Top Dog Plumbing receives a critically low WW Score of 38.2, driven by severe and consistent failures across all dimensions. The company demonstrates poor professionalism through rude communication, unresponsiveness, and aggressive collection tactics. Pricing is a major weakness with multiple complaints of overcharging (double market rates, $450 for simple cleanouts, $6,100 main replacements that ...
Read more Score Narrative
Top Dog Plumbing receives a critically low WW Score of 38.2, driven by severe and consistent failures across all dimensions. The company demonstrates poor professionalism through rude communication, unresponsiveness, and aggressive collection tactics. Pricing is a major weakness with multiple complaints of overcharging (double market rates, $450 for simple cleanouts, $6,100 main replacements that competitors completed for $300). Project completion is severely compromised by incomplete work, failed repairs, and refusal to honor callbacks or warranty obligations. While some technicians (Joe Rosario, Matthew) show competence, the majority of reviews describe incompetent workmanship, failed diagnostics, and shoddy repairs. The company's business license was revoked according to one review, and multiple reviews describe harassment and coercive payment collection.
Flags & Warnings
• CRITICAL: Multiple reviews describe aggressive and potentially illegal collection practices, including refusing to leave property without payment, depositing multiple checks without authorization, and harassment via voicemails and property visits.
• CRITICAL: One review (2023) indicates the company's plumbing license was revoked and phones were disconnected, suggesting potential business closure or regulatory action.
• PATTERN: Consistent overcharging across multiple reviews ($450 cleanout, $6,100 main replacement vs. $300 competitor quote, $450 for poor drywall repair).
• PATTERN: Multiple reports of failed work requiring re-repair by other contractors, indicating systemic quality issues.
• RECENCY: Most negative reviews are from 2022-2024 (recent), while positive reviews are older (2021 and earlier), suggesting deterioration in service quality over time.
• INCONSISTENCY: Stark contrast between glowing reviews (Joe Rosario, Matthew, 10-year customer) and severe complaints, suggesting highly variable service quality or possible selective positive review posting.
Reliability Statement
This score is highly reliable and should be trusted. It is based on 10 reviews with consistent negative patterns across all dimensions, particularly regarding pricing, completion, and professionalism. However, the presence of some genuinely positive reviews (Joe Rosario, Matthew) indicates the company may have had competent technicians, though overall organizational practices appear deeply problematic. The apparent license revocation and business disruption noted in recent reviews further validate the low score.
Read less