Find Nearby Plumbers In Rocklin, California

Elliott's Blue Collar Plumbing demonstrates exceptional performance across all four dimensions. Professionalism is consistently praised with 11 mentions highlighting punctuality, responsiveness, respectful treatment, and integrity—notably Kevin's refusal to charge for a neighbor's sewer problem. Pricing receives strong marks from 9 reviews emphasizing fair, transparent, and competitive rates with no hidden charges. Project completion is evidenced in 10 reviews documenting thorough diagnostics, timely resolution, and follow-through on complex jobs including water heater replacement, gas line installation, and pipe repairs. Technical expertise is demonstrated across 8 reviews with specific examples of superior problem-solving (finding leaks others missed, proper gas pressure calculations, identifying recalled ABS piping). All reviews are 5-star ratings from 2017–2023, with most from the past 3 years.

• All 12 reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative feedback—this is unusual and warrants caution. While the reviews contain specific details and varied scenarios that suggest authenticity, the complete absence of any critical comments or lower ratings is atypical for a contractor with this volume of work.
• Review dates span 2017–2023 with a concentration in 2020–2023, suggesting recency bias. Older reviews (2017–2019) may not reflect current service levels.
• No reviews mention warranty, guarantees, or post-service follow-up issues, which limits assessment of long-term accountability.

This WW Score of 91.2 is highly reliable based on 12 reviews with consistent, specific praise across all dimensions and strong mention counts (8–11 per dimension). However, the absence of any critical feedback or lower ratings introduces some caution; this score should be interpreted as representing the contractor's best-case performance rather than a fully balanced assessment. Prospective customers should still conduct independent due diligence.

Ronald T. Curtis Plumbing receives overwhelmingly positive feedback across all four scored dimensions, with professionalism being the most consistently praised attribute — nearly every reviewer explicitly mentions punctuality, cleanliness, responsiveness, and courteous communication. Pricing is a standout strength, with multiple reviewers noting Ron came in under competing bids, charged exactly what was quoted, and in one notable case saved a customer over $1,000 by honestly diagnosing a repair rather than pushing an unnecessary replacement. Project completion is also very strong, with reviewers consistently noting jobs were finished quickly, thoroughly, and with cleanup included. Experience and technical knowledge are well-documented across a wide range of plumbing tasks including water heater replacements, manifold work, faucet installs, and pressure valve repairs, with several reviewers specifically calling out his diagnostic precision and problem-solving ability.

• All 36 reviews are 5-star ratings with zero negative or mixed reviews, which is statistically unusual and warrants mild caution.
• However, the majority of reviews contain specific job details, named scenarios, and varied language, which significantly reduces the likelihood of fabricated reviews.
• Review recency is mixed: approximately 14 reviews are from 2022 or later (within ~3 years of late 2024), while 22 reviews date from 2010–2021. Older reviews were weighted slightly less but still included as they show consistent long-term patterns.
• No reviews mention any negative experience, callback issues, or incomplete work — while this is consistent with a high-quality contractor, the complete absence of any criticism across 36 reviews slightly inflates confidence in the positive scores.

This WW Score is based on 36 reviews with strong specificity and consistent patterns across more than a decade, making it a reliable indicator of contractor quality, though the absence of any negative feedback and all-5-star ratings suggest a degree of selection bias that users should keep in mind.

This contractor demonstrates strong overall performance with a WW Score of 82.3, driven primarily by consistent professionalism and reliable project completion. Technicians are frequently praised for punctuality, courtesy, and clear communication, with many reviews highlighting same-day or next-day service availability. Project completion is solid, with most jobs finished as promised and follow-through honored. However, pricing emerges as a notable weakness, with approximately 19% of reviews mentioning concerns about costs being high, overcharges, or unexpected price increases. Experience and technical knowledge are generally well-regarded, though some reviews indicate occasional diagnostic errors or incomplete solutions on first visits.

• PRICING CONCERNS: Approximately 19% of reviews (187 mentions) explicitly address pricing issues. Common complaints include: unexpected price increases after initial quotes, charges significantly higher than competitors, hidden or undisclosed fees, and perception of overcharging. Multiple reviews cite price gouging, particularly on emergency/after-hours calls and warranty work.
• FAKE REVIEW PATTERN DETECTED: Approximately 25-30 reviews (2.5-3% of total) show suspicious characteristics: identical phrasing ('excellent service,' 'highly recommend,' 'professional'), generic praise with zero specifics, all 5-star ratings with minimal detail, and clustered dates (particularly June 2025, May 2025). These appear to be artificially generated or incentivized reviews. Confidence in overall score reduced slightly due to this pattern.
• SCHEDULING/RESPONSIVENESS INCONSISTENCY: While most reviews praise quick response times, approximately 12 reviews document significant scheduling failures including no-shows, cancelled appointments without callback, and long delays in returning calls or providing estimates. This suggests operational inconsistency.
• QUALITY CONTROL VARIABILITY: Approximately 8-10 reviews mention incomplete first visits, misdiagnosis of problems, or work that required callbacks to fix. One review explicitly praised the company's quality control system with photo review by senior staff.
• RECENCY BIAS: Approximately 60% of reviews are from May-June 2025 (very recent), with a sharp drop-off in reviews from 2024 and earlier. This concentration may inflate current scores if recent performance differs from historical patterns.
• MULTIPLE BUSINESS ENTITIES: Reviews reference multiple business names ('The Plumber,' 'O&M Plumbing,' 'My Plumber,' 'Pro Plumbers Grapevine,' 'Roboco Enterprises Inc dba The Plumber') suggesting either franchises, rebranding, or data aggregation from multiple unrelated companies. This may compromise score reliability.

This WW Score of 82.3 should be treated with MODERATE-TO-HIGH confidence for professionalism and project completion dimensions, but MODERATE confidence for pricing due to documented overcharge patterns. The presence of suspected fake reviews (2.5-3% of dataset) and the concentration of recent reviews (60% from May-June 2025) suggest the score may not be fully representative of long-term performance. Customers should expect strong service quality and responsiveness but should obtain detailed written quotes and compare pricing with competitors before committing, particularly for large jobs or emergency services.

Liberty Plumbing demonstrates strong overall performance with a WW Score of 82.3, driven primarily by exceptional professionalism (86.5) across hundreds of reviews praising punctuality, communication, and courteous technicians. Project completion scores (81.8) are solid, though tempered by multiple reports of incomplete work, delayed callbacks, and follow-up issues. Experience ratings (84.1) reflect consistent technical competence and problem-solving ability. Pricing (76.2) emerges as the weakest dimension, with recurring complaints about unexpected charges, price gouging, and lack of transparency despite many positive comments about fair rates. The company shows significant variability in service quality and follow-through.

• PRICING CONCERNS: Multiple reviews (2016-06-28, 2017-10-30, 2022-03-17, 2022-08-03) document substantial overcharges, price gouging, and lack of transparency. Customers report being quoted one price then charged significantly more, or charged for parts at 5-7x retail cost. This pattern suggests inconsistent pricing practices.
• PROJECT COMPLETION ISSUES: Several reviews (2023-08-14, 2023-08-12, 2023-10-03, 2023-10-02, 2020-01-14) report incomplete work, abandoned projects, failure to return for callbacks, and lack of follow-through. One customer waited 3+ months for faucet installation with no resolution.
• COMMUNICATION FAILURES: Multiple reports (2022-07-06, 2022-08-19, 2017-10-03, 2017-10-02, 2019-08-18) of no-shows, missed appointments, failure to return calls, and unprofessional phone interactions with owners.
• QUALITY INCONSISTENCY: Reviews show wide variance in technician quality and work outcomes. Some technicians praised extensively; others criticized for incomplete diagnostics, poor installations, or damage (2016-11-16 chimney liner damage, 2016-05-16 worsened drain problem).
• POTENTIAL FAKE REVIEW PATTERN: Approximately 15-20 reviews from 2021-2025 show nearly identical phrasing ('on time, professional, friendly, clean, efficient') with minimal specific details. While not conclusive, this warrants caution in weighting recent reviews.
• DEPOSIT/PAYMENT PRACTICES: Review from 2022-08-03 documents aggressive deposit collection ($59 driver fee kept regardless), demands for 20% down payment upfront, and refusal to accept standard payment methods. Raises consumer protection concerns.
• PERMIT/COMPLIANCE ISSUES: Review from 2023-02-07 reports customer charged for permit that was never pulled or inspected, with no follow-up from company despite multiple contact attempts.

This WW Score of 82.3 should be treated with MODERATE-TO-HIGH caution: while professionalism and experience dimensions are well-supported by extensive data, the pricing dimension is significantly undermined by documented overcharge patterns, and project completion reliability is compromised by multiple reports of abandoned work and failed callbacks. The company appears capable of excellent service but demonstrates inconsistent follow-through and pricing transparency that creates material risk for customers. Recent reviews show potential fake review clustering that may inflate current ratings.

Placer County Plumbing receives consistently strong praise for professionalism, with multiple reviewers highlighting promptness, friendliness, courteous behavior (e.g., removing boots before entering homes), and clear communication. Project completion scores well overall, with numerous accounts of jobs being finished quickly and thoroughly, though one 1-star review explicitly alleges a recurring leak was treated as a new billable problem rather than a callback, which meaningfully penalizes this dimension. Experience is well-supported across reviews, with specific mentions of correct diagnosis, having parts on the truck, bringing work up to code, and solving problems another plumber could not. Pricing receives limited but generally positive mentions, with one reviewer calling it 'good pricing' and another noting 'fast, professional, good price,' though the single negative review raises a trust concern around billing practices that tempers confidence here.

• One 1-star review (2018-04-06) alleges the father-son team charged again for a recurring leak rather than honoring a callback — this is a direct integrity and project-completion concern and was weighted accordingly.
• Two reviews posted on the same date (2017-04-06) describe nearly identical experiences (toilet fix, father-son team, removing boots voluntarily). While the second appears to be a property manager forwarding a tenant email, the similarity in detail and same-day posting warrants mild scrutiny for potential coordination.
• The majority of reviews (9 out of 12) are older than 12 months relative to a 2025 evaluation date, with most clustered between 2017 and 2021. Recency is limited — only the 2021 review falls within a more recent window. Performance consistency over time cannot be fully confirmed.
• All reviews except one are 5-star ratings. While the volume and specificity of most reviews reduce fake-review suspicion, the near-universal 5-star pattern is noted as a mild flag.

This WW Score is moderately reliable — it is based on 12 reviews with reasonable specificity across all four dimensions, but is tempered by the age of most reviews, one credible negative allegation regarding billing integrity, and limited recent data to confirm current service quality.

Dave's Plumbing demonstrates strong overall performance across all dimensions, with particular strengths in technical expertise and professionalism. The company excels at diagnosing problems accurately, completing work efficiently, and maintaining courteous interactions with customers. Pricing is generally perceived as fair and reasonable, though some customers report concerns about travel time charges and occasional pricing that exceeds competitor quotes. Project completion is reliable with most jobs finished on schedule, though a small subset of reviews indicate scheduling delays and follow-up issues. The extensive review history (spanning from 1997 to 2025) shows consistent quality, though recent years contain more critical feedback regarding pricing transparency and service consistency.

• SUSPICIOUS REVIEW CLUSTER: Multiple reviews dated 2024-06-09 contain minimal or empty text with 5-star ratings (at least 8 reviews), suggesting potential fake or auto-generated reviews. This cluster inflates the positive sentiment artificially.
• SERIOUS INCIDENT: One 2024-02-19 review describes catastrophic water damage ($9K+ in repairs) caused by plumber negligence, followed by billing demands. This is a major red flag for liability and follow-through on damage responsibility.
• PRICING INCONSISTENCY: Multiple reviews (2020, 2023, 2024) report undisclosed travel time charges added to bills after service, indicating potential lack of transparency in pricing communication.
• SCHEDULING RELIABILITY: Several reviews (2011, 2013, 2015) report missed appointments, no-shows, and difficulty scheduling follow-up work, suggesting operational inconsistency.
• QUALITY DISPUTES: Two reviews (2021, 2023) describe disputes over workmanship quality with conflicting assessments from other contractors, indicating potential quality control variability.
• DISCRIMINATION ALLEGATION: One 2022 review alleges the owner refused service based on a 'Black Lives Matter' sign, though the account is one-sided and unverified.
• PERMIT/INSPECTION FAILURES: One 2023 review documents multiple failed inspections and repeated visits required to obtain permits, indicating knowledge gaps on code compliance.

This WW Score of 81.2 is reliable and based on substantial evidence (281 reviews with 94-127 mentions per dimension), but should be interpreted with caution due to a cluster of suspicious low-text 5-star reviews from June 2024 and several serious incidents (water damage liability, scheduling failures, pricing disputes) that suggest operational inconsistencies despite generally positive sentiment. The company demonstrates strong technical competence and professionalism in most engagements, but customers should verify pricing terms upfront and be aware of potential follow-up service delays.