score reflects this critical risk, but potential customers should request references specific to sewage/drainage work and verify proper permitting before engaging Daniel.

PACE Supply receives deeply polarized feedback across a large review base spanning over a decade. Professionalism is the most-mentioned dimension and is severely dragged down by a high volume of explicit complaints about rude phone interactions, hang-ups, dismissive counter staff, and a consistent pattern of refusing or discouraging service to homeowners and non-contractors. Pricing is a notable weakness, with multiple reviewers citing prices far above online or big-box alternatives, a controversial 25% restocking fee, and at least one report of an unexplained $150 admin fee. Project completion scores moderately, with some positive experiences of next-day delivery and follow-through, but offset by credible accounts of wrong orders, machined pipe defects causing major delays, unfulfilled warranty promises, and a billing error after a cancelled order. Experience scores highest among the four dimensions, as many reviews — particularly from contractors and professionals — praise staff knowledge, ability to source obscure parts, and technical guidance, though this is tempered by accounts of staff with poor product knowledge at some locations.

• SUSPECTED FAKE REVIEW CLUSTER: Reviews dated 2023-05-09 through 2023-05-15 (approximately 7 reviews posted within 6 days) share nearly identical structure, vocabulary, and themes — including repeated references to 'well-stocked warehouse,' 'hydronic materials,' 'boilers,' 'solar thermal,' 'radiant,' 'pumps,' 'Takagi,' 'PEX,' 'fan coils,' 'reception,' and 'Carlos the manager.' These reviews read as templated marketing content rather than genuine customer experiences. Confidence in positive scores has been reduced accordingly.
• MULTI-LOCATION AMBIGUITY: This review set aggregates feedback from multiple PACE Supply branches across the Bay Area (Oakland, San Francisco, San Rafael, Santa Rosa, Santa Clara, San Jose, South Sacramento, etc.). Scores reflect the brand aggregate, not a single location. Individual branch quality varies significantly per reviewer testimony.
• RECENCY NOTE: Reviews span from 2009 to 2024. Approximately 40% of reviews are older than 3 years. The most recent reviews (2024) continue to show mixed professionalism signals, suggesting the pattern of inconsistent service has persisted over time.
• HOMEOWNER VS. CONTRACTOR BIAS: A statistically significant number of negative reviews explicitly cite differential treatment based on customer type (homeowner vs. licensed contractor). This is a structural service policy issue, not isolated incidents, and materially impacts professionalism and pricing scores.
• REVIEW dated 2024-07-23 ('Funny without stuling your oroder, food water, bathroom always clean. Thanks again Tracy BYRD 20') appears to be a misplaced review for a food establishment, not a plumbing supply store. It was excluded from scoring.
• REVIEW dated 2024-04-26 ('great tools and nice water containers, I really enjoy the color and the rebranding on the stanley originated containers') appears to reference Stanley-brand drinkware and is likely a misplaced review. It was excluded from scoring.

This WW Score is based on a large review volume (105 reviews) and carries HIGH statistical confidence in its directional accuracy, but should be interpreted cautiously due to a suspected cluster of fake positive reviews in May 2023, significant multi-location aggregation, and a well-documented structural policy of differential treatment toward homeowners versus contractors that skews negative sentiment disproportionately for non-trade customers.