Find Nearby Plumbers In Riverside, California

Salvador Lomeli demonstrates strong professionalism with consistent praise for responsiveness, punctuality, and courteous demeanor across 38 reviews. Project completion scores are solid but tempered by two significant negative reviews detailing incomplete work, poor communication, and floor damage, indicating occasional execution issues. Pricing is generally perceived as fair and competitive (18 mentions), though one detailed complaint alleges overcharging and nickel-and-diming. Technical experience is well-regarded with 28 mentions of quality workmanship, problem-solving, and versatility across diverse projects. The WW Score of 82.3 reflects strong fundamentals offset by documented project management and follow-through failures.

• Two 2-star reviews (2024-06-11 and 2022-10-24) provide detailed, specific complaints about incomplete work, poor communication, and damage—these are credible negative signals, not fake reviews. The 2022-10-24 review is particularly detailed and substantive, describing incomplete projects, floor scratching, poor time management, and billing disputes.
• One 2-star review (2022-09-27) is vague and lacks detail, making it difficult to assess validity, but the complaint about pricing contradicts the dominant narrative of fair pricing.
• The remaining 47 reviews are overwhelmingly 5-star with consistent positive themes (responsive, professional, fair pricing, quality work). While this concentration is notable, the reviews contain sufficient specific project details (door installation, ceiling fans, flooring, closets, etc.) and varied language patterns to suggest authenticity rather than fake reviews.
• Recency: 16 reviews from past 12 months (2024-2023 Q4) show continued strong performance, but the two most serious negative reviews are from 2022 and mid-2024, suggesting potential recurring issues with project scope management and communication.

This WW Score of 82.3 is reliable with HIGH overall confidence due to substantial data (50 reviews, 38+ mentions per dimension). However, the score masks a meaningful bifurcation: the contractor excels at responsiveness and professionalism but has documented failures in project completion and scope management. Prospective customers should weight the detailed negative reviews heavily, particularly regarding advance payment policies, scope clarity, and communication during multi-phase projects. The score is trustworthy as a general indicator but should not obscure the real risks flagged in the two substantive complaints.

City Wide Plumbing Heating & Air Conditioning demonstrates strong overall performance across all dimensions. Professionalism is solid with consistent praise for responsiveness, friendliness, and communication, though two significant failures (no-show and delayed callbacks) temper the score. Pricing is a clear strength, with multiple reviews highlighting fair, competitive, and transparent pricing. Project completion is reliable with fast turnaround times and successful repairs, though the two negative reviews raise concerns about consistency. Technical expertise is evident, particularly in Dave's knowledge and problem-solving abilities. The company shows particular strength in emergency response and customer education.

• Two significant negative reviews (1.0 ratings) from 2022 and 2024 indicate serious professionalism lapses: a no-show with no callback and delayed response to warranty claim. These are material failures that substantially impact the professionalism score.
• Review recency is mixed: 5 reviews from 2024-2022 (recent), but 6 reviews from 2021 and earlier (older than 1 year). Recent reviews show both excellence and critical failures, suggesting inconsistent service quality.
• Multiple reviews mention 'Dave' by name, suggesting he may be a key performer. The negative reviews do not mention Dave, which could indicate quality variance depending on which technician is assigned.
• No fake review patterns detected. Reviews contain specific details (toilet ghost flushing, water heater replacement, copper repiping quotes, AC issues) and vary in tone and length appropriately.

This WW Score of 82.3 is reliable and should be trusted, supported by 11 reviews with consistent data across all dimensions and HIGH confidence levels. However, the two recent critical failures (2024 and 2022) in professionalism warrant caution—this company appears capable of excellent service but has demonstrated inconsistent execution, particularly in responsiveness and follow-through on warranty claims.

The overwhelming majority of reviews praise the professionalism, punctuality, and communication of individual technicians — particularly Chris, Shane, Nick, Vince, Oscar, Rick, and Mark — across what appears to be a network of plumbers operating under similar or shared branding. Pricing is generally described as fair and reasonable, though a meaningful minority of negative reviews cite price gouging, bait-and-switch tactics, and unexpected upcharges, which meaningfully suppresses the pricing score. Project completion is strong overall, with many reviewers noting jobs completed same-day or next-day, but recurring complaints about no-shows, missed appointments, and failure to follow through on callbacks — particularly from Rick and Shane in isolated incidents — prevent a higher score. Technical skill and problem-solving ability are consistently praised, with multiple reviewers noting that these plumbers solved problems others could not, though a small number of reviews describe substandard workmanship or incomplete repairs.

• DUPLICATE REVIEWS DETECTED: Multiple reviews appear verbatim or near-verbatim across different dates, including the 'Jay and Professional Plumbing team / bathtub stopper' review appearing at least 3 times, the 'On time, quality work, friendly and knowledgeable' Nick/Dustin/Vince/Oscar review appearing twice, the 'Nice job and customer service' review appearing twice, the 'Absolutely the best you will ever find' review appearing twice, the 'Awesome service, they get the job done quickly' review appearing twice, the 'Professional Plumbing saved the day' review appearing twice, the 'Started noticing a knocking sound' review appearing twice, the 'We had a kitchen sink back-up on a Sunday' Oscar review appearing twice, the 'Prompt, honest, and professional service' review appearing twice, and the 'Mark was friendly and prompt' review appearing twice. This pattern strongly suggests review padding or platform aggregation artifacts and reduces overall confidence.
• MULTI-ENTITY AGGREGATION SUSPECTED: Reviews reference a wide range of technician names (Chris, Shane, Nick, Vince, Oscar, Rick, Mark, Beto, Robert, Jon, Tim, Carlos, Fabian, Dustin, Joey, Steve, Matthew, Ammon, Richard, William, Cody, Terrance, Domingo, Adrian, etc.) across geographically diverse locations (Riverside CA, Shoreline WA, El Paso TX, Barrington IL, Grosse Pointe MI, Auburn WA, Edmonds WA, etc.). This dataset almost certainly aggregates reviews from multiple distinct businesses operating under similar 'Professional Plumbing' or related names. Scores should be interpreted with caution as they may not reflect any single contractor.
• NEGATIVE REVIEW PATTERN — NO-SHOWS AND GHOSTING: At least 8-10 reviews describe technicians or the company failing to show up for scheduled appointments without notice, failing to return calls, or abandoning jobs mid-project. This is a significant operational reliability concern.
• NEGATIVE REVIEW PATTERN — PRICING COMPLAINTS: Multiple 1-star and 2-3 star reviews cite price gouging, bait-and-switch pricing (quoted one price, charged significantly more), excessive charges for simple jobs, and upselling unnecessary work. These complaints span multiple technicians and locations.
• NEGATIVE REVIEW PATTERN — POOR WORKMANSHIP IN ISOLATED CASES: Several reviews describe work that was not completed correctly, required callbacks that were not honored, or caused additional damage (e.g., leaking valves after installation, incorrect diagnosis, disconnected pipes left unrepaired).
• RECENCY NOTE: The majority of reviews are from 2024-2025, which is positive for recency weighting. However, negative patterns (no-shows, pricing issues) appear across all time periods including recent reviews, suggesting these are not isolated historical issues.
• ALL 5-STAR PATTERN WITH EMPTY REVIEWS: Approximately 20-25 reviews consist of only a star rating with no text. These provide no usable data and were excluded from dimension scoring but inflate the apparent review count.

This WW Score carries MODERATE-to-HIGH reliability for the positive dimensions of professionalism and technical experience, but the score is materially undermined by confirmed duplicate reviews, strong evidence of multi-entity aggregation across geographically distinct businesses, and a consistent minority pattern of serious complaints around pricing transparency, appointment reliability, and follow-through — meaning this score should not be used to evaluate any single contractor without first confirming which specific technician or business entity is being assessed.

All Star Plumbing earns strong marks across professionalism, project completion, and experience, with the vast majority of reviewers praising courteous, knowledgeable technicians who arrive on time and complete jobs thoroughly. Recurring technicians such as Kyle, Manny, Jerry, Anthony, Toan, Bobby, and Johnny are cited repeatedly for going above and beyond, explaining issues clearly, and leaving work areas clean. Project completion is a clear strength, with many reviews noting same-day or next-day service, jobs finished as promised, and follow-through on callbacks. Pricing is the weakest dimension: while many reviewers describe costs as fair or competitive, a meaningful minority of negative reviews cite quotes that were significantly higher than competitors, unexpected charges, or price discrepancies between phone estimates and final invoices. A small but notable cluster of negative reviews also flags instances of no-shows, poor communication, rude behavior, and at least one case of faulty workmanship with no warranty honored, which moderately suppresses the professionalism and project completion scores.

• DUPLICATE REVIEW DETECTED: Two reviews with identical text ('Great customer service he did what needed to be done. Our kitchen sink stopped up. Knew exactly what to do.') were posted two days apart (2025-06-06 and 2025-06-08) with the same 5-star rating. This is a likely fake or duplicate submission and was counted only once for scoring purposes.
• REVIEW SCOPE CONCERN: This review set appears to aggregate reviews from multiple distinct All Star Plumbing businesses across different cities and states (Fresno CA, Fairfield CA, Napa CA, Corona CA, Greensboro NC, Minneapolis MN area, Arizona, and others). These are almost certainly separate, unrelated businesses operating under the same or similar name. Scores and narratives may reflect a blended profile of multiple companies rather than a single contractor, significantly reducing the reliability of any aggregate score.
• RECENCY NOTE: Reviews span from approximately 2005 to June 2025. A substantial portion of reviews predate 2022 and reflect business conditions, staff, and ownership that may no longer be current. Recent reviews (2024-2025) are weighted more heavily in scoring but older reviews still influence the aggregate.
• NEGATIVE REVIEW PATTERN: Approximately 20-25 reviews (roughly 5-6% of the total) are 1-2 star ratings citing: price gouging or bait-and-switch pricing, no-shows or failure to return calls, rude or dismissive technicians, faulty workmanship with no warranty honored, and pressure tactics. These are distributed across the review history and are not isolated incidents.
• GENERIC PRAISE PATTERN: A significant number of short reviews (e.g., 'Great service!', 'Professional', 'Excellent and friendly service', 'Best experience') contain no specific detail and cannot be reliably scored. These were excluded from dimension scoring but counted toward total reviews analyzed.
• BLANK REVIEWS: Approximately 10 reviews contained no text (only a star rating). These were excluded from dimension scoring.

This WW Score carries HIGH data confidence due to the large volume of detailed reviews, but its practical reliability is MODERATE-to-LIMITED as a guide for hiring any single contractor, because the review pool almost certainly blends feedback for multiple unrelated businesses operating under the 'All Star Plumbing' name across different states and regions — consumers should verify they are reading reviews specific to their local branch before making a hiring decision.

ACE Plumbing, Heating and Air draws an overwhelmingly positive picture across a large review base, with the vast majority of customers praising specific technicians by name — particularly Aaron, Chappy, Gerry, Ryan, Manuel, Everett, Martin, Josh, and others — for being professional, knowledgeable, courteous, and responsive. Project completion scores are strong, with most reviewers confirming jobs were finished same-day or next-day, often under emergency conditions. Experience scores are elevated by repeated praise for diagnostic accuracy, technical depth, and creative problem-solving (e.g., Chappy saving a customer $8,000 by avoiding an unnecessary mini-split installation, Martin keeping a 34-year-old HVAC unit running). Pricing scores are pulled down meaningfully by a cluster of credible negative reviews citing hidden fees (credit card surcharges, travel time charges, truck fees), overcharging for simple jobs, and one reviewer being quoted $1,200 for a job another plumber did for $200. Professionalism is also modestly penalized by a recurring pattern of negative reviews citing rude staff, no-shows, failure to honor warranties, and at least one technician (Mike/Mohammad) accused of fraud and non-refund — these are serious flags that prevent a higher score despite the dominant positive signal.

• DUPLICATE REVIEWS DETECTED: Two pairs of reviews are near-identical in wording and posted on consecutive dates (June 6-8 and June 5-7, 2025). The Aaron review and the Martin/Aaron AC review each appear twice with different dates. This is a strong indicator of review manipulation or padding and reduces confidence in the most recent review cluster.
• FAKE REVIEW CONCERN: A review posted by the company owner (Max Greenberg) praising his own technician Chappy is included in the dataset. While disclosed, this is a self-review and should carry zero weight in scoring. It has been excluded from scoring calculations.
• HIDDEN FEES / PRICING TRANSPARENCY: Multiple credible negative reviews cite undisclosed fees including a 5% credit card surcharge, a $30 travel time charge, and a $10 truck fee not disclosed at booking. One reviewer was charged $470 to auger three drains with no upfront pricing disclosure. These are material pricing integrity concerns.
• SERIOUS MISCONDUCT ALLEGATION: One review (Feb 2024) names a specific technician 'Mike (Mohammad Alzawahreh)' and alleges payment was taken via Venmo for unresolved work, refund requests were ignored, and calls were evaded. This is a fraud allegation and significantly impacts the professionalism score.
• WARRANTY VIOLATIONS: Multiple reviews across different time periods allege that ACE failed to honor stated warranties — including a lifetime water heater guarantee, a 30-day drain warranty dispute, and a callback that was never honored after a no-show emergency call.
• NO-SHOW / ABANDONMENT INCIDENTS: At least three reviews describe technicians or the company failing to show up for scheduled appointments without notice, including one emergency no-call no-show and one technician who broke drywall and left without completing the job.
• RUDE STAFF PATTERN: Multiple reviews spanning 2018–2024 describe rude, dismissive, or hostile interactions with staff — including hang-ups, refusal to let customers speak, and disrespectful treatment of elderly customers. This is a recurring pattern, not isolated incidents.
• RECENCY NOTE: The review dataset spans from 2011 to June 2025. Reviews from 2011–2018 involve different technicians and possibly different ownership/locations. The most recent 12 months (mid-2024 to mid-2025) are heavily positive and dominate the dataset, but the negative reviews from this period (hidden fees, rude manager Scott, no-show) are credible and have been weighted accordingly.
• MULTI-LOCATION AMBIGUITY: Reviews reference multiple geographic areas including Sacramento CA, Bullhead City AZ, Toledo OH, Baltimore MD, Diamond Bar CA, Evansville IN, and others. It is likely that this dataset aggregates reviews for multiple unrelated businesses operating under the 'Ace Plumbing' name. Scores should be interpreted with caution as they may not reflect a single contractor's performance.

This WW Score carries HIGH data confidence due to the large review volume, but its reliability as a single-contractor assessment is MODERATE at best, given strong evidence that reviews from multiple geographically distinct and likely unrelated 'Ace Plumbing' businesses have been aggregated together — consumers should verify they are reading reviews specific to their local ACE Plumbing branch before making a hiring decision.

Ballard Plumbing, Heating & Air Conditioning has a large and predominantly positive review base spanning over a decade, with the majority of customers praising technician professionalism, friendliness, punctuality, and clear communication. Experience scores are strong overall, with many reviewers citing knowledgeable diagnostics and quality workmanship, though a meaningful cluster of negative reviews describes failed repairs, units stopping working shortly after service, and technicians recommending unnecessary replacements — which meaningfully tempers both the experience and project completion scores. Pricing is the most contested dimension: while many reviewers describe fair and transparent pricing, multiple credible negative reviews allege significant overcharging, undisclosed costs, and pressure to purchase unnecessary new units, pulling the pricing score down considerably. Project completion is generally solid but is dragged down by several specific accounts of jobs not being completed correctly on the first visit, requiring callbacks, or being abandoned. The WW Score of 82.1 reflects a company with genuine strengths in customer-facing service but notable and recurring concerns around pricing integrity and repair accuracy.

• 11 reviews contained no text — only a star rating. These were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable evidence.
• Several reviews from 2013–2017 are over 7 years old and may not reflect current service quality. Recency weighting applied; older reviews treated as supplementary context only.
• Multiple credible 1-star reviews allege unnecessary upselling and pressure to replace units that other companies subsequently repaired cheaply (e.g., $12k replacement quote vs. $700 repair; $6,500 new unit recommendation vs. $100 fix; $8,000 replacement vs. $75 ground wire fix). This is a recurring and specific pattern across unrelated reviewers and time periods — not isolated incidents.
• One review (2024-03-04) describes a plumber performing over $1,000 of unrequested work without customer consent and failing to provide a receipt — a serious allegation of deceptive trade practice.
• One review (2023-01-24) alleges that both furnaces failed within one week of a Ballard tune-up, raising questions about technician conduct during maintenance visits.
• One review (2023-02-17) alleges Ballard declared an AC unit unrepairable and quoted $12k for replacement; a second company found it in perfect condition and repaired it for $700.
• One review (2019-07-06) alleges work was done with duct tape and that the technician appeared inexperienced — though this is a single account and may reflect an isolated incident.
• One review (2020-06-23) alleges racial discrimination in service scheduling. This cannot be verified from review data alone but is noted as a serious flag.
• One review (2021-09-18) documents installation of a visibly damaged evaporative coil unit and improperly secured condensers — the company did respond and correct the issue, which is noted positively.
• One review (2023-07-06) describes an AC unit installed with mismatched refrigerant specifications that damaged the attic coil — a significant technical error. The GM did respond and resolve the issue.
• The volume of 5-star reviews is very high relative to negative reviews, but the negative reviews are detailed, specific, and credible — they do not appear to be fake. The positive reviews also contain sufficient specificity (named technicians, described work) to be considered genuine. No fake review pattern detected, but the ratio of positives to negatives may reflect selection bias from satisfied customers being more likely to leave reviews.
• Recency note: The majority of reviews from 2024–2025 are positive, suggesting possible service improvement over time, but the pricing and upselling concerns appear across multiple years including 2024.

This WW Score is based on a large and diverse review set (130 reviews, 119 with usable data) spanning over a decade, giving it HIGH statistical confidence in direction — however, the score should be interpreted with caution given a credible and recurring pattern of pricing integrity concerns and repair accuracy failures that appear across multiple independent reviewers and time periods.