Find Nearby Plumbers In Oxnard, California

All three reviews speak positively about professionalism, noting punctuality, friendliness, clear communication, and follow-up contact from management. Project completion is consistently affirmed across all reviews, with jobs described as finished thoroughly and on time. Pricing is mentioned favorably in two reviews, including one case where the final cost came in under the estimate, suggesting transparent and fair pricing practices. Experience is referenced in two reviews through mentions of knowledgeability, problem-solving, and quality workmanship. However, the entire dataset consists of only 3 reviews, all dated 2017, meaning the score carries very limited reliability and reflects no recent performance data.

• All 3 reviews are dated 2017 — this data is over 7 years old and does not reflect current performance. Scores should be treated with significant caution.
• All 3 reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative feedback of any kind. While the reviews do contain specific details, the uniformly perfect ratings across a small sample warrants mild fake review awareness.
• Sample size of 3 reviews is at the minimum threshold for WW Score calculation. Results are statistically unreliable and should not be used as a strong indicator of contractor quality.

This WW Score is based on only 3 reviews, all from 2017, making it a LOW reliability signal — the score should not be trusted as a meaningful indicator of current contractor quality without substantially more recent review data.

David receives consistently positive feedback across the four substantive reviews that contain usable detail, with particular praise for his communication, punctuality, honesty, and respectful demeanor. Pricing is highlighted favorably in multiple reviews, including one that explicitly compared his quote favorably against a competitor by $600. Project completion is generally positive, though one review notes a washer drain issue may recur due to a deeper underlying problem, suggesting work was completed as scoped but with caveats. Experience and technical knowledge are affirmed by reviewers who noted his diagnostic thoroughness and willingness to educate customers, though the sample size of detailed reviews is small.

• 4 of 8 reviews contain no usable content — two are single periods ('.'), one is 'unknown', and one is a vague insurance-related comment with no evaluative detail. These reviews were excluded from scoring.
• The majority of reviews (5 of 8) are from 2012–2015, making them 9–12+ years old. Only 2 reviews are from the past 12 months (2024) and 1 from 2023. Recency is a significant concern — current performance may differ substantially from historical reviews.
• The 2012 review uses highly generic, effusive language ('absolutely phenomenal', 'above and beyond', 'exceptional in comparison to others') with limited specifics, which warrants mild skepticism, though it is not conclusively fake.
• With only 4 reviews containing substantive data and most data being quite old, this score should be treated with caution.

This WW Score carries LIMITED overall reliability due to a small number of substantive reviews, the majority of which are over 9 years old, leaving only 3 recent reviews with meaningful detail to anchor the score.

Angel's Backflow Service receives strong praise for professionalism, responsiveness, and communication across multiple reviews, with several customers highlighting same-day service and prompt report delivery. Project completion scores well, as jobs appear to be finished efficiently and thoroughly, with reports and invoices delivered promptly. Experience is rated highly based on one notable review where Angel saved a customer significant money by refurbishing a backflow device rather than replacing it, demonstrating clear technical competence. However, pricing is a mixed dimension: while earlier reviews praised low costs ($35 in 2019), the most recent review from 2023 expresses frustration over rising prices and shorter service times, suggesting a meaningful decline in price-friendliness over time. The overall score is tempered by the small review pool and the recency of the pricing complaint.

• Very small review pool (5 reviews total) — scores carry limited statistical reliability.
• Two of the five reviews are from 2019 and are over 4 years old; they should be weighted less heavily than the 2023 reviews.
• The most recent review (2023-09-05) raises a specific and credible pricing concern — price increased from $50 to $65 with shorter service time — which meaningfully drags down the pricing dimension.
• The three 5-star reviews from 2023 and 2019 are generally positive but relatively brief; while not conclusively fake, they lack deep specificity in some cases. No fake review pattern is definitively flagged, but caution is warranted given the small sample.

This WW Score is based on only 5 reviews spanning four years, with mixed recency, and should be treated as a preliminary indicator rather than a definitive assessment of contractor quality.

Perfection Plumbing receives strong praise for fair and competitive pricing across many reviews, and technical competence is frequently highlighted by satisfied customers. However, professionalism is significantly dragged down by a recurring and serious pattern of no-shows, broken promises, and failure to return calls — reported independently by at least 5 reviewers across multiple years. Project completion is similarly mixed: while many jobs are described as completed well, there are credible accounts of abandoned work, price changes after agreement, and at least one case of a dangerous incorrect installation that was never remedied. The business shows a split personality in the review record — capable and affordable when engaged, but unreliable in follow-through and responsiveness.

• RECENCY WARNING: The majority of reviews are older than 1 year, with most substantive reviews dating from 2013–2021. Only 2 reviews are from the past 12 months (relative to the most recent review date of 2023-09-11). The most recent review (2023) is positive, but the data pool is heavily weighted toward older experiences.
• NO-SHOW / RELIABILITY PATTERN: At least 5 independent reviews (2017-02-18, 2017-01-16, 2017-12-11, 2019-07-23, 2020-01-31) explicitly describe missed appointments, broken promises, and failure to return calls. This is a consistent and credible pattern, not isolated incidents.
• SERIOUS SAFETY COMPLAINT: One review (2015-04-20) alleges a dangerous incorrect installation of a dryer vent that directed exhaust into the home, followed by complete refusal to return and remedy the work despite repeated contact. A Contractors State License Board complaint was reportedly filed.
• ABANDONED/INCOMPLETE WORK: One review (2020-01-31) describes a customer who paid for drain clearing but claims the agreed work was not completed, the price was raised without authorization, and all follow-up contact was ignored.
• STAFF CONDUCT COMPLAINT: One review (2022-06-10, 1-star) alleges a technician used a company work van during a shoplifting incident. While unverifiable, it is noted as a flag.
• TECHNICIAN MISCONDUCT: One review (2021-08-06) describes a technician named 'John' who refused to use proper equipment, argued with the customer, and allegedly filed a false complaint against the customer. This may reflect a specific employee rather than the owner.
• BLANK/CONTENT-FREE REVIEWS: Three reviews contain only a period or are completely blank (2014-11-03, 2014-04-24, 2018-06-11). These were excluded from scoring as they provide no usable data.
• FAKE REVIEW SUSPICION — LOW LEVEL: Several older 5-star reviews (2006, 2012, 2013) use generic praise with minimal specifics. The all-caps review from 2006 is particularly generic. These are not conclusively fake but carry low evidentiary weight and were scored conservatively.
• MULTIPLE TECHNICIANS/STAFF: Reviews reference Robert, Antonio, Jimmie, John, and Lance Morrison — suggesting either multiple staff or possible business name overlap. Negative reviews involving non-Robert technicians may not fully reflect the owner's personal service quality, but they do reflect on the business as a whole.

This WW Score carries HIGH data confidence due to the volume of reviews, but the score itself should be interpreted cautiously — the contractor demonstrates genuine skill and fair pricing when engaged, but a well-documented and recurring pattern of no-shows, broken promises, and at least one serious unresolved workmanship complaint meaningfully suppresses the score and represents real risk to prospective customers.

AAA Paradise Plumbing presents a deeply mixed picture across a large review base. Professionalism scores moderately well — many reviewers praise individual technicians like David, Henry, Richard, Jeff, and Fred for punctuality, courtesy, and clear communication — but this is significantly offset by multiple reviews citing rude behavior, failure to follow up on quotes, and one account of threatening conduct by a supervisor. Project completion is similarly split: numerous reviews confirm jobs finished same-day and callbacks honored, but there are credible accounts of incomplete work, recurring problems after service, and at least one case of a clogged drain left entirely unresolved. The most damaging dimension is pricing, which is the single most frequently mentioned topic in negative reviews — spanning years and covering a wide range of job types — with customers consistently reporting quotes double or more than competitors, hidden fees, aggressive upselling, and charges for estimates not disclosed upfront. Experience scores modestly positive overall, with many reviewers praising technical skill, but undercut by accounts of incorrect diagnoses, improper repairs that failed within days, and at least one instance of a cracked fitting left unrepaired for weeks.

• PRICING CONCERN — SYSTEMIC: Overcharging and upselling complaints appear consistently across reviews spanning 2012 to 2025, representing the single largest negative signal in this dataset. This is not isolated — it is a recurring pattern across multiple technicians and job types.
• FAKE REVIEW SUSPICION — MODERATE: A cluster of 10+ reviews all dated 2024-06-09 with no specific timestamps are highly suspicious. Several of these are extremely generic ('Amazing service! Very professional and prompt!', 'Great customer service, reliable, on time service every time') with no job details, no technician names, and no specifics. This pattern is consistent with review padding. These reviews were included but weighted conservatively.
• ABANDONED WORK / FOLLOW-THROUGH FAILURES: Multiple reviews document work that failed within days of completion, a fitting cracked during service left leaking for 6+ weeks with no callback, a quote promised and never delivered, and a clogged drain left completely unresolved after payment.
• CONDUCT CONCERN: One detailed review (2019-02-04) describes a supervisor named Jeremy making repeated threatening phone calls and refusing to leave a property until paid, which if accurate represents a serious professionalism and ethical concern.
• RECENCY NOTE: Reviews span 2012 to 2025. The majority of reviews with usable data are from 2019 onward. Pricing complaints are present in both older and recent reviews, suggesting the pattern has not improved over time. The most recent reviews (2024–2025) still contain both strong positives and significant negatives.
• ONE REVIEW (2023-09-29, Rating 1.0) praises the company effusively in the text ('Ruben is the best... Paradise Plumbing is great') while assigning a 1-star rating — this is internally contradictory and was treated as unreliable data; the text sentiment was noted but the rating anomaly flagged.
• ONE REVIEW (2024-06-09, no text, Rating 5.0) contained no review text and was excluded from dimension scoring.

This WW Score carries HIGH data confidence given the large review volume and long time span, but the score should be interpreted cautiously due to suspected review padding in a cluster of generic 5-star reviews dated 2024-06-09, and the systemic nature of pricing complaints which suggests a structural business practice rather than isolated incidents.

This review set spans multiple companies and many years, revealing a deeply mixed picture. Recent reviews (2024–2025) for AAA Paradise Plumbing are predominantly positive, with strong mentions of professionalism, punctuality, thoroughness, and skilled technicians like David, Luis, Matthew, and Jeremy. However, a significant volume of older and some recent negative reviews — many tied to what appears to be Affordable Plumbing Pros — describe serious issues including price gouging, incomplete work, abandoned jobs, rude technicians, fabricated repair needs, and outright theft allegations. Pricing is the weakest dimension, dragged down by multiple detailed accounts of inflated quotes, hidden charges, and bait-and-switch tactics. Project completion also suffers due to several reviews describing unfinished work, repeat failures, and jobs that required callbacks or were never resolved.

• MIXED ENTITY WARNING: Reviews appear to cover at least two distinct companies — AAA Paradise Plumbing and Affordable Plumbing Pros. Scores are blended across both, which significantly reduces the reliability of the WW Score for either company individually.
• FAKE REVIEW SUSPICION (MODERATE): A cluster of reviews dated 2024-06-09 for AAA Paradise Plumbing are suspiciously uniform — all 5-star, many with generic praise, minimal specifics, and no verifiable job details. Several read as templated or solicited reviews. Confidence in the positive cluster from that date is reduced.
• RECENCY NOTE: The most credible and detailed recent reviews (2024–2025) skew positive for AAA Paradise Plumbing. The most damaging reviews are older (2013–2018) and appear tied to Affordable Plumbing Pros, but some serious negative reviews do appear in 2023 and 2024 as well.
• SERIOUS NEGATIVE INCIDENTS: Multiple reviews allege fabricated repair needs, overcharging by hundreds to thousands of dollars, a technician allegedly stealing medication, incomplete work left for weeks, and a broken fitting left leaking for 6+ weeks without follow-up. These are high-severity flags.
• CALLBACK/WARRANTY FAILURES: At least 3 reviews explicitly describe warranty or callback promises that were not honored, indicating a systemic follow-through problem in at least one of the entities reviewed.
• TWO BLANK REVIEWS: Two reviews contained no text (only a rating of 5.0). These were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable data.

The WW Score of 68.2 should be treated with caution — it reflects a blended dataset across what appear to be two or more distinct business entities, a suspicious cluster of generic 5-star reviews on a single date, and a meaningful volume of serious negative experiences that include pricing abuse, incomplete work, and unprofessional conduct; consumers should research AAA Paradise Plumbing and Affordable Plumbing Pros separately before making a hiring decision.