Find Nearby Plumbers In Thornton, Colorado

Craig Plumbing Heating & Cooling earns strong marks across all four dimensions, with professionalism being the most frequently cited strength — reviewers consistently praise punctuality, courtesy, responsiveness, and same-day service. Experience and technical knowledge are well-supported, with multiple reviewers noting skilled diagnostics and effective problem-solving, though one notable 1-star review credibly alleges a misdiagnosis of a furnace (flame sensor dismissed as unfixable), which tempers the experience score. Project completion is generally positive with jobs described as finished cleanly and efficiently, but is modestly penalized by a 1-star review describing a heating system removal that left the home without heat, a 2-star review about a recurring water leak not fixed on the first visit, and a 2-star review about a service plan with no follow-through on promised callbacks. Pricing is viewed favorably by most reviewers who mention it, though one older 2-star review raises a concern about a potentially inflated upsell estimate for a furnace reinstall that a second opinion deemed unnecessary.

• 11 reviews contain no text at all — only a star rating. These were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable evidence.
• A disproportionate number of reviews are 5-star with very brief or generic text (e.g., 'Excellent!', 'Great service', 'Fast & friendly service!!'). While not conclusive, this pattern warrants mild caution regarding authenticity of the thinnest reviews.
• One credible 1-star review (2025-03-11) alleges misdiagnosis: technician declared furnace unfixable in 5 minutes; reviewer fixed it themselves by replacing a flame sensor. This is a specific, plausible technical complaint and was weighted meaningfully against the experience score.
• One 1-star review (2020-12-23) states the heating and cooling system was removed and the home was left without heat. No contractor response or context is available, but this is a serious project completion failure if accurate.
• One 2-star review (2020-12-12) describes a rude and dismissive callback interaction after a job was not completed correctly the first time, indicating a professionalism and project completion concern.
• One 2-star review (2019-07-17) describes an upsell attempt for a $2,500 furnace reinstall that a second opinion deemed unnecessary, and a purchased service plan with no follow-through. This is older than 5 years but relevant to both pricing and project completion dimensions.
• Several reviews are from 2016–2022 and carry reduced recency weight. The majority of reviews (roughly 35+) are from 2024–2025, which provides a reasonably current picture of performance.

This WW Score is based on a substantial volume of reviews with strong recency, and is considered moderately reliable — the high volume of positive reviews is credible overall, but the presence of several specific, detailed negative reviews across professionalism, project completion, and experience prevents a top-tier score and should be taken seriously by prospective customers.

Prime Plumbing and Heating earns strong marks for professionalism and experience, with dozens of reviews praising named technicians — particularly Matthew, Dylan, Richard, and Billy — for punctuality, clear communication, and technical knowledge. Project completion scores well overall but is meaningfully dragged down by one detailed 1-star account of a botched boiler diagnosis that required a return visit, a technician who left without completing work, and a threatening tone from the office about restocking fees. Pricing is the weakest dimension: two explicit 1-star reviews cite labor quotes of $1,950 for 3 hours and a non-itemized $350–$400 faucet replacement, and a third describes a $75 service call for 20 minutes of non-work, while only a handful of positive reviews mention fair or money-saving pricing. The heavy concentration of 5-star reviews from May–June 2025 — many praising the same two technicians in near-identical language — raises a moderate authenticity concern that tempers overall confidence slightly.

• POTENTIAL REVIEW CLUSTERING: 18 reviews dated exactly 2025-05-10 all praising 'Mathew/Matthew' for HVAC work, several using nearly identical phrasing ('went above and beyond', 'professional and knowledgeable', 'highly recommend'). This volume on a single date is statistically unusual and may indicate solicited or incentivized reviews.
• FAKE REVIEW RISK — MODERATE: Multiple reviews in the May–June 2025 cluster lack specific job details, use generic superlatives, and follow a formulaic structure. Confidence in scores derived from this cluster has been conservatively adjusted.
• NEGATIVE REVIEW — PROJECT COMPLETION: One detailed 1-star review (2023-10-30) describes a technician who failed to diagnose a boiler igniter fault, returned a second time without completing work, and the office threatened a restocking fee. This is a serious completion and professionalism failure.
• NEGATIVE REVIEW — PRICING: A 1-star review (2023-10-25) quotes $1,950 labor-only for 2–3 hours on a tankless water heater. A separate 1-star review (2017-06-02) cites a non-itemized flat-rate faucet replacement of $350–$400 with no transparency. A third 1-star review (2017-04-19) describes a $75 charge for a 20-minute non-productive visit.
• NEGATIVE REVIEW — RESPONSIVENESS: A 2-star review (2018-06-26) describes repeated failure to return calls or show up, affecting both a tenant and the unit below. This is a reliability concern.
• RECENCY NOTE: The majority of negative reviews are from 2017–2023. The 2025 reviews are overwhelmingly positive. It is unclear whether this reflects genuine improvement or a review solicitation campaign. Both interpretations are plausible.
• ONE BLANK REVIEW (2025-06-02, 5 stars) contained no text and was excluded from dimension scoring.

This WW Score carries moderate-to-high reliability for professionalism and experience based on volume of mentions, but the pricing and project completion scores should be weighted carefully given credible negative reviews and a suspicious cluster of same-day 5-star reviews that may inflate the overall picture.

24/7 Drain and Sewer, operated primarily by Chris, earns strong marks across all four dimensions based on a consistent body of reviews. Professionalism is well-supported with repeated mentions of punctuality, honest communication, and polite demeanor, though one 1-star review citing a complete failure to return a call within a reasonable window meaningfully tempers that score. Project completion is similarly strong, with multiple reviewers noting jobs were finished thoroughly and correctly — including one case where a line was cleaned a second time to ensure quality — but the same unresponsiveness complaint introduces a real reliability concern. Pricing is a clear strength, with several reviewers explicitly calling out affordability, fair rates, and savings compared to competitor quotes. Experience scores well, with reviewers noting Chris successfully cleaned lines that other companies had declared uncleanable, demonstrating genuine technical skill. The single negative review is credible and specific, and is weighted accordingly.

• One 1-star review (2015-04-19) credibly describes a failure to return a call within a reasonable timeframe for an urgent job — this is a direct contradiction of the '24/7' brand promise and is treated as a meaningful data point, not an outlier to be dismissed.
• The majority of reviews are older than 5 years, with only 2 reviews from the past 12 months (2022 and 2023). Business practices, staffing, and quality may have changed. Recency is a concern and scores are modestly conservative as a result.
• Several reviews mention being referred by the same sewer scope company or individual (Ian / Daniel), which creates a referral cluster. This is not necessarily fake but does suggest a concentrated referral source rather than a fully independent review pool.
• No reviews mention negative experiences with pricing, workmanship quality, or incomplete jobs beyond the one responsiveness complaint — while this is largely positive, the absence of any critical detail across 11 five-star reviews warrants mild caution about review diversity.

This WW Score carries HIGH overall confidence due to a sufficient volume of reviews with usable data across all four dimensions, but should be interpreted with caution given that most reviews are more than five years old and the contractor's current responsiveness and consistency cannot be fully verified from this dataset.

Otto and his team receive consistently strong praise across professionalism, project completion, and experience. Multiple reviewers explicitly highlight punctuality, clear communication, attention to detail, and quality craftsmanship across a diverse range of projects including plumbing, carpentry, and renovation work. Project completion is well-supported, with reviewers noting efficient execution, follow-through, and willingness to ensure customer satisfaction. Pricing is mentioned in only one review, where the fee was described as 'very fair,' yielding a LIMITED confidence score for that dimension. The overall picture is of a highly capable and professional contractor, though the small review pool limits full confidence in the aggregate score.

• All 8 reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative or mixed feedback — this warrants mild caution, though most reviews contain specific details that reduce the likelihood of fabrication.
• Two reviews dated 2023-10-27 share the same date, which is worth noting but not necessarily indicative of manipulation given they describe different projects.
• Several reviews are somewhat generic (e.g., 'Great guy, professional and neat') with limited specifics — these were counted but weighted conservatively.
• Review pool is small (8 reviews total) — scores should be treated as directionally reliable but not statistically robust.

This WW Score is moderately reliable given consistent positive signals across most dimensions and a reasonable level of review specificity, but the small sample size of 8 reviews and absence of any critical feedback mean the score should be treated as a promising early indicator rather than a fully validated assessment.

Friendly Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism with consistently friendly, courteous technicians and responsive communication (82.5/100). Pricing is generally fair and competitive, though some customers report higher-than-expected costs and occasional billing issues (76.0/100). Project completion shows mixed results—many jobs are finished promptly and thoroughly, but a significant minority of reviews cite incomplete work, no-shows, and follow-up failures (75.8/100). Technical expertise is solid with knowledgeable plumbers who diagnose problems well, though a few reviews mention misdiagnosis or inability to solve complex issues (80.2/100). The company excels at customer service but struggles with operational consistency and accountability.

• PATTERN DETECTED: Multiple reviews (15+) cite no-shows, ghosting, or failure to follow up despite confirmed appointments. This is a systemic operational issue, not isolated incidents.
• PATTERN DETECTED: Several reviews (8+) report significant price discrepancies between initial quotes and final bills, or aggressive upselling tactics. Some customers report being overcharged by $500-$1500+ on single jobs.
• PATTERN DETECTED: Receptionist/office staff rudeness mentioned in 6+ reviews. Complaints include rude phone manner, hanging up on customers, and dismissive attitudes.
• PATTERN DETECTED: Incomplete work requiring callbacks mentioned in 12+ reviews. Some customers report paying multiple times for the same issue without resolution.
• RECENCY CONCERN: Most recent reviews (2024-2025) show higher frequency of no-shows and communication failures compared to older reviews, suggesting operational decline.
• FAKE REVIEW RISK - MODERATE: Approximately 40-50 reviews appear suspiciously generic with identical phrasing ('friendly,' 'professional,' 'reasonable price') and minimal detail. However, these are balanced by highly detailed negative reviews with specific complaints, reducing overall fake review confidence.
• INCONSISTENCY FLAG: Same company name appears to operate in multiple geographic regions (Reno, Denver, Bay Area, Illinois, etc.) with vastly different quality levels. Reviews suggest different management/ownership across locations.
• QUALITY VARIANCE: Individual technician quality varies dramatically. Named technicians (Charles, Michael, Carlos, Manuel, Josh, Edward) receive consistent 5-star praise, while unnamed or different technicians receive 1-star complaints for same company.

This WW Score of 78.2 should be treated with CAUTION. While the company demonstrates genuine strengths in professionalism and technical knowledge, the high frequency of no-shows, incomplete work, and billing disputes in recent reviews (particularly 2024-2025) indicates serious operational problems that offset positive attributes. The score reflects historical performance across multiple locations and technicians; individual customer experience will vary significantly depending on which technician is assigned and which location serves them. Customers should obtain written quotes, confirm appointments 24 hours prior, and request specific experienced technicians by name to maximize likelihood of positive outcomes.

JD's Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism and technical expertise, with technicians consistently praised for friendliness, knowledge, and efficiency. Project completion is generally reliable with same-day service frequently mentioned. However, pricing emerges as a significant concern, with multiple customers reporting substantial overcharges (e.g., $970 for a 1.25-hour faucet replacement, $800 for 1-hour garbage disposal installation, $664 for faucet replacement vs. $213-300 elsewhere). While many reviews praise fair pricing, the frequency and severity of pricing complaints—particularly from older reviews and recent ones—substantially lower the overall score. The company also faces credibility issues including false BBB accreditation claims and unresolved service failures.

• PRICING INCONSISTENCY: Significant pattern of overcharging complaints across multiple years (2015-2024). Customers report markups of 200-400% on labor and parts. This contradicts many positive pricing reviews, suggesting either inconsistent pricing practices or selective upselling.
• FALSE ADVERTISING: One detailed 1-star review (2024-09-09) explicitly states the company falsely advertises BBB accreditation they do not hold, and allegedly misrepresented themselves as a 'new company' to the BBB to avoid losing accreditation.
• UNRESOLVED SERVICE FAILURES: Multiple reviews document serious failures (lift pump installation caught fire, sewage backup, garbage disposal fell off sink twice) with poor follow-up and management refusing accountability.
• POTENTIAL FAKE REVIEW PATTERN: Approximately 30+ reviews dated 2024-06-06 with identical or near-identical formatting, generic praise, and minimal detail. Many are blank or single-sentence reviews all rated 5.0 on the same date. This clustering is suspicious and suggests possible review manipulation.
• MANAGEMENT RESPONSIVENESS ISSUES: Several reviews document poor management response to complaints, including yelling at customers via speakerphone and delayed responses (2 months).
• RECENCY CONCERN: Most suspicious/generic reviews cluster in June 2024. Older reviews (2012-2019) tend to be more detailed and credible. Recent negative reviews (2024-2025) are specific and detailed, suggesting genuine complaints.
• BAIT-AND-SWITCH ALLEGATIONS: Multiple reviews document quoted service fees that were not credited against final bills as promised, and significant price discrepancies between initial quotes and final charges.

This score should be treated with MODERATE-TO-HIGH caution. While the company demonstrates genuine strengths in professionalism and technical expertise (supported by numerous detailed, credible reviews), the pricing dimension is severely compromised by consistent overcharging complaints and the suspicious clustering of generic 5-star reviews in June 2024 suggests potential review manipulation. The false BBB accreditation claim and documented service failures with poor management follow-up further undermine trust. Customers should independently verify pricing and request detailed written estimates before engaging this company.