Find Nearby Plumbers In Arlington Heights, Illinois

Narwhal Plumbing and Jacob receive consistently strong feedback across all four scored dimensions. Professionalism is the most frequently cited strength, with reviewers highlighting punctuality, respectful behavior, clear communication, and responsiveness across all seven reviews. Project completion is equally well-supported, with every reviewer confirming their job was finished successfully and to satisfaction, including complex multi-step repairs. Pricing is mentioned positively in three reviews, with Jacob described as the least expensive among competitors and reasonably priced, though this dimension carries only moderate confidence due to fewer explicit mentions. Experience and workmanship are praised across six reviews, with specific references to code compliance, technical problem-solving, and repeat business from satisfied customers.

• All 7 reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative or mixed feedback — this warrants mild caution, though reviews contain specific job details and varied language that reduce the likelihood of fabrication.
• Review date range spans 2019 to 2024 — 4 of the 7 reviews are older than 12 months (pre-2024), and 2 are older than 3 years. The most recent review is from June 2024. Recency-weighted confidence is moderate; the older reviews carry reduced weight.
• Sample size is small (7 reviews total) — while all dimensions have usable data, scores should be interpreted with awareness that a small number of negative experiences could significantly shift results.

This WW Score is moderately reliable given the small but specific and varied review set; the consistent positive signals across all dimensions are credible, but the limited sample size and age of several reviews mean this score should be treated as a strong directional indicator rather than a definitive assessment.

Stellar Plumbing demonstrates strong overall performance across all four dimensions, earning a WW Score of 84.2. The company excels in professionalism (87.5), with extensive evidence of punctuality, responsiveness, and courteous technicians across 287 reviews. Experience is also a clear strength (86.0), with 201 mentions highlighting skilled, knowledgeable technicians who solve complex problems efficiently. Project completion scores well at 85.5 with 198 mentions confirming timely, thorough work. Pricing is the relative weak point at 81.0, though still solid, with 156 mentions showing generally fair rates but occasional complaints about unexpected charges or estimates that increased significantly during work. The company's consistency across multiple technicians (Duane, Curtis, Gus, Carlos, Jeff, and others) and geographic locations suggests a strong operational foundation.

• FAKE REVIEW PATTERN DETECTED: Multiple reviews from June 2025 (future dates) with suspiciously generic praise and identical 5-star ratings with minimal detail suggest potential review manipulation or data entry errors. These 6 reviews lack specificity compared to authentic reviews.
• PRICING CONCERNS: 8 reviews (1-star and 2-3 star ratings) explicitly mention overcharging, unexpected price increases mid-job, or bills 40-60% higher than initial estimates. One review documents a bill 60% higher than agreed price; another reports $1,600 charged for work another plumber completed in 30 minutes.
• PROFESSIONALISM GAPS: 5 reviews document poor follow-up (no callbacks for days/weeks), one instance of threatening legal action over a quote dispute, and one report of technician arriving with dirty boots and laying dirty tools on customer's counters.
• LICENSING/COMPLIANCE ISSUES: One 2020 review explicitly states 'Not a licensed contractor' appears on company website; another 2015 review documents illegal gas line work and permit violations that resulted in gas company shutoff.
• QUALITY CONTROL INCONSISTENCY: Multiple reviews (2014-2015) document significant rework required due to code violations, improper fittings, and poor workmanship by certain technicians, suggesting variable quality depending on which technician is assigned.
• RECENCY NOTE: Majority of reviews are from 2018-2025 with strong concentration in 2024-2025, indicating recent high volume of business. However, the 6 future-dated reviews from June 2025 are anomalous and reduce confidence slightly.

This WW Score of 84.2 is highly reliable based on 515 usable reviews with strong data across all dimensions, but customers should be aware that pricing transparency and consistency appear to be genuine weak points, and technician quality varies—requesting specific experienced technicians (Duane, Curtis, Gus) by name may improve outcomes based on review patterns.

J&S Plumbing demonstrates strong overall performance with a WW Score of 82.3, driven by consistently high marks in experience (86.4) and professionalism (85.2). The company excels at technical competency, punctuality, and courteous service across hundreds of reviews. However, pricing emerges as a notable weakness (73.1), with recurring complaints about high costs, unexpected charges, hidden fees, and diagnostic charges that discourage warranty claims. Project completion is solid (84.6) but marred by occasional follow-up issues and callback problems. The company's strength lies in skilled technicians and responsive service; its vulnerability is pricing transparency and fairness.

• PRICING CONCERNS: Multiple reviews (15+) explicitly cite overcharging, hidden fees, diagnostic charges, and prices significantly higher than competitors. Several customers report being charged $200-$800+ for simple repairs or diagnostic visits.
• FAKE REVIEW PATTERN DETECTED: Reviews dated 2025-06-07, 2025-06-06, 2025-06-04, 2025-06-03 contain nearly identical phrasing ('Adam and his teammate arrived as scheduled, identified the problem, and explained the repair and associated costs...repairs were done well and the price quoted was fair'). This exact text appears in at least 2 separate reviews with different dates, suggesting potential review manipulation.
• QUALITY INCONSISTENCY: Multiple reviews report the same job needing to be redone (garbage disposal, sewer rodding, pump replacement), indicating inconsistent workmanship or incomplete diagnostics on first visit.
• CUSTOMER SERVICE FAILURES: 8+ reviews cite poor communication, missed appointments without notice, failure to return calls, and rude/condescending staff behavior from specific employees (Ed McMurray, office staff).
• WARRANTY & FOLLOW-UP ISSUES: Several reviews report warranty claims being discouraged through high diagnostic fees, or work not holding up beyond initial service.
• RECENCY BIAS: Most recent reviews (2025) are overwhelmingly 5-star with minimal detail, contrasting sharply with 2023-2024 reviews which show more balanced feedback. This temporal clustering warrants caution.

This WW Score of 82.3 should be treated with MODERATE-TO-HIGH confidence for technical competency and professionalism, but LOW confidence for pricing fairness; the pricing dimension is heavily influenced by legitimate complaints and should not be discounted. The recent surge of identical-phrasing 5-star reviews raises concerns about review authenticity, suggesting the true score may be slightly lower than reported. Customers seeking J&S should expect skilled work and responsive service but should obtain detailed written quotes upfront and compare pricing with competitors before committing.

Lakeside Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism with consistent praise for punctuality, communication, and courteous staff across 52 reviews. Experience scores are solid at 84.1 based on 31 mentions of skilled workmanship and problem-solving. However, project completion shows notable weakness at 76.8 due to several documented failures including incomplete sewer work, improper toilet repairs causing damage, and unresponsive follow-up on callbacks. Pricing is fair overall (78.5) but some customers report inconsistent value and higher costs than competitors. The company's long-standing reputation is tempered by recurring issues with quality control and accountability on complex jobs.

• CRITICAL: Five 1-star reviews document serious project completion failures: incomplete sewer rodding with no refund (2023), negligent inspection causing home damage (2021), toilet repair failure causing ceiling damage (2016), inexperienced technician and no-show callback (2016), and refusal to perform work (2017). These are not isolated complaints.
• ACCOUNTABILITY PATTERN: Multiple reviews mention unresponsive management when issues are raised. Office manager promised callback that never occurred; company refused responsibility for damage caused by improper work; tap-dancing on fair credit requests.
• QUALITY CONTROL INCONSISTENCY: Two 2-star reviews from 2013-2014 describe multiple fixture failures within 6-12 months and repeated charges for fixes. Suggests workmanship quality varies significantly by technician.
• RECENCY BIAS: Most recent reviews (2024-2025) are overwhelmingly positive (5-star), while older reviews (2013-2023) contain more critical feedback. This may reflect recent operational improvements or selection bias in recent reviewers.
• EMPTY REVIEWS: Four reviews contain no text (2023, 2022 x2), reducing data quality slightly.
• PRICING INCONSISTENCY: Customers report mixed experiences—some praise fair pricing, others note premium rates with inconsistent value. One customer paid $500 for incomplete work; another paid $525 for unnecessary pump replacement.

This WW Score of 82.3 should be treated with MODERATE-TO-HIGH caution. While professionalism and experience scores are well-supported by 50+ mentions, the project completion dimension is significantly dragged down by documented failures in complex jobs (sewer work, inspections, repairs) and poor accountability. The company excels at routine, straightforward work and customer service but shows material weakness in complex problem-solving and follow-through on failures. Recent positive reviews suggest possible improvement, but historical pattern of unresponsiveness to complaints is concerning. Recommend this company for simple jobs with established plumbers (Nick, Eric, Greg) but exercise caution on complex projects.

Mr. Drain Plumbing earns strong marks across all four dimensions, with professionalism being the most consistently praised attribute — technicians are repeatedly described as polite, friendly, punctual, and communicative. Project completion scores well given the large volume of reviews confirming jobs were finished same-day or next-day, with a notable 30-day warranty honored in at least one case; however, a handful of reviews describe abandoned or incomplete resolutions and one instance of a wrong-part installation requiring a callback. Experience scores solidly, with many reviewers praising diagnostic accuracy and technical skill, though several credible negative reviews describe significant misdiagnoses and unnecessary upselling that meaningfully drag this dimension down. Pricing is the weakest dimension: while many customers found costs fair or reasonable, a meaningful cluster of reviews — including a $17,716 charge, a $5,200 bill for 14 hours of work, a $25,000 sewer line quote later done for half elsewhere, a $4,000 quote for a $285 fix, and complaints about an undisclosed 3% credit card surcharge — indicate inconsistent and sometimes deceptive pricing practices that cannot be ignored.

• 12 reviews contained no text (rating only) and were excluded from dimensional scoring but counted in total reviews analyzed.
• Several reviews are very old (2014–2018) and may not reflect current business practices; recency weighting applied — older reviews given reduced influence.
• Multiple credible negative reviews describe significant upselling, inflated quotes, and misdiagnosis (e.g., $4,000 quote for a $285 fix, $25k sewer quote done elsewhere for ~$12.5k, $5,200 charged for 14 man-hours of work, $17,716 total bill). These are specific, detailed, and plausible — not dismissed.
• One reviewer explicitly alleges the company impersonated Roto-Rooter on the phone, which is a serious business conduct concern.
• One reviewer alleges discriminatory targeting (young, female, POC) and fabricated water pressure readings — this is a serious allegation and noted as unverified but credible in tone.
• One review describes a wrong-size part installed (3-inch stopper on 4-inch drain) with refusal to honor a callback without full charge — a clear project completion failure.
• One review describes repeated no-shows and missed appointment windows — a professionalism failure.
• The overwhelming majority of reviews are 5-star, which warrants mild fake-review scrutiny; however, most positive reviews contain specific technician names, job details, and varied language, reducing the likelihood of systematic fabrication. The negative reviews are detailed and credible, suggesting the review pool is largely authentic.
• The undisclosed 3% credit card surcharge is mentioned in at least two reviews as a surprise charge — this is a transparency/pricing concern.
• Score confidence is tempered by the pricing dimension's high variance: the gap between best-case and worst-case pricing experiences is extremely wide, making the pricing score less predictive than usual.

This WW Score is based on a large, diverse, and largely authentic review set spanning 2014–2025, and carries HIGH overall confidence; however, prospective customers should weigh the pricing dimension with particular caution given documented instances of significant overquoting and lack of pricing transparency, and are strongly advised to obtain competing quotes for any major plumbing work.

This contractor demonstrates strong overall performance across all dimensions. Professionalism is a clear strength, with consistent mentions of punctuality, courteous communication, cleanliness, and responsive staff across 52 reviews. Project completion is solid with 48 mentions of timely work and follow-through, though a few older reviews (2017) flagged no-shows and missed guarantees. Pricing receives moderate confidence (28 mentions) with generally positive feedback on fair pricing, though one 2018 review noted premium charges. Experience is well-documented across 42 reviews, with technicians consistently praised for technical knowledge and problem-solving. The score is anchored by recent, detailed reviews (2024-2025) that outweigh older negative incidents.

• RECENCY CONCERN: 40 of 75 reviews are from 2024-2025 (recent), but 15 reviews are from 2013-2017 (7+ years old). Recent reviews are overwhelmingly positive (5-star), while older reviews contain 2 significant negative incidents (1-star ratings in 2017 for no-shows and missed guarantees). This suggests either service quality improvement or potential review platform bias toward recent submissions.
• POTENTIAL FAKE REVIEW PATTERN: Multiple reviews from 2025 and late 2024 use nearly identical phrasing ('professional,' 'knowledgeable,' 'friendly,' 'clean,' 'fair price') and all are 5-star with minimal specificity. Examples: 'Great company to work with. They quickly came and did a clean and professional installation' and 'They schedule easily, the plumbers are professional and knowledgable.' However, many reviews also contain specific details (names, job types, problem-solving narratives), which mitigates this concern. Confidence reduced slightly due to this pattern.
• EMPTY REVIEWS: 3 reviews contain no text (5-star ratings only on 2025-05-10, 2025-04-10, and 2024-12-11). These are excluded from scoring but suggest possible data quality issues.
• COMPANY NAME INCONSISTENCY: Reviews reference both 'Stellar Plumbing' (majority, 2024-2025) and 'Shark Plumbing' (older reviews, 2013-2018). This may indicate a name change, rebranding, or two different entities. If these are different companies, the score conflates two separate service providers. Recommend verification.
• NEGATIVE OUTLIERS: Two 1-star reviews from 2017 describe serious issues: no-shows despite guarantees and misdiagnosis of toilet problems. These are old but represent genuine service failures that should not be ignored.

This WW Score of 82.1 is reliable for recent service expectations (2024-2025) with HIGH confidence, as it is based on 52+ recent, detailed reviews across all dimensions. However, the score should be treated with MODERATE caution overall due to: (1) potential company name/identity inconsistency between 'Stellar' and 'Shark' reviews, (2) a cluster of suspiciously similar phrasing in recent reviews, and (3) documented service failures in 2017 that suggest past reliability issues, though recent performance appears significantly improved. Recommend contacting the company directly to clarify current ownership/branding before committing to major work.