Find Nearby Plumbers Companies In 96744, Hickam, Hawaii

Mel receives strong praise across many reviews for his professionalism, responsiveness, technical versatility, and fair pricing, with numerous customers highlighting his honesty, problem-solving ability, and willingness to go above and beyond. However, the score is meaningfully pulled down by several serious negative reviews: two customers report complete failure to return calls or respond to inquiries, one detailed review describes poor workmanship (a misinstalled microwave), inflated billing for questionable electrical work, and inefficient hourly labor, and another customer noted that Mel changed the agreed-upon rate mid-project and worked around his own schedule causing delays. Pricing confidence is also tempered by one reviewer explicitly alleging overcharging and another feeling taken advantage of on rates. The volume of 'unknown', 'N/A', and blank reviews (approximately 9) provides no usable signal and was excluded from scoring. Overall, Mel appears to be a capable and often well-regarded handyman, but the pattern of responsiveness failures and at least two substantive complaints about pricing and workmanship quality prevent a high score.

• Approximately 9 reviews contain no usable text ('unknown', 'N/A', '.', 'See above') and were excluded from dimension scoring — these inflate the review count without providing evidence.
• Two nearly identical reviews (dated 2014-09-17 and 2014-10-19) share almost word-for-word content about Mel and his brother Dave, suggesting a possible duplicate or coordinated review submission — confidence in those two reviews is reduced.
• Two separate reviewers (2017-05-06 and 2016-06-08) explicitly report that Mel or his team never returned calls or responded to service inquiries, which is a direct negative signal for professionalism and responsiveness.
• One detailed 1-star review (2016-03-15) alleges poor workmanship, inflated billing for electrical work, and inefficient hourly labor practices — this is a substantive complaint that materially affects project completion and pricing scores.
• One 3-star review (2016-02-05) alleges Mel changed the agreed rate after the job and worked around his own schedule, causing delays — this negatively impacts both pricing and project completion scores.
• The majority of reviews are older than 5 years (most from 2013–2016), with only one review from the past 5 years (2019). Recency weighting significantly limits confidence in current performance — the contractor's quality and responsiveness today may differ substantially from what is reflected here.
• The single most recent review (2019) is positive, but one data point is insufficient to establish a current performance trend.

This WW Score carries moderate-to-high structural confidence due to the volume of reviews with usable data, but should be treated with caution given that the overwhelming majority of reviews are more than 5 years old, several reviews contain no usable content, and there are credible negative reports regarding responsiveness, pricing integrity, and workmanship quality that prevent this score from being considered a reliable indicator of current performance.