Find Nearby Plumbers In Honolulu, Hawaii

Larry's Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism with consistent punctuality, courteous communication, and responsive customer service across 89 mentions. Technical expertise and problem-solving ability are well-documented with 41 mentions of skilled workmanship. However, project completion shows concerning patterns with 58 mentions revealing multiple instances of no-shows, incomplete work, callbacks not honored, and follow-through failures. Pricing presents a mixed picture across 32 mentions: while many customers praise fair and reasonable rates, a notable subset reports overcharging, hidden fees, and inflated estimates. The company's overall reliability is undermined by documented communication breakdowns and inconsistent service delivery.

• PATTERN DETECTED: Multiple reviews (2022-2023) document serious project completion failures including no-shows on scheduled appointments, failure to return calls, incomplete diagnostics, and lack of follow-through on promised callbacks. This represents a systemic issue beyond isolated incidents.
• PRICING INCONSISTENCY: Significant variance in customer perception of pricing fairness. While majority praise reasonable rates, multiple detailed complaints document overcharging (e.g., $1,100 for 2 hours of work, $1,030 for water heater installation labor only, $65 undisclosed estimate fees). This suggests either inconsistent pricing practices or poor communication of costs.
• COMMUNICATION FAILURES: At least 6 reviews explicitly mention failure to return calls, missed appointments without notification, and poor coordination between office and field staff. One 2022 review documents 2+ weeks without hot water due to repeated no-shows and lack of communication.
• QUALITY CONTROL CONCERNS: Several reviews report incomplete work requiring callbacks (shower handle spinning after repair, dishwasher hose still leaking, water heater issues persisting). One review mentions unnecessary repairs and sloppy work.
• RECENCY PATTERN: Most negative reviews cluster in 2022-2023 period, suggesting potential operational decline or staffing issues in recent years. Recent 2025 reviews are predominantly positive, indicating possible recent improvements.
• FAKE REVIEW RISK - MODERATE: Approximately 15 reviews contain only generic praise with no specific details (e.g., 'Excellent', 'Great job', 'unknown', single-sentence comments). However, majority of reviews contain sufficient specific detail to appear authentic. No evidence of identical phrasing across multiple reviews.
• INCONSISTENT TECHNICIAN QUALITY: Named technicians (Robert, Chandler, Tim, Jose) receive consistent praise, while unnamed or different technicians appear in negative reviews, suggesting quality varies significantly by individual technician.

This WW Score of 78.2 should be treated with CAUTION despite HIGH overall confidence. While professionalism and experience scores are well-supported by extensive mentions, the project completion dimension reveals critical systemic failures in follow-through and communication that directly contradict the positive professionalism ratings. The company appears to excel at initial customer interaction but struggles with execution and accountability. Recent 2025 reviews suggest improvement, but the pattern of documented failures in 2022-2023 indicates this is a company with inconsistent reliability that requires careful consideration before engagement.

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.

Little Big Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism with consistent punctuality, responsive communication, and courteous technicians across 58 reviews. Technical expertise and workmanship quality are well-documented with 35 mentions of skilled problem-solving and efficient job execution. Project completion is generally reliable (79/100) with most jobs finished as promised, though some follow-up and callback issues are noted. Pricing emerges as the primary weakness (68/100) with 18 mentions revealing significant customer concerns: multiple complaints about high estimates ($400-$1,100 for routine jobs), non-transparent pricing practices, surprise charges, and service fees that customers perceive as excessive or unethical. Several reviews explicitly compare LBP's pricing unfavorably to competitors offering the same work at 50-70% lower cost.

• PRICING PATTERN: Systematic complaints about high pricing and non-transparent billing across multiple years (2013-2024). At least 12 reviews explicitly criticize pricing as unreasonable, with customers reporting they found cheaper alternatives or felt gouged.
• SERVICE FEE CONTROVERSY: Multiple reviews (2018, 2016) report $75 service/estimate fees that are not applied to work, which customers state is non-standard in the industry. This practice appears to have generated significant customer dissatisfaction.
• FOLLOW-UP FAILURES: Several reviews (2015, 2020, 2023) document poor follow-up after initial service calls, with customers unable to reach the company by phone or email for days/weeks.
• QUALITY CONTROL ISSUES: At least 5 reviews document significant errors in execution (wrong valve placement, incorrect water heater size, cartridge not removed before soldering, broken toilet flange, incomplete work) that required callbacks or customer complaints.
• WARRANTY COMPANY FRICTION: Multiple reviews involving American Home Shield (AHS) show communication breakdowns, disputes over coverage, and customer perception that LBP prioritizes upselling over honest diagnosis.
• RECENCY NOTE: Most negative reviews cluster in 2013-2020 period. Recent reviews (2023-2024) show improved professionalism but pricing complaints persist. This suggests some operational improvements but unresolved pricing strategy issues.
• OWNER RESPONSE PATTERN: One review (2019) documents owner attempting to pressure customer to remove negative review, which raises ethical concerns about reputation management.

This WW Score of 78.2 is reliable and should be trusted, supported by 80 reviews with HIGH confidence in professionalism and experience dimensions. However, the score is significantly dragged down by legitimate, well-documented pricing concerns that appear systematic rather than isolated. Customers consistently report LBP's prices as 30-70% higher than competitors for identical work, and multiple reviews document questionable billing practices. The company excels at technical execution and customer interaction but has a documented pattern of aggressive pricing that warrants serious consideration before engaging their services.

Matt's Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism with consistent praise for responsiveness, punctuality, and courteous behavior across 32 reviews. Project completion is solid with most jobs finished on time and thoroughly, though some concerns about follow-through on callbacks and post-job cleanup issues appear in negative reviews. Pricing is generally viewed as fair and reasonable (16 mentions), though a few customers reported high costs or unexpected charges. Experience and workmanship are well-regarded (18 mentions), with customers noting skilled problem-solving and quality work. However, multiple serious complaints about dishonesty, misdiagnosis, and poor communication in critical situations significantly impact overall trustworthiness.

• CRITICAL: Multiple reviews (2024-02-01, 2023-06-10, 2016-06-11, 2016-04-27) allege dishonesty, misdiagnosis, and refusal to cooperate with insurance claims. These are serious integrity concerns that contradict the predominantly positive rating pattern.
• COMMUNICATION INCONSISTENCY: Several reviews (2023-06-26, 2018-03-23, 2020-06-10) report difficulty reaching the company or lack of callback despite claims of 24-hour service. This contradicts the high professionalism scores from other reviews.
• EMPTY/GENERIC REVIEWS: 8 reviews contain no text or only generic praise ('unknown', blank text, 'Best plumber around!'), suggesting possible review manipulation or placeholder entries.
• DUPLICATE NEGATIVE REVIEW: The 2016-06-11 and 2016-04-27 reviews are identical word-for-word, indicating either a duplicate submission or coordinated complaint.
• RETIREMENT NOTICE (2019-12-04): One review suggests Matt was retiring, yet reviews continue through 2025. Unclear if business continued under same management or if this affects service consistency.
• QUALITY INCONSISTENCY: Stark contrast between glowing 5-star reviews praising professionalism and detailed 1-star reviews alleging incompetence and dishonesty suggests either highly variable service quality or potential fake reviews in one direction.

This WW Score of 78.2 should be treated with CAUTION despite HIGH overall confidence. While the score is based on substantial data (67 reviews), the presence of serious allegations of dishonesty, misdiagnosis, and insurance claim refusal in multiple detailed negative reviews—combined with communication inconsistencies and suspicious review patterns—suggests the predominantly positive rating may not fully reflect actual service reliability. Customers should independently verify recent service quality and request detailed written estimates before engaging.

Hawaii Drain Cleaning Squad demonstrates strong professionalism, fair pricing, and technical expertise across most customer interactions. Jack and his team consistently receive praise for responsiveness, communication, cleanliness, and knowledgeable service delivery. However, the WW Score is significantly impacted by a pattern of project completion failures: multiple customers report no-shows, missed appointments, extended delays, poor follow-up communication, and abandoned jobs spanning weeks or months. While the majority of reviews are highly positive (5-star ratings), the severity and frequency of completion failures—particularly evident in reviews from 2019-2021—create material reliability concerns that offset otherwise strong performance in professionalism and expertise.

• CRITICAL: Pattern of no-shows and missed appointments documented in at least 4 reviews (2019-05-21, 2020-01-21, 2021-02-13, 2022-01-29). This represents a systemic project completion risk.
• CRITICAL: Extended project delays and poor communication documented in 2021-02-13 review spanning 4+ months with multiple failed rescheduling attempts and unresponsive follow-up.
• CRITICAL: Two reviews (2022-01-29, 2022-01-20) describe complete communication breakdown after missed appointments, with customers reporting being ignored for extended periods.
• Recency concern: Most severe completion failures occurred 2019-2021. Recent reviews (2022-2023) show improvement, but the 2023-12-19 refund update suggests ongoing customer dissatisfaction with membership service.
• Inconsistency: Stark contrast between majority 5-star reviews praising quick response and completion versus minority 1-star reviews documenting systematic abandonment. This suggests inconsistent service delivery or possible capacity management issues.
• One review (2020-01-25) mentions other contractors critiqued Jack's initial work quality, though this is isolated and not corroborated.

This WW Score of 78.2 should be treated with caution: while professionalism and expertise scores are well-supported by high-mention counts, the project completion score is significantly dragged down by documented failures that represent material business risk. The score reflects a company with strong initial customer interactions but concerning follow-through and accountability issues, particularly for complex or delayed projects. Prospective customers should prioritize clarifying completion timelines and communication protocols before engaging.

Kawamoto's Plumbing demonstrates strong technical expertise and fair pricing, with most customers praising workmanship quality and reasonable rates. However, a persistent pattern of communication failures significantly undermines the overall score. While 48 reviews mention professionalism positively (punctuality, friendliness, cleanliness), 8 reviews explicitly cite serious responsiveness issues—missed callbacks, no follow-up on quotes, and failure to honor scheduling commitments. This creates a critical reliability gap: the business excels when engaged but struggles with initial and ongoing communication. Project completion is solid when work begins, but several customers report abandoned follow-ups and scheduling breakdowns that prevented jobs from starting.

• CRITICAL PATTERN: 8 reviews (13% of total) explicitly cite communication failures—no callbacks, unanswered calls/texts, missed appointments, and broken follow-up promises. This is a systemic issue, not isolated incidents.
• Recency concern: Most negative reviews (communication failures) cluster in 2017–2018 (older), while recent reviews (2024) show improved responsiveness. However, the pattern recurs across multiple years, suggesting cyclical capacity/management issues.
• Confidence in Professionalism score is tempered by the communication failures, which are a core professionalism dimension. The high mention count masks a serious quality-of-service problem.
• No fake review patterns detected. Reviews are detailed, specific, and varied in language. Negative reviews are substantive and credible.

This WW Score of 78.2 is reliable but should be interpreted cautiously: the business delivers excellent work quality and fair pricing when engaged, but prospective customers face a material risk of communication delays and scheduling failures before work even begins. The score reflects strong technical performance undermined by operational/responsiveness weaknesses that have persisted across multiple years.