Find Nearby Plumbers In Champaign, Illinois

Richard demonstrates strong professionalism across multiple reviews, with consistent praise for communication, politeness, and responsiveness. Pricing is generally described as fair and transparent, though one 2018 review raised concerns about undisclosed service charges that significantly damaged trust. Project completion is solid with multiple mentions of work being done quickly and thoroughly. Technical skill and problem-solving ability are evident across diverse project types. The 2018 negative review is substantially older and appears isolated; more recent reviews (2023-2024) consistently reinforce positive patterns.

• One significantly negative review from 2018 (1.0 stars) alleges undisclosed $65 service charge and suggests discriminatory pricing targeting young foreigners. This review is 6+ years old but represents a serious professionalism/pricing concern that cannot be ignored.
• Most positive reviews are from 2023-2024 (3 of 5 usable reviews), suggesting either improved practices or potential selection bias in recent feedback.
• Review from 2014 is 10 years old and should be weighted less heavily in current assessment.

This score is moderately reliable but carries meaningful uncertainty due to the isolated but serious 2018 complaint about pricing transparency and potential discriminatory practices. Recent reviews (past 12 months) are consistently positive and support the higher score, but the historical incident warrants caution and suggests verifying pricing terms explicitly in writing before engagement.

Peace of Mind Plumbing has an overwhelmingly positive review base spanning from 2012 to 2025, with the vast majority of customers praising responsiveness, punctuality, communication, and fair pricing. Professionalism scores are strong but modestly penalized due to a small number of serious negative reviews citing an incomplete job, no-shows, and poor follow-through by specific individuals (Chad in one case, and an unnamed new owner in another). Project completion is the most penalized dimension: while most reviews describe successful job completion, one review explicitly describes an abandoned, unfinished job with price changes, and another describes a scheduled appointment that was never honored. Pricing is consistently praised across a large number of reviews, with multiple customers noting they were charged less than quoted and that estimates were transparent. Experience scores are high, with numerous reviewers describing accurate diagnoses, skilled workmanship, and technicians who identified problems other plumbers missed.

• DUPLICATE REVIEW DETECTED: Two reviews dated 2015-10-23 are word-for-word identical (Chad/water main review by same apparent author). One was excluded from scoring as a duplicate.
• DUPLICATE REVIEW DETECTED: Two reviews about Joe installing a hot water heater for a mother in Cave Creek (2018-06-11 and 2018-04-06) are nearly word-for-word identical. One was excluded from scoring.
• DUPLICATE REVIEW DETECTED: Two reviews about Brian and Poppy installing a hot water heater contracted through Lowes (2019-06-11 and 2019-05-09) are nearly word-for-word identical. One was excluded from scoring.
• DUPLICATE REVIEW DETECTED: Two reviews about Joe fixing a garbage disposal and dishwasher leak (2019-06-11 and 2019-05-10) are nearly word-for-word identical. One was excluded from scoring.
• MULTIPLE TECHNICIAN NAMES: Reviews reference Rick, Joe, Chad, Bryan, Brian, Poppy, Mike, David, Nick, Zach, Lundon, Vincent, Ann, and Gerald. This strongly suggests this is an aggregated review profile spanning multiple franchise locations or business entities operating under the 'Peace of Mind Plumbing' name. Scores reflect the aggregate and may not represent any single location or operator accurately.
• NEGATIVE REVIEW — INCOMPLETE JOB (2024-06-10, 1 star): Reviewer explicitly states the job was not completed, pricing changed multiple times upward from original quote, and the owner Chad was unresponsive. This is a significant project completion and professionalism flag.
• NEGATIVE REVIEW — NO-SHOW (2021-08-20, 1 star): Reviewer states they were given an appointment and the company never showed after a week and a half of waiting.
• NEGATIVE REVIEW — OWNERSHIP CHANGE WARNING (2022-11-22, 1 star): Reviewer warns that a new owner took over from Chad and is not recommended, citing poor responsiveness.
• BLANK REVIEWS: Six reviews contain no text (only a star rating). These were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable data.
• ONE-WORD NEGATIVE REVIEW (2024-06-09, 1 star): Review text reads only 'Terrible' with no detail. Counted as a negative signal but not attributable to any specific dimension.
• RECENCY NOTE: The majority of reviews are older than 12 months, with a significant cluster dated 2019-06-11 and 2020-06-10 that may reflect bulk import or backdated entries. Reviews from the past 12 months (2024-06-09 through 2025-05-10) are generally positive but include the serious incomplete-job complaint from June 2024.
• POTENTIAL FAKE REVIEW PATTERN: The cluster of reviews all dated exactly 2019-06-11 and 2020-06-10 is suspicious and may represent imported or bulk-submitted reviews. Confidence in those specific reviews is reduced, though their content is generally specific enough to retain partial weight.

This WW Score carries HIGH data confidence due to the large volume of reviews, but should be interpreted with caution given the multi-entity nature of the business, confirmed duplicate reviews, a credible incomplete-job complaint, a no-show complaint, and suspicious clustering of review dates that may indicate imported or artificially submitted reviews.

Sullivan Plumbing demonstrates strong overall performance across all dimensions, with particular strength in project completion (86.5) and professionalism (85.2). The company excels at punctuality, responsiveness, communication, and technical competence, with many customers praising specific technicians by name and expressing loyalty. However, pricing emerges as a consistent concern, with a notably lower score (73.8) driven by frequent complaints about high labor rates, lack of itemized invoices, and perceived overcharging relative to work performed. Despite pricing friction, the company maintains solid execution and customer satisfaction.

• PRICING COMPLAINTS ARE SUBSTANTIAL: 68 mentions of pricing issues reveal a pattern of customer dissatisfaction. Multiple reviews cite $300-$500+ per hour labor rates, lack of transparent billing, and charges perceived as excessive relative to time spent. This is the single largest source of negative feedback.
• NEGATIVE REVIEWS CLUSTER AROUND SPECIFIC ISSUES: Several 1-star reviews allege misdiagnosis (well pump/pressure tank case), poor follow-up on callbacks, unprofessional front desk behavior, and one case of alleged deliberate overcharging ($3,000+ for a $1,177 part). These are isolated but serious incidents.
• INCONSISTENT SERVICE QUALITY: A small number of reviews report poor workmanship (toilet installation errors, improper drain diagnosis, ceiling holes cut unnecessarily), suggesting quality control variability across technicians.
• CALLBACK AND FOLLOW-UP ISSUES: Multiple reviews mention delayed callbacks, failure to return calls, and broken promises to schedule follow-up work, indicating potential operational/communication gaps.
• RECENCY BIAS NOTED: Most recent reviews (2025, 2024) are overwhelmingly positive (5-star), while older reviews (2011-2020) show more balanced feedback with legitimate complaints. Recent reviews may reflect improved operations or potential review filtering.
• GENERIC PRAISE DETECTED: A small number of recent reviews contain unusually generic, enthusiastic language with minimal specific detail (e.g., 'Excellent,' 'Amazing job! Very happy overall!'), which could indicate fake or incentivized reviews, though this is not pervasive.

This WW Score of 82.1 is reliable and well-supported by 250 reviews with high mention counts across all dimensions. However, the score masks a significant pricing-quality tension: customers consistently praise workmanship and professionalism but express frustration with costs and billing transparency. The company's true value proposition depends heavily on whether customers prioritize quality execution (where Sullivan scores well) or cost-effectiveness (where it scores poorly). Prospective customers should request itemized quotes and clarify labor rates upfront before committing.

Xtreme Mechanical demonstrates strong performance across all measured dimensions. Professionalism is consistently praised with on-time arrival, respectful demeanor, clear communication, and thorough explanations noted across multiple reviews. Project completion is solid with jobs finished as requested and problems resolved after verification. Technical expertise is evident in quick diagnostics and problem-solving ability. Pricing feedback is limited but positive where mentioned, with fair value noted. The oldest reviews (2020–2021) suggest sustained service quality, though the sample size of 4 reviews limits confidence in the overall score.

• Small sample size (4 reviews) — score reliability is moderate at best
• Review dates span 2020–2023 with significant gaps; most recent review is from December 2023, which is positive for recency
• Pricing dimension based on only 2 mentions; insufficient data to make strong claims about value proposition
• No negative reviews present — while not necessarily fake, absence of any critical feedback is atypical and should be noted

This WW Score of 88.3 should be treated with moderate caution due to the small sample size (4 reviews) and limited mentions for the pricing dimension; however, the consistency of positive feedback across professionalism and project completion, combined with recent review activity, suggests the score is directionally reliable.

Clean Line demonstrates strong professionalism across all four reviews, with consistent praise for friendly, polite, and responsive service. Pricing is a notable strength, with multiple reviewers explicitly highlighting fair and competitive rates compared to national chains. Project completion is well-supported, though one review notes the technician appropriately stopped work when continuation was not in the customer's best interest, showing good judgment. Technical experience is evident but mentioned less frequently, primarily through successful sewer line cleaning and drainage assessment work.

• One review is significantly older (2013, over 10 years ago) and should be weighted less heavily in current assessment
• Another review is from 2018 (6 years old), limiting recency of data
• Only 2 of 4 reviews are from 2024, creating a recency concern
• All reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative feedback, which is atypical; however, each review contains specific details and different scenarios, reducing suspicion of fake reviews
• Small sample size (4 reviews) limits statistical confidence

This score should be treated with moderate caution due to the small sample size (4 reviews) and significant age of 50% of the data (2013 and 2018). The 2024 reviews are recent and detailed, but more current feedback is needed to validate the score's reliability.

True Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism with consistently punctual technicians, courteous communication, and responsive scheduling across 187 mentions. Project completion is reliable with most jobs finished on time and callbacks honored, supported by 156 mentions. Technical expertise is solid with skilled diagnosticians and quality workmanship noted in 142 reviews. However, pricing emerges as a significant weakness: 89 mentions reveal recurring complaints about markups ranging from 3-5x fair market value, excessive service call fees ($25-$75 for estimates), and quotes perceived as inflated or dishonest. While individual technicians are frequently praised, the company's pricing structure and post-ownership (November 2023) service quality decline are persistent concerns that suppress the overall score.

• PRICING PATTERN: Systematic overcharging documented across multiple reviews. Examples include $831 for a $65 cartridge replacement, $486 for a $5 copper elbow (15 min work), $900 for a $30 toilet flange, and $1200 for 3 hours emergency work. This pattern suggests either intentional markup strategy or poor cost estimation practices.
• OWNERSHIP CHANGE IMPACT: Multiple long-term customers (10+ years) report significant service quality decline after November 2023 ownership change. Pre-2023 reviews are predominantly 5-star; post-2023 shows increased 1-2 star ratings for communication, scheduling, and pricing issues.
• SERVICE FEE CONTROVERSY: Repeated complaints about $25-$75 diagnostic/estimate fees, particularly when quotes are not accepted. Some customers report being charged for estimates on jobs exceeding $10,000.
• COMMUNICATION INCONSISTENCY: Several reviews cite delayed follow-ups (3 weeks without estimate), missed callbacks, failed appointment notifications, and rescheduling without proper notice. This contrasts sharply with earlier reviews praising responsiveness.
• FAKE REVIEW RISK - LIMITED: While most reviews appear genuine with specific details, there is a cluster of 15-20 very brief, generic 5-star reviews with minimal detail (e.g., empty text fields, single sentences like 'Great service!!') dated 2025-06-02 to 2025-06-09. These lack specificity and may inflate recent ratings artificially.
• RECENCY CONCERN: Reviews from past 6 months (2025) show higher concentration of 5-star ratings with less detail, while 2024-2023 reviews contain more balanced criticism. This temporal pattern warrants caution in weighting recent scores.
• INCONSISTENT QUALITY: Multiple reviews document technician-to-technician variance. Some technicians (Derek, Ryan, Cody, Sam, Chris) are specifically requested and praised; others are criticized for poor communication or sloppy work. This suggests inconsistent training or quality control.

This WW Score of 78.2 is reliable for assessing professionalism and project completion (both HIGH confidence with 150+ mentions each), but the pricing dimension (68.0, HIGH confidence with 89 mentions) is the primary driver of the lower overall score and reflects genuine, documented customer dissatisfaction with value-for-money. The post-November 2023 ownership change has materially impacted service consistency; customers should weight pre-2023 reviews more heavily for historical baseline and expect potential pricing negotiations. The cluster of generic 5-star reviews in June 2025 suggests recent rating inflation and should be discounted.