Find Nearby Plumbers In Colorado Springs, Colorado

Felix Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism across all three reviews, with consistent praise for friendly demeanor, responsiveness, and willingness to accommodate emergency calls. Project completion is solid, with same-day service delivery and quality workmanship evident in drain replumbing and disposal replacement. Pricing appears fair based on one explicit mention comparing favorably to competitors' rates, though limited data on this dimension. Technical skill is evident in problem-solving and quality outcomes, though only two reviews explicitly address workmanship quality. The WW Score of 88.3 reflects reliable performance, but is tempered by the small sample size (3 reviews) and age of reviews (oldest from 2016).

• All three reviews are 5-star ratings with uniformly positive language and no critical feedback — consider whether this represents genuine consensus or potential selection bias
• Review dates are significantly outdated: oldest from March 2016, most recent from June 2018 — no recent data available to assess current service quality
• Sample size is very small (n=3) — confidence in overall score is limited and should not be treated as definitive
• Pricing dimension based on only one mention (comparison to competitors) — insufficient data for robust pricing assessment

This WW Score should be treated with caution due to the small sample size (3 reviews), complete lack of recent data (all reviews 5+ years old), and absence of any negative feedback that would provide balance and validation of the positive ratings.

RMW Plumbing Services (Rick) earns strong marks across all four dimensions, with the majority of reviewers praising punctuality, responsiveness, technical skill, and fair pricing. The experience dimension scores highest, supported by numerous specific accounts of expert diagnostics, complex repairs, and going above and beyond on jobs. However, three 1-star reviews introduce meaningful penalties: two cite complete failure to respond or schedule (voicemail full, no callbacks over extended periods), and one details a serious concern about overpricing, incomplete work, and refusal to honor a stated satisfaction guarantee. These negative reviews are credible and specific, preventing top-tier scores in professionalism and project completion. Pricing scores are tempered by the one detailed complaint of an inflated quote and a competitor-matching negotiation that still left unresolved work.

• Three 1-star reviews describe significant responsiveness and reliability failures: one customer reported being unable to reach Rick for 2 years with a full voicemail box, another reported 3-4 unanswered contact attempts, and a third reported incomplete work with refusal to remedy without additional fees — these are credible, specific, and materially impact the score.
• Several reviews (dated 2021-06-10) mention technicians named 'Phil', 'Chad', 'Ben', and 'Dustin' — names not associated with RMW Plumbing elsewhere. These may be misattributed reviews from a different company or platform aggregation error, and have been treated with reduced weight.
• Five reviews contain no text (blank body, 5-star rating only) and were excluded from scoring as they provide no usable data.
• A cluster of reviews share the exact date 2021-06-10, which is unusual and may indicate a bulk import or platform migration rather than organic review activity. Confidence is not reduced overall due to the volume of detailed reviews, but this pattern is noted.
• The majority of high-quality, specific reviews are from 2024–2025, which is a positive recency signal. The negative reviews span 2019–2023, suggesting possible improvement over time, though the 2023 scheduling complaint is relatively recent.
• One review references 'TMW' rather than 'RMW' — likely a typo but noted as a minor data quality flag.

This WW Score is based on 35 reviews with usable content across a multi-year period and carries HIGH overall confidence, but consumers should weigh the three detailed negative reviews seriously as they reveal a documented pattern of responsiveness failures and at least one unresolved workmanship dispute.

Holmes Plumbing and Heating demonstrates strong performance across all dimensions with consistent positive feedback. Professionalism is well-supported by mentions of punctuality, responsiveness (Jodi's prompt calls), helpful attitude, and professional demeanor. Project completion is evidenced by multiple accounts of work finished on schedule and completely (boiler install in 1 day, bathroom renovation, multiple simultaneous plumbing fixes). Pricing receives strong marks for fairness and transparency, with specific examples of competitive quotes and no hidden charges. Experience is validated through technical knowledge, quality workmanship, and problem-solving ability. However, the overall confidence is moderated by recency concerns: most reviews are 4-9 years old, with only one review from 2024, limiting the ability to assess current service levels.

• One review (2016-11-14) contains only 'unknown' as text and provides no substantive data; excluded from analysis.
• Significant recency gap: 5 of 6 usable reviews are from 2015-2018 (6-9 years old). Only 1 recent review from July 2024. Current service quality cannot be reliably assessed from historical data.
• All reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative feedback, which is atypical. While not necessarily fake, this pattern limits ability to identify weaknesses or validate balanced assessment.
• Review from 2020 explicitly states inability to assess quality of installed sump pump, reducing confidence in experience dimension for that review.

This score should be treated with caution due to the age of most reviews and the absence of recent critical feedback; while the 2024 review is encouraging, a more current sample of reviews would be needed to confidently assess whether this contractor maintains these service standards today.

JR Whitney Plumbing demonstrates strong performance across all measured dimensions based on two detailed positive reviews. Customers consistently praise Jeff Whitney's technical expertise, transparent communication, fair pricing practices, and reliable project completion. One 2018 review highlights his knowledge advantage over competitors (Home Depot) and same-day service delivery. A 2017 review documents 10+ years of durable workmanship with no failures. However, the WW Score is based on only 2 usable reviews, limiting confidence. One 2021 review reporting non-responsiveness suggests potential recent business issues that warrant caution.

• Only 2 usable reviews with substantive data; 1 review (2021) reports non-responsiveness and possible business closure, contradicting positive older reviews
• All positive reviews are 5+ years old (2017-2018); most recent review is negative (2021), suggesting possible decline in service quality or business status
• Recency concern: No reviews from past 12 months; cannot assess current operational status
• Limited mention count (2 per dimension) results in LOW confidence scores across all dimensions

This score should be treated with caution due to very limited review volume (2 usable reviews) and significant recency gap; the 2021 non-responsiveness complaint suggests the positive historical reviews may not reflect current business conditions.

Professionalism is the strongest signal across these reviews, with multiple customers explicitly praising punctuality, politeness, communication, and responsiveness — including technicians who followed up after installation and kept customers informed throughout multi-day jobs. Project completion scores well too, with most reviewers confirming work was finished satisfactorily, though one review (July 2024) noted the repair did not fully resolve the underlying problem, which tempers the score slightly. Experience is well-supported, with reviewers citing knowledgeable technicians capable of complex work including tankless water heater installation, gas line enlargement, full bathroom remodels, and sewer line replacement. Pricing data is thin — only two reviews touch on cost, one calling it 'affordable' with no further detail — so that dimension carries low confidence and limited influence on the final score.

• One review (2016-02-19) is over 8 years old and was given reduced weight in scoring relative to the 2023-2024 reviews.
• The July 2024 review explicitly states the repair did not fully fix the problem, which is a meaningful project completion concern and was factored into that dimension's score.
• Total review count is low (8 reviews). While the WW Score is calculable, it should be treated with caution — a larger review base would significantly improve reliability.
• No strong fake review patterns detected. Reviews vary in length, detail, specificity, and named technicians (Toney, Andrew, Joaquin, Mike, Dan), which supports authenticity.

This WW Score is based on a small but credible review set with good dimensional coverage; it is moderately reliable but should be revisited as more reviews accumulate, particularly for pricing data which remains very thin.

Westside Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism with consistent punctuality, courteous communication, and responsive service across 89 mentions. Project completion is reliable with most jobs finished on time and follow-through honored, though some older reviews cite incomplete diagnostics or abandoned callbacks. Experience and technical skill are generally solid, with technicians like Orlando, Matt, and Preston frequently praised for knowledge and efficiency. However, pricing presents a significant concern: 32 mentions reveal a pattern of overcharging, hidden fees, and quotes substantially higher than competitors—some customers report paying $1,000+ more than neighbors for identical services. Several older reviews (2014-2018) document aggressive upselling and questionable diagnostic practices, though more recent reviews (2023-2025) show improvement in honesty and fair pricing.

• PRICING INCONSISTENCY: Multiple reviews (2014-2018 and 2022-2025) document overcharging patterns. One customer paid $3,000 for water heater installation vs. neighbors' $1,500-$2,000. Another was quoted $1,900 vs. actual fair price of $1,200. This suggests systemic pricing issues despite recent improvements.
• HISTORICAL MISCONDUCT (2014-2018): Older reviews reveal serious problems: false warranty claims to AHS, misdiagnosis of septic vs. drain issues, refusal to perform promised work (snaking), inappropriate personal comments to female customer, and unresponsive management. These suggest past quality control failures.
• NEGATIVE OUTLIER REVIEWS: 9 one-star reviews (2014-2025) cite incompetence, dishonesty, rude staff, and poor follow-up. One 2023 review documents unprofessional behavior (inappropriate comments, refusal to snake line) and 2-year customer suffering. Another 2024 review alleges Orlando charged full day rate for 1 hour work and hit customer's vehicle without response.
• RECENCY BIAS: Most recent reviews (2025, 2024) are overwhelmingly positive (5-star), while critical reviews cluster in 2014-2018 and scattered 2022-2023. This suggests either genuine improvement or potential review manipulation/filtering of older complaints.
• GENERIC PRAISE PATTERN: Many recent 5-star reviews use nearly identical phrasing ('professional,' 'friendly,' 'quick,' 'fair price,' 'highly recommend') with minimal specific detail. While not conclusive fake review evidence, combined with recency clustering, warrants caution.
• INCONSISTENT TECHNICIAN QUALITY: Named technicians (Orlando, Matt, Preston, Jay, Lance) receive consistent praise, but unnamed technicians and older reviews document poor diagnostics, rudeness, and incompetence. Suggests quality depends heavily on individual technician assignment.
• MANAGEMENT RESPONSIVENESS: Multiple reviews cite failure to return calls, hang-ups, and dismissive responses to complaints (2014-2018, 2016). One 2016 review notes owner eventually called after negative review posted, suggesting complaints may be ignored without public pressure.

This WW Score of 78.2 should be treated with MODERATE-TO-HIGH caution: while recent reviews (past 12 months) are consistently positive and support the score, a substantial body of older reviews (2014-2018) documents serious misconduct including overcharging, false claims, and poor diagnostics. The dramatic shift toward 5-star reviews in 2023-2025 may reflect genuine operational improvement under current management, but could also indicate review filtering or selection bias. Pricing remains a legitimate concern with documented overcharges; customers should obtain multiple quotes and verify all charges in writing. The company appears reliable for basic service execution but carries elevated risk for fair pricing and honest diagnostics.