Find Nearby Plumbers In Atlanta, Georgia

525 Plumbing has a strong overall reputation built on consistent praise for technical skill, thoroughness, and fair pricing across many reviews. Professionalism scores are pulled down meaningfully by two explicit negative experiences: one reviewer describing an employee named Carl as rude and unprofessional in 2024, and another citing dismissive attitude and poor communication around scheduling. Project completion is similarly mixed — the majority of reviewers report jobs finished well, but one reviewer documented a leaking faucet that failed within 9 months and a scheduling reschedule that suggested smaller jobs were deprioritized. Pricing is a genuine strength, with multiple reviewers independently citing savings compared to competitor quotes and describing rates as reasonable. Experience is the highest-confidence positive dimension, with numerous reviewers specifically calling out diagnostic skill, problem-solving ability, and technical knowledge across complex jobs including gas lines, sewer issues, and water systems.

• The most recent review (2024-09-09) is a 1-star complaint about an employee named Carl being rude and unprofessional — this is the only review from the past 12 months and carries elevated recency weight. It is a meaningful negative signal.
• The majority of positive reviews are from 2013–2023, with several from 2015–2020. Recency of positive feedback is limited; the business's current service quality may differ from its historical reputation.
• Several 5-star reviews share similar language patterns (family business praise, name-dropping Stephanie/Michael, 'highly recommend') but most include specific job details and unique circumstances, reducing fake review concern. No strong evidence of coordinated fake reviews, though the pattern warrants mild caution.
• One reviewer noted a job failure (shower faucet leaking within 9 months) that was not resolved proactively — this is a project completion quality flag.
• Scheduling inflexibility and deprioritization of smaller jobs was explicitly cited in one negative review — a potential systemic issue worth noting.

This WW Score carries HIGH overall confidence due to 15 reviews with usable data across all four dimensions, though the score should be interpreted with caution given that the only review from the past 12 months is a 1-star complaint, and the bulk of positive reviews are more than two years old.

Jon Hall (GTB Plumbing) demonstrates strong performance across all four dimensions. Professionalism is consistently praised with mentions of punctuality, clear communication, politeness, and neat work habits. Pricing is highlighted as fair and competitive, with customers noting savings versus corporate competitors. Project completion is excellent, with all jobs finished completely and on-time, including emergency holiday service. Technical skill and problem-solving ability are evident across diverse plumbing tasks from water heater replacement to leak diagnosis. However, the overall confidence is moderated by the small sample size (7 reviews) and notably dated reviews, with most from 2016–2019.

• RECENCY CONCERN: 5 of 7 reviews are older than 5 years (2016–2019). Only 1 review from past 12 months (2023). This limits confidence in current service quality.
• POTENTIAL FAKE REVIEW PATTERN: All 7 reviews are 5-star ratings with uniformly positive language and no substantive criticisms. No variance in rating distribution is unusual. However, reviews do contain specific details (water heater replacement, valve work, vanity installation, holiday service) which provides some authenticity.
• SMALL SAMPLE SIZE: Only 7 reviews total. Recommend collecting more recent feedback before making high-confidence decisions.

This WW Score of 88.2 should be treated with caution due to small sample size and significant age of most reviews; while the available data is consistently positive and specific, the lack of recent feedback and absence of any critical perspectives limits confidence in how current performance aligns with these historical ratings.

Lloyd Johnson Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism across all reviews, with consistent praise for punctuality, communication, courtesy, and responsiveness (5 mentions). Technical expertise and problem-solving ability are well-documented, particularly Mike's willingness to advise cost-saving measures and provide detailed explanations (4 mentions). Project completion is supported by multiple references to follow-through and customer satisfaction (3 mentions). Pricing feedback is limited but positive, with customers noting fair value despite not being the cheapest option (2 mentions). The company's long-standing reputation since 2013 and willingness to go beyond standard service add credibility.

• Review dates are significantly dated: 4 of 5 reviews are from 2013-2019, with only one from 2016-2017 range. Most data is 5+ years old, limiting recency assessment.
• All 5 reviews are 4.0 or 5.0 stars with no negative feedback. While not necessarily fake, the absence of any critical perspective or constructive complaints is atypical and should be noted.
• Sample size is small (n=5). Confidence in overall score is moderate due to limited volume, despite high mention counts within available reviews.

This WW Score of 88.2 should be treated with moderate confidence due to the small sample size (5 reviews) and significantly dated review history (most from 2013-2019). The score reflects genuine strengths in professionalism and experience, but lacks recent validation and critical perspective needed for high confidence.

Bobby Amos receives consistently strong praise across all four scored dimensions, with professionalism being the most frequently and enthusiastically mentioned quality — reviewers highlight his courtesy, responsiveness, same-day availability, and willingness to go above and beyond even on holidays. Project completion scores are high, supported by multiple accounts of jobs being finished promptly and thoroughly, including one instance where he stayed past another commitment to complete a job correctly. Pricing is noted favorably in three reviews, with customers expressing that costs came in well under expectations and were described as reasonable and honest. Experience is well-supported by accounts of accurate diagnosis, creative problem-solving, and technical knowledge across a range of plumbing issues. The primary limitation of this score is that all six reviews are older than one year, with the most recent dating to December 2022 and the majority clustering between 2015 and 2019, which reduces confidence in how well this score reflects current performance.

• All 6 reviews are older than 12 months. The most recent review is from December 2022; four of six reviews are from 2015–2019. This score may not reflect current service quality.
• All reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative or mixed feedback. While the reviews contain specific details and varied language that reduce fake review suspicion, the uniformity warrants mild caution.
• Review volume is low (6 total). Scores are directionally reliable but should be interpreted conservatively until more recent and numerous reviews are available.

This WW Score is directionally trustworthy given the specificity and variety of the reviews, but should be treated with moderate caution due to the small review volume, the age of the data, and the absence of any critical feedback.

Northside Plumbing earns strong marks for professionalism, with dozens of reviewers citing punctuality, responsiveness, same-day service, and courteous technicians — particularly Chad, Tyler, and Joseph. Pricing is generally viewed as fair and reasonable, though one reviewer flagged a $450 charge for 45 minutes of labor with no parts and an unsolicited upsell, and a separate reviewer was billed $995 for unresolved work. Project completion is the most penalized dimension: there are multiple serious negative reviews describing abandoned work, unresolved drain issues, a billing dispute for incomplete service, and a flooring damage incident that escalated to third-party arbitration — all of which meaningfully drag the score down. Experience scores moderately well, with many reviewers praising diagnostic skill and technical knowledge, but offset by cases where problems were misdiagnosed or left unresolved. The business has a long review history spanning over a decade, and recent reviews (2024–2025) are predominantly positive, suggesting improvement over time.

• 8 reviews contain no text — only a star rating. These were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable data.
• One review (2012-06-14, 1-star) appears to be for a different company entirely ('Able Plumbing on Giles Rd') and was excluded from scoring.
• One review (2012-06-16, 5-star) contains only 'SEE ABOVE' with no usable content and was excluded.
• The 1-star review dated 2024-09-07 alleges discriminatory behavior (refusing service based on sexual orientation). This is a serious conduct flag that falls outside standard scoring dimensions but reflects on professionalism and business ethics.
• A 2024-05-06 review describes a significant project completion failure: technicians spent 5+ hours without resolving a blocked drain, lost the customer record, and then billed $995.39 for unresolved work. This is a major negative signal for project completion.
• A 2013 review describes a flooring damage incident, billing overcharge, and owner hanging up on the customer — escalating to third-party arbitration. While older, it establishes a pattern of dispute-handling concerns.
• A 2019 review describes two running toilets that were not fixed after payment of $400+, requiring a return visit and additional charges. The owner's response was described as dismissive.
• A 2012 review describes a sewer line replacement with poor workmanship: cut cast iron pipe left in crawlspace, poor landscaping restoration, and eventual line collapse attributed to improper installation.
• Several older negative reviews (2012–2015) involve a 'Glen' who appears to be a prior owner or manager. Recent reviews (2018–2025) center on 'Chad.' This ownership/management transition may explain the improvement in recent reviews, but the historical record still affects the overall score.
• Recency note: The majority of reviews from 2024–2025 are overwhelmingly positive (5-star). Reviews from 2012–2015 contain the most serious complaints. Scores were weighted toward recent reviews but historical negatives were not ignored given their severity.
• Mild generic praise pattern detected in several short 5-star reviews (e.g., 'Great service,' 'Excellent and fast,' 'Good guys, good work'), but most are accompanied by specific details or named technicians, reducing fake review concern to LOW.

This WW Score is based on 55 reviews with usable content spanning 2006–2025, with HIGH confidence across all four dimensions due to strong mention counts; however, the score should be interpreted with caution given documented serious project completion failures, a discriminatory conduct allegation, and a pattern of dispute escalation in older reviews that temper an otherwise strong recent track record.

Majestic Plumbing & Electric demonstrates strong professionalism (84.5) with consistently punctual, courteous, and knowledgeable technicians across 287 mentions. Project completion is solid (81.5) with most jobs finished on time and to satisfaction. Technical expertise is high (83.0) with many customers praising problem-solving abilities. However, pricing is a significant weakness (62.0), with 156 mentions revealing widespread complaints about high costs, unexpected charges, bait-and-switch tactics on Angie's List deals, and quotes that are 2-3x market rates. This pricing concern substantially impacts the overall WW Score despite strong performance in other dimensions.

• PRICING PATTERN: Systematic complaints about excessive pricing across 156 reviews. Multiple customers report being charged $300-$700 for jobs competitors quote at $95-$200. This is not isolated—it's a consistent business model issue.
• ANGIE'S LIST BAIT-AND-SWITCH: At least 25+ reviews explicitly describe Angie's List deals as misleading. Advertised prices ($39-$119) become $300-$600+ once technician arrives. Customers report feeling trapped into paying inflated prices after taking time off work.
• DUPLICATE/SUSPICIOUS REVIEWS: Two identical reviews for 'Corbett' (dated 2025-06-07 and 2025-06-04) with identical text suggest possible fake reviews. Multiple other reviews show near-identical phrasing ('did a good job,' 'great job,' 'very professional') with minimal detail.
• NEGATIVE REVIEW CLUSTERING: Approximately 40+ one-star and two-star reviews (8% of total) cite pricing fraud, upselling, and refusal to honor quotes. This is higher than typical for service companies and indicates systemic issues beyond individual technician performance.
• QUOTE INTEGRITY ISSUES: Multiple reviews (2019-07-15, 2019-07-18, 2017-05-08) describe quotes that doubled or tripled between estimate and service day, or were refused to be honored. One customer reported a quote increase from $2,300 to $5,000 the morning of service.
• RECENCY NOTE: Most recent reviews (2025) are overwhelmingly 5-star with minimal detail, while older reviews (2016-2019) contain more balanced criticism. This temporal pattern suggests possible review manipulation or selection bias.
• ESTIMATE FEES: Multiple complaints about $49-$79 'estimate fees' that are supposedly credited but often not, or are applied inconsistently. This practice creates friction and customer distrust.

This WW Score of 78.2 is reliable for professionalism and technical competence but should be heavily weighted toward pricing concerns: Majestic delivers quality work and professional service, but at costs that consistently exceed market rates by 100-300%, with documented patterns of upselling and Angie's List deal manipulation that undermine customer trust despite strong technical execution.