Find Nearby Plumbers In Upland, California

Richard receives consistently strong marks across all four dimensions, with every review contributing usable data. Professionalism is a standout theme — punctuality, communication, respectfulness, and cleanliness are mentioned repeatedly and with specificity. Pricing is explicitly praised in 8 of 9 reviews, with one review even providing a concrete competitive comparison ($375 vs $250 for the same job), lending strong credibility to the value claims. Project completion is well-supported, with reviewers noting same-day service, thorough follow-through, and attention to detail such as proper venting placement and copper piping choices. Experience scores high due to specific technical callouts — proper gas line sizing, discharge line routing, and knowledgeable problem-solving — particularly in the detailed tankless water heater review.

• All 9 reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative feedback whatsoever, which warrants mild scrutiny. However, the reviews vary meaningfully in length, specificity, writing style, and job type, which reduces the likelihood of coordinated fake reviews.
• Several reviews (particularly from 2021–2022) are over 1 year old and may not reflect current service quality. Only 1 review is from the past 12 months (October 2023), so recency-weighted confidence is somewhat limited.
• The review pool is small (9 total), which limits statistical reliability despite high per-dimension mention counts. Scores should be interpreted with this in mind.

This WW Score is moderately reliable given the small but specific and varied review set; the high mention rates across all dimensions and the presence of detailed, credible reviews support the scores, but the limited total volume and recency gap mean the score should be treated as a strong positive signal rather than a definitive assessment.

Tito's Plumbing demonstrates strong overall performance with particular strengths in professionalism, experience, and fair pricing. The business excels at responsiveness, punctuality, and technical skill, with multiple reviews praising quick responses, same-day service, and knowledgeable problem-solving. Pricing is consistently described as fair and reasonable with transparent quotes. However, project completion shows the lowest score due to two significant failures: one customer was abandoned mid-job with no follow-up, and another experienced billing manipulation and subsequent dismissal. These serious incidents substantially impact reliability despite the overwhelming majority of positive experiences.

• POTENTIAL FAKE REVIEW DETECTED: Review dated 2024-05-05 exhibits suspiciously generic language ('truly commendable,' 'truly remarkable,' 'truly exceptional') with repetitive phrasing and lacks specific technical details. Reads as templated praise rather than authentic customer experience.
• CRITICAL INCIDENT: Review dated 2023-03-07 documents billing fraud (charging from arrival time rather than service start, padding hours, refusing service after complaint). This represents serious ethical and business practice violations.
• CRITICAL INCIDENT: Review dated 2022-02-12 documents project abandonment without follow-up or resolution. Customer was told to find another plumber mid-job.
• RECENCY CONCERN: Most reviews are from 2021-2022 (older than 2 years). Only 3 reviews from 2024 and 2 from 2023. Recent data is limited.
• INCONSISTENCY: Multiple positive reviews mention 'Tito' by name, but several reviews reference 'Jose,' 'Juan,' 'Alfredo,' and 'Jose' as owner/technicians. Unclear organizational structure or potential name inconsistencies in business identity.

This score should be treated with MODERATE-TO-HIGH caution. While the majority of reviews (21 of 24) are positive and detailed, two severe incidents (billing fraud and project abandonment) combined with limited recent data (only 3 reviews in past 12 months) and one suspected fake review reduce confidence in the overall reliability. The business shows strong capability but inconsistent follow-through and ethical standards.

A2Z Plumbing performs strongly across all four dimensions, with professionalism being the most frequently cited strength — reviewers consistently highlight punctuality, responsiveness, friendliness, and same-day or short-notice availability. Pricing is generally regarded as fair and reasonable, though one detailed 1-star review raises a serious concern about a technician recommending a costly replacement without performing a proper inspection, which meaningfully suppresses the pricing and project completion scores. Project completion is well-supported by multiple reviews describing jobs finished correctly and efficiently, but the 1-star review describes a situation where the work was not properly assessed and the customer felt misled, which cannot be ignored. Experience scores are bolstered by several reviewers specifically calling out technical knowledge, problem-solving ability, and quality of workmanship. The single negative review is detailed, credible, and specific enough to carry significant weight against the otherwise positive pattern.

• One detailed 1-star review (2022-01-14) describes a technician who refused to properly inspect a water heater, immediately pushed a $2,000+ replacement, and charged $90 for what the customer described as no real diagnostic work. This is a substantive complaint about both pricing transparency and project completion integrity and has been weighted accordingly.
• Several reviews use similar praise language (honest, knowledgeable, fair price, highly recommend) across multiple entries. While not conclusive of fake reviews, the pattern warrants mild caution — particularly among the shorter, less-detailed 5-star reviews.
• The majority of reviews (approximately 14 of 19) are dated 2020–2021, making them 3–5 years old at time of analysis. Only 2 reviews are from the past 12 months (2023). Recency confidence is reduced — recent performance may differ from the historical pattern.
• No reviews mention any negative experience with project completion beyond the 1-star review, which could reflect genuine quality or could reflect review selection bias. Score conservatism has been applied.

This WW Score is based on a moderate-sized review set with HIGH mention counts across all dimensions, but reliability is tempered by the age of most reviews, one credible and detailed negative review, and mild repetition patterns in positive reviews that suggest cautious interpretation.

LGI Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism across all reviews, with consistent mentions of punctuality, courteous communication, and responsive service. Project completion is well-documented with timely job delivery and follow-through on callbacks (notably the hot water pump timer repair). Technical expertise and workmanship quality are evident across multiple reviews. Pricing feedback is limited to one explicit mention of fair value, which constrains confidence in that dimension. The overall WW Score of 89.2 reflects solid performance, though the small sample size (5 reviews) and limited pricing data warrant moderate confidence.

• Small sample size (5 reviews total) limits statistical reliability
• One review (2023-10-20) is notably longer and more detailed than others, with unusually comprehensive praise across all dimensions—while not definitively fake, it reads as more polished than typical customer feedback
• Pricing dimension based on only 1 explicit mention; insufficient data for robust assessment
• One review dates to 2021 (over 3 years old); 4 of 5 reviews are from late 2023 or early 2024, providing reasonable recency
• All reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative feedback—while possible for a quality contractor, absence of any critical perspective limits ability to validate claims

This score should be treated with caution due to the small sample size and lack of critical feedback; while the data available is positive and consistent, a larger and more diverse review pool would be needed to establish high confidence in LGI Plumbing's true performance level.

Living Waters Backflow demonstrates strong professionalism across all three reviews, with consistent praise for responsiveness, same-day service, and clear communication. Project completion is solid, with jobs finished promptly and to customer satisfaction. Pricing is described as fair in two reviews. However, the sample size is small (only 3 reviews), and all are 5-star ratings with no critical feedback, which limits confidence in the overall assessment. The company appears reliable for backflow testing and repair services, but more diverse feedback would strengthen this evaluation.

• Small sample size (n=3) limits statistical reliability
• All reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative feedback or critical comments — consider requesting more recent reviews to validate consistency
• Most recent review is from May 2024, but two reviews are from 2023 and 2022, indicating limited recent data
• Reviews focus narrowly on backflow services; generalizability to other plumbing work is unknown

This WW Score should be treated as preliminary due to the small sample size and lack of critical feedback; additional reviews, particularly any negative or mixed feedback, would significantly improve confidence in this assessment.

The overwhelming majority of reviews praise this company's professionalism, punctuality, communication, and courteous technicians across a large and diverse team including Josh, Ryan, Brooke, Brian, Jason, Ric, Hugo, Matthew, Dan, and others. Pricing scores are pulled down by a meaningful minority of negative reviews explicitly citing overcharging, surprise charges, and quotes that were significantly higher than competitors or industry norms — including a $2,000 quote for a gas line job, a $1,460 charge that left gas still leaking, a $660 toilet wax seal job quoted at $280, and a $326 charge for a 10-minute repair. Project completion scores reflect a strong general record of jobs finished on time and correctly, but are tempered by several credible complaints of incomplete work, failure to follow through on callbacks, abandoned jobs, and at least one instance where a repair did not resolve the underlying issue after multiple visits. Experience scores are high overall, with many reviewers specifically praising technical skill and problem-solving, though a small number of reviews describe botched work, improper installations, and a technician who lacked equipment to properly test gas lines.

• Several reviews appear to be near-duplicate submissions: two reviews dated 2024-09-03 are nearly word-for-word identical ('Amazing service from Bob the Plumber Inc...'), and two reviews dated 2022-07-19 are nearly identical ('Just wanted to share with others that Bob the plumber was very pleasing...'). These may be duplicate submissions or coordinated reviews and have been treated with reduced weight.
• Two reviews dated 2021-02-25 appear to be from the same customer describing the same negative experience with gas line work, submitted on the same date — one with text and one without. Counted as one incident.
• A significant number of reviews (49+) contain no review text and only a star rating. These were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable qualitative data.
• Reviews span from 2005 to 2025, a 20-year window. The business appears to have changed ownership at least once (original 'Bob' retired, replaced by Ryan and Brooke under the same brand name in one market, while the Bertolino brand operates separately). This suggests the reviews may reflect multiple distinct business entities operating under similar or shared branding, which could distort the aggregate score.
• Pricing complaints are credible and specific, not vague. Multiple 1-star and 2-star reviews cite exact dollar amounts and describe surprise charges, bait-and-switch pricing, or rates far above market. This pattern is notable enough to meaningfully suppress the pricing score.
• One review (2020-09-16) alleges the contractor is unlicensed and improperly installed a water heater resulting in a red tag from the gas company. A separate 2011 review also alleges no license and no insurance. These are serious allegations that could not be verified from reviews alone but are flagged as a significant concern.
• One review (2013-02-17) describes a detailed and specific pattern of substandard work, incomplete rough-in, drain installed in the wrong location, and the contractor 'marking' work by painting a city water access cover blue — a practice the city confirmed receiving complaints about. This is a credible and specific negative flag.
• Recency note: The majority of reviews with substantive text are from 2022 onward, which is positive for score reliability. However, the negative reviews are distributed across the full timeline, suggesting recurring issues rather than isolated incidents.

This WW Score is based on a very large review set (320 total, 271 with usable data) spanning 20 years and carries HIGH statistical confidence in its directional accuracy, but users should note that the reviews likely reflect multiple business entities or ownership periods operating under shared branding, that pricing complaints are specific and recurring enough to be treated as a genuine pattern rather than outliers, and that serious allegations regarding licensing and workmanship quality — while unverified — warrant independent verification before hiring.