Find Nearby Plumbers Companies In 99216, Coeur D Alene, Idaho

Noble Plumbing & Heating has an overwhelmingly positive review history spanning roughly 2010–2024, with the vast majority of customers praising punctuality, courteous behavior, shoe covers, cleanup, and clear communication — all strong professionalism indicators. Pricing is generally described as fair, reasonable, or better than competitors, though one 2024 review raises a legitimate concern about being charged two service call fees for a single incomplete repair, which tempers the pricing score. Project completion is strong overall, with many reviewers noting jobs were finished on time and as quoted, but a handful of reviews cite missed callbacks, a no-show appointment, an unreachable voicemail, and one instance where the job was not fully resolved on the first visit — preventing a top-tier score. Experience scores well, with multiple reviewers noting Richard and his team solved problems that other plumbers could not, demonstrated technical depth, and offered honest advice even when it cost them revenue. The score is modestly reduced by the heavy age of most reviews (the majority predate 2015) and a small number of negative responsiveness incidents.

• RECENCY WARNING: The overwhelming majority of reviews are from 2010–2014. Only a small number of reviews are from 2015 or later, with just one review from the past 12 months (2024). The WW Score is heavily influenced by older data and may not reflect current service quality.
• BLANK/UNKNOWN REVIEWS: At least 4 reviews contain only 'unknown' or a single punctuation mark ('.') with no usable text. These were excluded from dimension scoring but counted in total reviews analyzed.
• RESPONSIVENESS PATTERN: Multiple reviews (at least 3) cite failure to return calls or missed appointments. While most were resolved or explained, this is a recurring theme that warrants a flag.
• PRICING CONCERN (2024): The most recent review (March 2024, 2-star) explicitly criticizes being charged two service call fees for one incomplete repair with no prior disclosure. This is a substantive complaint and was weighted accordingly in the pricing score.
• POTENTIAL GENERIC PRAISE: A number of short reviews (e.g., 'Good no problem', 'It went great.', 'See above.', 'great.') provide minimal detail. While not conclusively fake, they add limited scoring value and were treated conservatively.

This WW Score carries HIGH statistical confidence due to the large volume of reviews, but should be treated with moderate practical caution given that most reviews are 8–14 years old and the most recent substantive review raises a pricing transparency concern.

This contractor shows strong project completion and technical skill, with multiple reviews praising quality workmanship, reliability, and problem-solving ability. However, pricing is a significant weakness—multiple recent reviews (2024, 2022) explicitly cite excessive charges, with quotes 3x higher than competitors and installation costs exceeding equipment costs. Professionalism is mixed: older reviews praise punctuality and courtesy, but a 2024 review reports refusal to honor callbacks and a 2022 review cites communication failures. The dataset is heavily skewed toward older reviews (2007–2013), with only 3 recent reviews (2024, 2022, 2017), limiting confidence in current performance.

• RECENCY CONCERN: 13 of 20 reviews are from 2007–2013 (10+ years old). Only 3 reviews from 2017 onward. Recent reviews (2024, 2022) are significantly more negative, suggesting possible service decline.
• FAKE REVIEW PATTERN: 7 reviews contain only 'unknown' text with ratings (2016, 2015, 2014). These provide no usable data and appear to be placeholder or corrupted entries.
• PRICING RED FLAG: Two recent detailed reviews (2024, 2022) independently report excessive pricing (3x competitors, costs exceeding equipment). This is a consistent, credible complaint.
• CALLBACK FAILURE: 2024 review explicitly states refusal to return and fix damage caused during installation—serious project completion failure.
• POTENTIAL LEGAL/ETHICAL ISSUES: 2022 review alleges use of non-certified/unlicensed handymen. 2022 review from attorney raises criminal allegations. These are serious but unverified claims.
• INCONSISTENT QUALITY: Stark contrast between glowing older reviews and damaging recent reviews suggests either service degradation or data quality issues.

This score should be treated with caution. While older reviews are consistently positive, the three recent detailed reviews (2024, 2022) paint a very different picture of excessive pricing, poor communication, and failure to honor callbacks. The heavy weighting toward 10+ year old data masks what appears to be current performance problems. A score of 72.8 may overstate current reliability; recent performance suggests significantly lower trustworthiness.