Find Nearby Plumbers Companies In 96701, Honolulu, Hawaii

Aloha Aina Plumbing receives overwhelmingly positive feedback across all four dimensions, with professionalism being the most consistently praised attribute — punctuality, communication (especially from Keiko), courteous attitudes, and cleanliness are mentioned in the vast majority of reviews. Project completion scores are very high, with reviewers repeatedly noting jobs finished same-day or next-day, thorough follow-through, and no abandoned work, though one 1-star review raises a credible concern about billing discrepancies and alleged post-review harassment by the owner. Pricing is generally praised as fair and transparent, with multiple reviewers noting upfront quotes and no surprise charges; however, the single negative review alleges overcharging and billing manipulation, which moderately tempers the pricing score. Experience and workmanship are consistently highlighted, with reviewers noting Albert's problem-solving ability on complex jobs, technical knowledge, and quality of work across a wide range of plumbing tasks.

• One 1-star review (2021-10-22) alleges post-review harassment by the owner, retaliatory invoicing, and billing for time not worked. This is a serious conduct flag that warrants attention despite being a single data point among 83 reviews.
• All other 82 reviews are 5-star ratings with zero 2, 3, or 4-star reviews. While the reviews contain specific details and varied language that reduce fake review suspicion, the complete absence of any middle-ground ratings is statistically unusual and warrants mild caution.
• Review language is largely specific and varied with named individuals, job descriptions, and situational details — this reduces (but does not eliminate) concern about authenticity.
• Recency note: The majority of reviews span 2021–2024, with a strong cluster in 2022–2024. The score is well-supported by recent data. Reviews older than 2021 are not present, so recency is not a concern here.
• The negative review's allegation of owner calling the reviewer multiple times to yell at them after a 3-star review, and then sending a second invoice as retaliation, is a significant professionalism red flag that is not reflected in any other review but should not be dismissed.

This WW Score is based on a large sample of 83 reviews with strong recency and high mention counts across all dimensions, making it statistically reliable; however, the single credible negative review alleging billing misconduct and owner harassment introduces a meaningful caveat that prospective customers should weigh independently.

Mana Plumbing demonstrates exceptional performance across all four dimensions. Professionalism is the strongest area, with 16 reviews explicitly praising punctuality, responsiveness, communication, and courteous demeanor. Project completion is consistently reliable with 14 mentions of timely, thorough work and follow-through. Pricing receives strong marks from 10 reviews highlighting fair estimates, transparent billing, and honest cost management. Technical expertise is evident in 9 reviews describing skilled diagnostics, efficient problem-solving, and knowledgeable guidance. The WW Score of 89.2 reflects a highly trustworthy contractor with broad, consistent positive evidence.

• All 18 reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative feedback or critical comments. While this is not necessarily indicative of fake reviews, the complete absence of any constructive criticism or minor complaints is statistically unusual and warrants noting.
• One review (Ian Wheeler, dated 2024-06-09 and 2024-02-01) appears to be duplicated with identical text and professional signature, suggesting possible review platform duplication rather than separate customer experiences.
• One review (Caesar, dated 2017-11-25) is significantly older than the rest (7+ years), while 16 of 18 reviews are from 2024-2025. This older review should carry less weight in assessing current service quality.
• Review mentions both 'Matt' and 'Mike' and 'Caesar' as service providers, suggesting this may be a team operation. Individual performance variation is not captured in aggregate scoring.

This WW Score of 89.2 is highly reliable given the large sample size (18 reviews), consistent positive evidence across all dimensions, and recent review dates (16 of 18 from 2024-2025). However, the complete absence of any negative feedback or mixed reviews should be interpreted with appropriate caution—this score reflects an exceptionally strong reputation but may not capture the full spectrum of customer experiences.

Drain Daddy demonstrates strong overall performance across all dimensions, with particular strength in project completion (86.0) and professionalism (84.5). The company excels at responsiveness, punctuality, and follow-through on warranty commitments. Pricing is generally perceived as fair and competitive (78.0), though some customers note it is not the absolute lowest. Technical skill and workmanship are consistently praised (85.5). However, two significant negative reviews from 2016-2018 detailing unprofessional conduct, unsanitary practices, and billing disputes create material concerns that prevent a higher overall score despite the overwhelmingly positive majority.

• Two highly detailed negative reviews (1-star ratings from 2016-07-29 and 2018-08-07) describe serious professionalism issues including unsanitary work practices, aggressive billing tactics, and poor customer service. These are specific and credible complaints that contradict the predominantly positive pattern.
• Review from 2016-07-29 alleges dirty work practices, improper handling of customer belongings, sewage contamination of carpet, and unfair blame assignment for building-wide plumbing issues. This review is detailed and includes reference to supporting documentation.
• Review from 2018-08-07 complains of excessive pricing ($130 for 2-minute drain clearing) and aggressive payment demands (4-day payment deadline). While the customer's tone is hostile, the complaint about pricing for minimal work is substantive.
• Multiple reviews from 2013-2016 period (older than 12 months) comprise approximately 70% of dataset. More recent reviews (2024, 2022) are uniformly 5-star with limited detail, which could suggest selection bias in what gets posted recently.
• Three reviews marked 'unknown' with 5-star ratings lack any substantive content and cannot be meaningfully evaluated.
• One review (2013-06-20) explicitly states 'you have to keep an eye on him because he tries to cut corners,' suggesting potential quality control issues.
• One review (2013-05-15, 3-star) reports overcharging and refusal to apply senior discount until customer negotiated, indicating possible pricing integrity concerns.
• Recency concern: Only 3 reviews from past 12 months (2024, 2022 dates), all 5-star. Bulk of data is 8-12 years old, limiting current reliability assessment.

This WW Score of 82.3 should be treated with MODERATE-to-HIGH caution. While the majority of reviews (98 of 100) are positive and detailed, the presence of two credible, specific negative reviews describing serious professionalism and billing issues creates legitimate concerns about consistency. The dataset is heavily weighted toward reviews from 2011-2016 (70+ reviews), making current performance assessment difficult. Recent reviews (past 12 months) are limited to 3 entries, all 5-star with minimal detail. The score reflects strong historical performance but may not accurately represent current service quality or consistency. Prospective customers should review the detailed negative complaints from 2016-2018 before engaging this contractor.

CJ Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism with responsive communication, punctual arrivals, and courteous staff across most engagements. Pricing is generally fair and transparent, with many customers praising value compared to competitors, though some disputes over estimates exist. Project completion shows mixed results: many jobs are finished efficiently and thoroughly, but several reviews document incomplete work, abandoned jobs, and follow-up visits required. Technical expertise is solid with skilled diagnostics and quality workmanship, though a subset of reviews allege misdiagnosis and unnecessary work. The company's performance is notably inconsistent across different technicians and time periods.

• INCONSISTENCY PATTERN: Reviews show stark polarization—predominantly 5-star praise (majority recent) versus serious 1-star complaints (mix of recent and older). This suggests either significant service variability by technician or genuine quality control issues.
• MISDIAGNOSIS ALLEGATIONS: Multiple detailed reviews (2023, 2021, 2014) allege incorrect diagnoses leading to unnecessary work, wall damage, and inflated costs. Examples include water heater replacement when valve stem was issue, and false sewer pipe diagnosis.
• PROJECT COMPLETION CONCERNS: Several reviews document incomplete work requiring callbacks, abandoned jobs, and drywall damage left unrepaired. One review details work done to wrong unit entirely.
• COMMUNICATION FAILURES: Multiple 1-star reviews cite missed appointments, no-shows, lack of follow-up, and poor scheduling despite confirmation. One customer lost work day due to no-show.
• PRICING DISPUTES: While many praise fair pricing, others report significant cost overruns, surprise charges, and disputes over quoted vs. actual amounts. One review documents $1400 vs. $1600 discrepancy with aggressive all-caps response.
• DRIVER CONDUCT: Two separate reviews (2021, 2013) report aggressive/reckless driving by company vehicles, suggesting potential safety and professionalism concerns.
• RECENCY BIAS NOTED: Most 5-star reviews cluster in 2021-2025 (recent), while serious 1-star complaints span 2013-2021. Recent reviews are overwhelmingly positive, but historical pattern shows significant problems.
• FAKE REVIEW RISK—MODERATE: Several 5-star reviews are extremely generic with minimal detail (empty text fields, single sentences). However, majority of positive reviews contain specific names, dates, and detailed narratives, reducing overall fake review suspicion.
• SAMPLE COMPOSITION: 4 reviews have empty text fields but assigned 5-star ratings, limiting data quality for those entries.

This WW Score of 78.2 should be treated with CAUTION. While based on substantial data (127 reviews, HIGH confidence in dimensions), the extreme polarization between recent glowing reviews and historical serious complaints suggests either genuine operational improvement or potential review manipulation. The score reflects current performance trend but masks significant historical service failures. Customers should request references from recent jobs and clarify pricing/scope in writing before committing.

Furuta Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism and technical expertise, with consistently positive feedback on technician courtesy, responsiveness, and skill level. However, pricing remains a significant concern, with multiple customers reporting high costs, lack of itemized invoices, and feeling overcharged relative to work performed. Project completion shows mixed results—while most jobs are finished promptly and well, several reviews document incomplete work, delayed follow-ups on proposals, and unresolved issues requiring additional service calls. The company excels in communication and punctuality but struggles with transparent pricing practices and consistent project follow-through.

• PRICING INCONSISTENCY: Multiple reviews (6+) explicitly criticize pricing as 'overpriced,' 'arm and leg,' or 'ridiculously high.' One senior citizen reported being charged $900 for work a friend completed for $60. Another customer was quoted $1,800 then offered $900 'as a side job.' This pattern suggests potential predatory pricing or inconsistent rate structures.
• INVOICE/TRANSPARENCY ISSUE: At least 2 reviews explicitly mention lack of itemized invoices and missing cost breakdowns, creating friction with property management and insurance claims.
• PROJECT COMPLETION GAPS: Multiple reviews (4+) document incomplete work cycles: leak investigations that don't result in quotes for days/weeks, jobs requiring multiple appointments, and one case where a clogged toilet reclogged shortly after service. One customer waited over a week for a proposal after paying $250 for leak investigation.
• COMMUNICATION BREAKDOWN: Several reviews (3+) from 2023 describe poor responsiveness to follow-up inquiries, delayed quote turnarounds (72+ hours despite 24-48 hour promise), and loss of interest when customers mentioned shopping around.
• RECENCY PATTERN: Most negative reviews (1-star and 2-star) cluster in 2023 and early 2024, suggesting potential operational or policy changes. Older reviews (2020-2022) are predominantly 5-star with fewer complaints about pricing.
• POTENTIAL FAKE REVIEW RISK - MODERATE: Several 5-star reviews contain nearly identical phrasing ('mahalo,' 'highly recommend,' specific technician name-drops with effusive praise). However, reviews are sufficiently detailed and varied in specifics to suggest authenticity rather than fabrication. No clear evidence of coordinated fake reviews, but some reviews read as overly polished.

This WW Score of 78.2 is reliable at HIGH confidence due to 47 reviews with substantial data across all dimensions. However, the score masks a critical bifurcation: the company excels in professionalism and technical skill but has serious, documented issues with pricing transparency and project completion consistency. Customers should expect quality workmanship and professional service but should obtain detailed, itemized quotes in writing and clarify all scope and pricing before work begins. Recent negative reviews suggest operational challenges that may not be fully resolved.

All Aloha Plumbing (operating also under prior names Hawaii Drain Pros and Drain Pro) demonstrates strong professionalism in the field — the majority of reviews praise individual technicians as courteous, knowledgeable, thorough, and responsive, including after-hours and emergency availability. Project completion is generally solid, with most jobs described as finished correctly and on time, though a meaningful minority of reviews cite missed or rescheduled appointments, one instance of work left incomplete, and a case where a technician admitted he could not service the unit. Experience scores well overall, with many reviewers highlighting skilled diagnostics, camera inspections, and quality workmanship, though at least two reviews describe technicians who appeared unknowledgeable or failed to perform basic diagnostics. Pricing is the single most damaging dimension: a large and consistent pattern of reviews across multiple years describes quotes that are dramatically above market rate — sometimes 3x to 10x comparable estimates — with a recurring pattern of price negotiation on-site that suggests initial quotes are inflated, and multiple reviewers report feeling taken advantage of, including elderly and vulnerable customers.

• PRICING PATTERN — SEVERE: A large volume of reviews (spanning 2021–2025) consistently describe pricing as extreme, with quotes for simple jobs ranging from $550 to $3,000+ where comparable work was available for a fraction of the cost. This is not isolated; it is a systemic pattern across many technicians and years.
• PREDATORY PRICING CONCERN: Multiple reviews specifically mention elderly or financially vulnerable customers being quoted prices 5–10x market rate, with technicians returning multiple times with lower offers only after refusal — a classic high-pressure sales tactic.
• APPOINTMENT RELIABILITY ISSUES: At least 4–5 reviews describe missed, rescheduled, or no-show appointments, including one review where a technician never arrived during a late-night emergency despite a confirmed window.
• INCOMPLETE WORK / MISREPRESENTATION: One review (2024) describes a technician who refused to service a portable tankless water heater he was dispatched to repair, claiming ignorance of the unit, and the company failed to follow up or refund the dispatch fee. Another review (2023) describes a job left with a leak that required a return visit.
• INVOICE TRANSPARENCY ISSUES: Multiple reviews note non-itemized invoices, invoices not delivered at all, or billing discrepancies (one reviewer was charged across two overlapping estimates totaling $2,600).
• REVIEW SUPPRESSION ATTEMPT: At least two reviews explicitly quote the company's post-service email asking unhappy customers NOT to leave a review and instead contact the company directly — a practice that artificially inflates public ratings.
• FAKE/IRRELEVANT REVIEW: One review (2024-04-14) is clearly not a legitimate customer review — it accuses the company of money laundering based on seeing ads in Florida and has no plumbing service content. This review was excluded from scoring.
• BLANK REVIEWS: Several reviews contain no text (only a star rating). These were counted in total reviews analyzed but excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable data.
• RECENCY NOTE: Reviews span from 2019 to June 2025. The pricing complaints are present across the entire date range and are not improving over time — they appear in 2025 reviews as well as older ones.
• BUSINESS NAME CHANGES: The company appears to have operated under at least three names — Hawaii Drain Pros, Drain Pro, and All Aloha Plumbing — which may complicate reputation tracking and could be a flag for consumers researching the business.

This WW Score is based on a large and diverse review set (109 reviews) spanning over five years, giving HIGH statistical confidence; however, the score should be interpreted with caution on the pricing dimension specifically, as the pattern of extreme overcharging is one of the most consistent and well-documented findings in this dataset and represents a material risk to consumers.