Find Nearby Plumbers In Miami, Florida

Kendall Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism with consistent praise for punctuality, politeness, and responsiveness across multiple reviews. Pricing is a notable strength, with customers repeatedly highlighting fair and transparent quotes compared to competitors, though one review noted slightly elevated costs. Project completion is solid with evidence of same-day service, problem resolution, and follow-up callbacks. Technical skill and problem-solving ability are evident from reviews describing complex issues (backflow, water heater replacement, correcting prior work) being handled competently. The primary concern is the 1-star licensing fraud allegation from 2023, which significantly impacts overall trustworthiness despite positive customer feedback.

• CRITICAL: One review (2023-09-15) alleges unlicensed and fraudulent contractor status with references to license verification searches. This is a serious legal/compliance red flag that contradicts positive customer reviews and raises questions about legitimacy.
• Two reviews are extremely old (2006, 2011) and should be weighted minimally in current assessment.
• Multiple 5-star reviews from 2022-2023 show similar positive phrasing patterns (emphasis on 'reasonable pricing', 'professional', 'fast service') which could suggest curated or filtered reviews, though specificity varies enough to avoid full fake review classification.
• Review from 2006 mentions needing two calls to get service, suggesting potential responsiveness issues in past operations.

This score should be treated with significant caution due to the unresolved licensing fraud allegation from 2023, which directly contradicts the positive customer feedback and raises serious questions about the contractor's legal standing and legitimacy regardless of service quality ratings.

USA Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism across multiple reviews, with consistent praise for punctuality, communication, and courteous behavior. Pricing feedback is positive but mentioned in only 3 reviews, with customers noting fair rates and no overcharging. Project completion is well-documented across 4 reviews showing timely arrival and thorough work. Technical skill and workmanship quality are consistently praised. However, the overall score is tempered by the small sample size (6 reviews) and the age of most reviews (4 of 6 are from 2017–2020), limiting confidence in current performance.

• Review recency concern: 4 of 6 reviews are older than 4 years (2017–2020). Only 1 review is from 2024. Current service quality cannot be reliably assessed from this dataset.
• All reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative feedback. While not necessarily fake, the complete absence of any critical comments or minor complaints is unusual and should be noted.
• Small sample size (6 reviews) limits statistical reliability. Recommend collecting more recent reviews before making high-confidence business decisions.

This score should be treated with caution due to limited recent data and small sample size; the 2024 review suggests current operations, but 4 of 6 reviews predate 2021, making it difficult to assess whether current performance matches historical ratings.

Gonzalez Plumbing demonstrates strong technical capability and generally reliable project completion, with multiple reviews praising speed, efficiency, and quality workmanship on complex jobs. Professionalism is solid across most interactions, though one significant negative review documents rudeness and billing discrepancies that materially impact this dimension. Pricing is generally fair and transparent, but the documented overcharging incident and receipt falsification allegation create meaningful concern about pricing integrity. The WW Score of 82.3 reflects strong fundamentals tempered by one serious service failure that cannot be ignored.

• CRITICAL: One 1-star review (2021-01-29) alleges serious misconduct including rudeness, overcharging for unnecessary service call, and receipt falsification showing false payment amount. This is a specific, detailed complaint with concrete allegations that materially contradicts the otherwise positive pattern.
• RECENCY CONCERN: Two reviews are significantly older (2022 and 2018), limiting their relevance to current service quality. Most recent reviews (May 2025) are uniformly 5-star, but sample size remains small.
• SMALL SAMPLE SIZE: Only 6 reviews total limits confidence in overall assessment. Scores are based on 3-4 mentions per dimension, which is the threshold between LIMITED and MODERATE confidence.
• PATTERN NOTE: Five of six reviews are 5-star with generic positive language; one is 1-star with specific allegations. This polarization warrants caution in interpreting the overall score.

This score should be treated with caution due to small sample size (6 reviews) and a serious documented service failure that contradicts the predominantly positive pattern; the score reflects genuine strengths in technical work but is tempered by credible allegations of unprofessional conduct and billing dishonesty that cannot be dismissed.

Bernard receives consistently positive feedback across all four dimensions, with professionalism and pricing being the most frequently cited strengths. Multiple reviewers explicitly praised his punctuality, responsiveness, and fair transparent pricing with no hidden charges. His project completion record is bolstered by a notable callback instance where he returned the next day to resolve an unfinished issue, demonstrating follow-through. Workmanship quality is described positively but with limited specific technical detail, keeping the experience score conservative. The overall picture is genuinely positive, though the small review pool and age of most reviews limit full confidence.

• Only 5 reviews total — WW Score should be treated as directional, not definitive.
• 3 of 5 reviews are older than 3 years (2018, 2021 x2), and only 1 review falls within the past 12 months (July 2024). Recency weighting is a concern — recent performance may differ from historical pattern.
• All reviews are 5-star with no negative feedback. While not conclusively fake, the absence of any criticism across all reviews warrants mild caution. Reviews do contain specific details (repeat usage, named contractor, specific scenarios) which reduces but does not eliminate fake review concern.
• No reviews mention any negative experience, pricing dispute, or incomplete work — absence of complaints is not scored as evidence of quality per scoring rules.

This WW Score carries MODERATE reliability due to a small review pool of only 5 reviews, a majority of which are over two years old, though the presence of specific, credible details in individual reviews lends some authenticity to the overall positive signal.

Lester's Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism and technical expertise across most reviews, with consistent praise for responsiveness, communication, and skilled workmanship. However, significant concerns emerge around pricing fairness and project completion reliability. Two detailed negative reviews from 2016–2018 describe repeated failures on the same repair, refusal to stand behind work, and aggressive customer service, which substantially offset the numerous positive recent reviews. The company shows a stark performance divide: recent reviews (2019–2024) are uniformly excellent, while older reviews reveal serious quality and integrity issues. Recency bias and potential selective review patterns warrant caution.

• RECENCY CONCERN: 7 of 11 reviews are from 2019 or later; only 2 negative reviews are from 2016–2018. This temporal clustering suggests possible review management or selective posting.
• PATTERN INCONSISTENCY: Positive reviews are highly detailed and specific (naming Javier/Javier Delgado, describing exact work); negative reviews are also detailed but describe systemic failures. This is not a fake review pattern, but rather suggests genuine service quality improvement or staff turnover over time.
• PRICING CONTRADICTION: Positive reviews praise 'very reasonable' and 'couldn't believe the price' pricing, while negative reviews cite 'sky high prices' and 'extremely high' proposals. This suggests either price increases over time or inconsistent pricing practices.
• PROJECT COMPLETION RED FLAG: One 1-star review documents three failures of the same repair (2017, 2017, 2018) with refusal to warranty work or speak to owner. This is a serious integrity issue that contradicts the 'reliable and dependable' claim in other reviews.
• VERY OLD REVIEWS: Two reviews are from 2004 and 2012 (8–20 years old); their relevance to current service quality is minimal.

This score should be treated with MODERATE confidence. While recent reviews (2019–2024) are consistently strong and detailed, two serious negative reviews from 2016–2018 describing repeated failures, warranty refusal, and unprofessional conduct significantly undermine trust. The stark temporal divide suggests either substantial service improvement or selective review visibility. The WW Score of 79.8 reflects this tension: strong on professionalism and expertise, weak on pricing consistency and completion reliability. Prospective customers should request references for similar work and clarify warranty terms in writing before engaging.

Lasseter Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism with consistent mentions of punctuality, courtesy, and communication across multiple reviews. Technical skill and problem-solving ability are well-documented, particularly Lee's ability to diagnose and resolve issues quickly. Pricing is perceived as fair and competitive. However, project completion is significantly impacted by two older negative reviews (2014–2015) alleging unauthorized work and incomplete problem-solving, which create material concerns despite the predominance of positive recent reviews praising reliability and follow-through.

• Two significant negative reviews from 2014–2015 allege unauthorized work and poor problem-solving; these are older but serious and not addressed in recent reviews.
• Most positive reviews (5 of 6) are from 2017–2022, while negative reviews are from 2014–2015; recency bias favors current performance but historical issues remain unresolved in public record.
• Positive reviews show some generic phrasing ('best plumbers', 'highly recommend') but include specific details (Lee's 10-minute fix, water pressure/temperature issue, 10-year relationship), reducing fake review suspicion.
• No recent reviews (past 12 months) provided; most data is 2–10 years old, limiting confidence in current operational standards.

This score should be treated with moderate caution: while recent positive reviews are detailed and consistent, the absence of reviews from the past 2 years and the presence of unresolved serious complaints from 2014–2015 create uncertainty about current reliability and whether past issues have been systematically addressed.