Find Nearby Plumbers In Belleville, Illinois

Dunn Plumbing demonstrates exceptional performance across all four dimensions. Professionalism is consistently praised with 9 mentions highlighting punctuality, responsiveness, friendliness, and courteous communication—Josh frequently arrives same-day or within hours of contact. All 10 reviews explicitly confirm project completion with no abandoned work, emergency callbacks honored, and lasting solutions. Pricing receives strong marks across 5 mentions for fair value, transparency, and avoiding unnecessary upsells. Experience is validated through 8 mentions of skilled diagnostics, quality workmanship, and successful resolution of complex HVAC and plumbing issues. The company's track record of repeat customers and referrals reinforces reliability.

• All 10 reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative feedback—this uniformity is unusual and warrants caution. However, reviews contain specific details (emergency calls, same-day service, technical fixes, named individual 'Josh'), varied dates spanning 2018–2023, and distinct scenarios, which mitigates concerns about fabrication.
• Three reviews are older than 3 years (2018, 2020, 2021), reducing recency weight. However, 7 of 10 reviews are from 2021 onward, providing adequate recent data.
• All reviews reference the same technician 'Josh' by name, which could indicate either genuine consistency or selective review curation. The specificity of technical details and problem descriptions suggests authenticity.

This WW Score of 91.2 is highly reliable given the large mention counts across all dimensions (5–10 per category), consistent positive evidence, and specific operational details. However, the absence of any critical feedback and the all-5-star pattern should be noted as a minor caveat—real-world performance may include occasional service gaps not reflected in these reviews.

D&L Plumbing receives consistently strong marks across all four dimensions, with professionalism being the most frequently and enthusiastically cited strength — reviewers repeatedly highlight punctuality, communication, cleanliness, and courteous attitudes. Project completion is also a clear strength, with multiple reviews confirming jobs were finished on time, on scope, and with proper follow-through including callbacks and code compliance. Pricing is mentioned favorably in five reviews, with customers describing the work as fair and reasonable, though no detailed cost breakdowns are provided to fully validate this. Experience and workmanship are well-supported, with reviewers noting technical knowledge, code awareness, and quality outcomes across a variety of plumbing tasks. The score is tempered slightly by the fact that several reviews are quite old (pre-2015), which reduces certainty about current service consistency.

• Several reviews are significantly dated — 6 of 12 reviews are from 2015 or earlier, with some dating back to 2007, 2009, and 2012. These older reviews carry reduced weight and may not reflect current service quality.
• All reviews are 4 or 5 stars with no negative or mixed feedback, which warrants mild caution. However, the reviews contain specific details, varied phrasing, and named individuals (e.g., Edgar), which reduces the likelihood of fabrication.
• No reviews mention any negative experiences, delays, or unresolved issues. While this is positive, the complete absence of any criticism across 12 reviews spanning 17 years is worth noting as a mild flag.

This WW Score carries HIGH overall confidence due to strong mention counts across all dimensions and specific, detailed review content, but users should note that half the reviews are over a decade old and the most recent cluster (2022–2024) represents a smaller sample of 5 reviews.

JD Sewer & Sons demonstrates strong overall performance across all dimensions, with particular strength in project completion (90.0) and pricing value (88.0). The company excels at rapid response times, same-day service, and transparent pricing that consistently undercuts competitors. Professionalism scores slightly lower (82.0) due to one significant 2017 incident involving a crew member's dismissive behavior toward a customer's reasonable request, though management responded appropriately. Experience is well-documented through multiple mentions of skilled technicians (Jim, Randy, Tony) who solve complex problems and provide thorough explanations. The overwhelming majority of reviews (23 of 24) are 5-star ratings spanning multiple years, indicating consistent service quality.

• One severe negative review from 2017 involving unprofessional crew behavior and customer dismissal; however, management acknowledged the issue was not isolated and committed to addressing it. This single incident significantly impacts the professionalism score but does not appear to reflect current operations based on subsequent positive reviews.
• Most reviews (20 of 24) lack specific dates, making recency assessment difficult. However, the two dated reviews are from 2019 and 2017, with the 2019 review being highly positive, suggesting sustained quality over time.
• High concentration of 5-star reviews with limited negative feedback could suggest selection bias in review platform, though the single 1-star review demonstrates the platform is not artificially filtered.

This WW Score of 87.2 is highly reliable, based on 24 reviews with strong mention counts across all dimensions (8-18 mentions each). The score is conservative given the single serious professionalism incident in 2017, which appropriately reduces confidence in that dimension despite management's response. The consistency of positive feedback across multiple years and technicians, combined with documented rapid response and fair pricing, supports confidence in this assessment.

Beloman earns strong marks for professionalism, with the overwhelming majority of reviewers across many years explicitly praising punctuality, courtesy, communication, and technician demeanor. Experience and workmanship are also well-regarded, with multiple reviewers citing knowledgeable technicians, effective problem-solving, and quality installations. Project completion is generally solid but is tempered by a notable negative review describing abandoned duct-cleaning work, an unfulfilled camera inspection promise, and unresolved follow-up — as well as a separate review where the tech failed to fix the problem and no estimate was ever delivered. Pricing is the weakest dimension: while several reviewers describe fair or even excellent value, a meaningful number explicitly call out high costs, one describes tripled part prices, and one long-term customer stated the annual fee had become too expensive to continue. The score reflects a genuinely strong service operation with recurring pricing and occasional follow-through concerns.

• Approximately 18 reviews contain only 'unknown' or are completely blank with no text — these were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable data beyond a star rating.
• A large cluster of reviews dated 2025-04-10 and 2025-05-10 share identical date stamps, which may indicate batch-imported or aggregated reviews rather than organic individual submissions. Confidence is not reduced as content varies, but this pattern is noted.
• The review corpus spans from 2008 to 2025. Reviews older than 2022 were given reduced weight in scoring, particularly for pricing and project completion, as service quality and pricing structures may have changed significantly over 10+ years.
• One 1-star review (2022) describes a serious project completion failure: duct work holes left unsealed, a missed appointment by the salesman, a promised camera video never delivered, and no follow-up from management despite assurances — this materially reduced the project completion score.
• One 1-star review (2011) describes a failure to ever submit a quote after a home visit and no response to follow-up calls or emails, indicating a responsiveness and follow-through failure.
• One 1-star review (2010) alleges parts were marked up approximately 4x retail price, which is a significant pricing integrity concern and was weighted in the pricing score.
• One 3-star review (2011) notes the technician did not fix the problem and no replacement estimate was ever provided despite a callback promise.
• The vast majority of reviews are 5-star, which is a pattern consistent with a genuinely well-regarded company but also warrants awareness of potential selection bias in review sourcing.

This WW Score is based on a large and diverse review set spanning 16+ years with strong mention counts across all four dimensions, making it statistically reliable, though users should note that pricing complaints and isolated but serious project completion failures prevent a higher score and reflect real recurring concerns.

Environmental Plumbing Services demonstrates strong professionalism across communication, punctuality, and courtesy, with 38 reviews explicitly praising these qualities. Pricing is generally perceived as fair and reasonable, though fewer reviews address this dimension. Project completion shows a notable weakness: while most jobs are completed, two significant reviews document serious follow-through failures (abandoned fireplace repair in 2018, unresponsive callbacks in 2005), and one review mentions responsiveness concerns. Technical experience is solid, with multiple reviews highlighting problem-solving ability and knowledge. The company's age (reviews span 2002–2021) and volume of positive feedback suggest reliability, but recent completion issues and older data reduce overall confidence.

• FAKE REVIEW PATTERN DETECTED: 4 reviews contain only 'unknown' or '.' as text with 5-star ratings (2015-12-08, 2015-11-23, 2015-07-20, 2015-02-19, 2002-10-21). These provide no usable data and suggest possible review manipulation. Confidence reduced accordingly.
• CRITICAL PROJECT COMPLETION ISSUE: Review dated 2018-11-29 (1-star) documents a fireplace repair abandoned 2 years prior with no callback. Review dated 2005-11-05 (2-star) reports 48+ hours without callback after installation problem. These are serious red flags for follow-through.
• RECENCY CONCERN: Majority of reviews are from 2002–2014 (15+ years old). Only 3 reviews from 2018 or later. Recent data is sparse, limiting confidence in current performance.
• RESPONSIVENESS INCONSISTENCY: Review dated 2007-11-30 (2-star) explicitly states concern with 'overall responsiveness' as reason for not hiring. This contradicts the dominant narrative of prompt callbacks in older reviews.

This WW Score of 82.1 should be treated with MODERATE-TO-HIGH caution: professionalism is well-documented and strong, but project completion has documented failures, pricing data is limited, and most reviews are 10+ years old with sparse recent validation. The fake reviews and responsiveness inconsistencies further reduce confidence in the overall reliability of this score.

Culler Plumbing demonstrates strong overall performance across professionalism, project completion, and experience, with many reviewers praising responsiveness, punctuality, thoroughness, and willingness to go above and beyond. Project completion scores are bolstered by consistent reports of jobs finished on time or same-day, follow-through on difficult installs, and cleanup after work. However, pricing is a notable weak point — multiple reviewers across different years explicitly called out costs as high, one reported a $200 diagnostic charge with no work performed and a coupon not honored, and one detailed a confrontational interaction with the owner over labor rates. Professionalism scores are tempered by two negative reviews describing rude or dismissive behavior from Dennis directly, which cannot be ignored despite the volume of positive feedback. The presence of four 'unknown' reviews from 2016 and several very brief or content-free reviews reduces the usable signal somewhat.

• 4 reviews contain only the word 'unknown' with no usable content — these were excluded from scoring.
• Several reviews are extremely brief (e.g., 'Just as they told me it would.', 'Was quoted a price that seemed fair. Will hire.', '.') and provide no scorable detail — treated as low-signal.
• Recency concern: The majority of reviews are from 2013–2019. Only one review is from 2020 and none from 2021 or later. This score may not reflect current service quality.
• Pricing dimension has a meaningful negative signal: at least 3 separate reviewers across different years explicitly flagged pricing as high or unfair, including one 1-star review citing a $200 charge for 5 minutes of work and a coupon not honored.
• One detailed 1-star review (2014) describes the owner Dennis as rude, sarcastic, and walking out of a customer's home — this is a significant professionalism flag that is weighted against the otherwise positive professionalism mentions.
• No fake review patterns detected — reviews vary in length, detail, and sentiment, and negative reviews are present, which increases authenticity confidence.

This WW Score is based on a moderately large review set with good dimension coverage, but reliability is reduced by the age of most reviews (majority over 3 years old), several content-free submissions, and recurring pricing complaints that suggest a consistent pattern of above-market rates.