Find Nearby Plumbers In Chicago, Illinois

Good Plumbing demonstrates strong technical expertise and generally professional service delivery, with many customers praising responsiveness, friendliness, and skilled workmanship. However, the company is significantly hampered by inconsistent project completion (missed appointments, incomplete callbacks, follow-up failures) and pricing concerns. Multiple customers report being overcharged, receiving inflated estimates, or experiencing aggressive upselling tactics. While recent reviews (2025) are predominantly positive, older reviews reveal systemic issues with communication, reliability, and fair pricing that persist across years. The WW Score of 72.8 reflects a company with solid technical capability undermined by operational and ethical inconsistencies.

• PRICING INTEGRITY CONCERNS: Multiple reviews (2025-06-02, 2025-05-10, 2025-05-10) describe aggressive upselling, inflated estimates, and misrepresentation of customer needs. One customer reported a $3,000 estimate for a $200 fix; another was quoted $1,057 for a 10-minute faucet repair. Pattern suggests potential systemic overcharging.
• PROJECT COMPLETION FAILURES: Recurring pattern of missed appointments, no-shows, incomplete callbacks, and abandoned work across multiple years (2019, 2011, 2008). Several customers report scheduling issues, failure to follow up on promised work, and incomplete repairs requiring second visits.
• COMMUNICATION BREAKDOWNS: Consistent complaints about poor follow-up, unresponsiveness to callbacks, and miscommunication regarding appointment times and job scope. Some reviews from 2008-2011 show similar patterns to recent complaints.
• RECENCY BIAS ALERT: Recent reviews (June 2025) are overwhelmingly 5-star with minimal detail, contrasting sharply with older reviews that contain specific complaints. While some recent reviews show legitimate detail, the concentration of generic praise warrants caution. However, insufficient evidence of coordinated fake reviews—variation in language and specific technician names suggests authenticity.
• INCONSISTENT QUALITY BY TECHNICIAN: Performance varies significantly by individual plumber. Some technicians (Chip, Bryan C., Jose, Chris) receive consistent praise; others are associated with poor outcomes. Suggests training or quality control gaps.
• CREDIT CARD SECURITY ISSUE: 2021 review documents unsafe practice of writing full credit card numbers on paper receipts—a serious compliance and security violation.
• OWNER CONDUCT CONCERNS: Multiple reviews reference unprofessional behavior by owner(s), including rudeness, dismissiveness of customer concerns, and failure to honor commitments. One 2009 review documents non-payment of contractor invoices.

This WW Score should be treated with MODERATE-TO-HIGH confidence for recent work (2025) but significantly lower confidence for predicting future performance, given the company's documented history of systemic issues with pricing integrity, project completion, and communication spanning multiple years. The strong recent review trend is encouraging but does not fully offset the pattern of serious complaints in older reviews and the specific allegations of overcharging and aggressive sales tactics in 2025 reviews.

S&J Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism, project completion, and technical expertise across most reviews, with technicians consistently praised for punctuality, communication, and quality workmanship. However, pricing emerges as a significant weakness, with numerous customers reporting charges substantially higher than market rates—often 2-4x competitor pricing for identical services. While the company excels at responsiveness and work quality, the aggressive pricing strategy and documented pattern of high-pressure upselling substantially diminish overall customer satisfaction. The WW Score of 72.8 reflects strong operational execution undermined by persistent pricing concerns that affect customer trust and value perception.

• PRICING PATTERN: 47 reviews explicitly mention pricing concerns. Recurring complaints of charges 2-4x market rates for identical services (e.g., $579 vs $279 for drain cleaning, $1,650 vs $350 for hydro jetting, $1,000+ for simple toilet cartridge replacement). This is not isolated—it is systematic.
• UPSELLING BEHAVIOR: Multiple reviews document aggressive upselling tactics—technicians immediately suggesting unnecessary upgrades, repairs, or replacements before assessing actual needs. Pattern suggests sales-driven approach rather than customer-need-driven service.
• BAIT AND SWITCH ALLEGATIONS: Several reviews describe $49 estimate fee as misleading, with customers reporting unexpectedly high quotes after technicians arrive. Some customers report feeling pressured or manipulated into accepting inflated estimates.
• INCONSISTENT SERVICE QUALITY: While most reviews praise individual technicians, a subset report poor diagnosis, incomplete work, or technicians lacking proper tools/knowledge (e.g., drain techs unable to replace toilets, failed rodding attempts requiring expensive wall removal).
• MISSED APPOINTMENTS: At least 3 reviews document failure to meet promised service windows or cancellations with minimal notice, contradicting the company's otherwise strong responsiveness reputation.
• SENIOR CITIZEN TARGETING: One explicit review alleges predatory pricing targeting elderly customers, describing charges as 'elder abuse' under Illinois law. This warrants serious consideration.
• REVIEW AUTHENTICITY: The majority of reviews (80+) are 5-star with highly positive language, but a distinct subset (20+) are 1-2 star with detailed, specific pricing complaints. The 5-star reviews are generally less detailed about pricing specifics, while negative reviews provide exact dollar comparisons. This pattern suggests genuine customer polarization rather than fake reviews, but indicates two very different customer experiences.
• RECENCY: Most recent reviews (past 12 months) show continued pricing complaints, indicating this is an ongoing issue, not a historical problem.

This WW Score of 72.8 is highly reliable (based on 127 reviews with substantial data across all dimensions), but it masks a critical bifurcation: S&J excels at professionalism and execution (85.2 and 84.6 scores) but fails significantly on pricing (52.1 score). Customers should expect excellent service quality and responsiveness but should independently verify pricing against 2-3 competitors before committing, as the company's rates consistently exceed market standards by substantial margins.

Kuhn Plumbing demonstrates strong technical expertise and generally reliable project completion, with many customers praising their knowledgeable plumbers and ability to solve complex problems. Professionalism is solid overall, with consistent mentions of punctuality, courtesy, and responsiveness, though some negative reviews cite poor phone communication and unprofessional scheduling practices. The primary weakness is pricing: a substantial portion of reviews explicitly criticize high hourly rates, travel time billing, and what customers perceive as excessive charges for relatively simple jobs. This pricing concern significantly impacts the overall score despite strong performance in other dimensions.

• PRICING PATTERN: 28 reviews mention pricing concerns. Negative pricing reviews are consistent across multiple years (2009-2024), suggesting this is a systemic business model issue rather than isolated incidents. Customers repeatedly cite $150-$200+ per hour rates, billing for travel time, and charges perceived as disproportionate to work performed.
• EMPTY REVIEWS: 8 reviews contain only a 5-star rating with no text (dates: 2025-05-10, 2024-11-11 x3, 2024-06-09, 2023-06-10, 2022-06-10 x2). These appear to be placeholder or automated entries and provide no substantive data.
• RECENCY BIAS: Most detailed positive reviews are from 2022-2025 (recent), while many detailed negative reviews are older (2009-2016). However, pricing complaints appear consistently across all time periods, indicating this is not a resolved historical issue.
• POLARIZED SENTIMENT: The review distribution is highly bimodal—predominantly 5-star and 1-star ratings with fewer middle-ground reviews. This suggests customers either have very positive experiences or feel strongly wronged, particularly regarding pricing and billing practices.
• BILLING DISPUTES: Multiple reviews (2024-06-09, 2022-06-10, 2019-08-22, 2015-10-25, 2014-07-17, 2014-06-05, 2011-09-21, 2011-02-18) document billing issues including unexpected charges, delayed invoices, charges for travel time, and disputes over work scope. One review (2024-06-09) alleges unauthorized charges ($612) without proper documentation.
• WORK QUALITY INCONSISTENCY: A few reviews mention incomplete work requiring multiple visits (2016-05-24, 2014-01-10 sump pump issue, 2011-10-22 Flushmate toilet), though most work quality mentions are positive.
• PHONE SERVICE COMPLAINTS: Multiple reviews (2022-02-10, 2011-04-18) cite poor phone communication, rude staff, and failure to notify customers of delays.

This WW Score of 72.8 is reliable and based on substantial data (80 reviews with 42+ mentions per dimension), but the score masks a critical business model issue: Kuhn Plumbing delivers high-quality technical work and professional service, but their pricing structure and billing practices generate persistent customer dissatisfaction that significantly depresses the overall score. Customers seeking quality work should expect to pay premium rates; those prioritizing affordability should seek alternatives.

Dave and Joe's Plumbing demonstrates strong technical expertise and generally fair pricing, with many customers praising responsiveness and knowledge. However, the company suffers from significant and recurring professionalism issues, particularly around punctuality and follow-through on commitments. Multiple detailed reviews document chronic no-shows, extreme lateness (2-3 hours without notice), poor communication, and failure to honor warranties and callbacks. While approximately 70% of reviews are highly positive, the 10 one-star reviews reveal a troubling pattern of incomplete work, code violations, and unresolved issues that required customers to hire other plumbers for corrections. The company's integrity is further questioned by allegations of harassment and unlicensed operation in some cases.

• CRITICAL: Multiple detailed accounts of chronic no-shows and extreme lateness (2-3 hours) without communication or apology. This pattern appears across at least 4 separate reviews spanning 2023-2024.
• CRITICAL: At least 8 one-star reviews document serious quality and safety issues: improper installations, code violations (including dangerous gas line connections), incomplete work requiring expensive corrections by other plumbers, and warranty non-compliance.
• PATTERN: Several reviews allege the company is unlicensed or cannot provide proof of licensing. One sheriff explicitly states the technician came 'unlicensed.'
• PATTERN: Multiple customers report being ignored or harassed after leaving negative reviews, including one allegation of vulgar language and phone harassment.
• PATTERN: Significant discrepancy between positive reviews (mostly 4-5 stars with generic praise) and detailed negative reviews (1 star with specific, credible accounts of failures). The positive reviews often lack specificity, while negative reviews are highly detailed and internally consistent.
• RECENCY: Most recent reviews (past 12 months) show a mix of 5-star and 1-star ratings. The pattern of problems has NOT improved over time.
• CONCERN: One customer reports being charged back through their credit card issuer and considering legal action for incorrect parts and overcharging.
• CONCERN: Multiple reviews mention the company took customer property (faucets) without clear explanation or compensation.

This WW Score should be treated with CAUTION despite HIGH confidence in the data. The score of 72.8 masks a deeply polarized customer base with a credible pattern of serious operational failures, safety violations, and warranty non-compliance that are not reflected in the aggregate number. The company excels at initial response and pricing but fails consistently at execution, communication, and accountability. Customers seeking emergency service or simple jobs may have positive experiences, but those requiring complex work, follow-up visits, or warranty claims face substantial risk.

Your Helpful Plumber demonstrates strong technical competence and responsiveness, with many customers praising quick arrival times, friendly demeanor, and effective problem-solving. However, the company is significantly hampered by serious reliability and accountability issues: multiple no-shows despite confirmed appointments, poor follow-up communication, unresolved billing disputes, and catastrophic failures (flooding, property damage) with inadequate remediation. Pricing is inconsistent—some customers report fair value while others cite significant overcharges or unexpected cost increases. The business shows a pattern of responsiveness early in customer relationships that deteriorates during follow-up work or callbacks.

• CRITICAL: Multiple documented no-shows on confirmed appointments (2015, 2017, 2018, 2020, 2021) with poor communication and unresponsiveness afterward. This is a systemic issue, not isolated incidents.
• CRITICAL: Two catastrophic failures involving major property damage ($65,000 and $5,000+) with inadequate response, no accountability, and customer difficulty reaching the company for remediation.
• CRITICAL: Billing integrity concerns—multiple customers report being charged despite being told work would be free (2021), overcharges not refunded (2016), and price increases after initial estimates (2015, 2017).
• CRITICAL: Incomplete or improper work requiring customers to hire other plumbers to redo jobs (2015, 2022), and warranty claims denied (2017).
• Pattern of owner (Terry) being unreachable or unresponsive after initial contact, particularly when issues arise or refunds are owed.
• Inconsistent quality across different plumbers/team members; some reviews praise specific individuals (Justin, Steve, Armando) while others describe incompetence and unprofessionalism.
• One review (2017) describes inappropriate workplace behavior and concerning personal conduct by a plumber.
• Recency concern: Most severe failures and no-shows occurred 2015–2021; more recent reviews (2022) show continued issues with incomplete work.
• High concentration of 5-star reviews (approximately 60+ of 100) creates potential for selection bias, but this is offset by numerous detailed 1-star reviews with specific, verifiable complaints.

This WW Score of 72.8 should be treated with caution: while the company demonstrates technical competence and responsiveness on initial contact, the high frequency of documented no-shows, communication failures, billing disputes, and catastrophic failures with poor remediation represents unacceptable risk. The score is pulled down appropriately by project completion issues (71.0) and pricing concerns (68.0), but even these may understate the severity of accountability problems. Customers should prioritize companies with more consistent follow-through and accountability before engaging this plumber.

Roto-Rooter scores very strongly on professionalism and technician experience, with hundreds of reviews praising individual technicians by name for being courteous, knowledgeable, communicative, and thorough. Project completion is generally solid, with most jobs resolved same-day or within a short timeframe, though a meaningful minority of reviews describe incomplete work, no-shows, broken promises on follow-up visits, and warranty disputes. The most significant drag on the overall WW Score is pricing, which is the single most-complained-about dimension across the entire review set — dozens of reviewers explicitly describe charges as 'outrageous,' 'ridiculous,' 'a scam,' or triple the price of competitors, with specific dollar amounts cited ranging from $315 for 4 minutes of work to $8,700 for a water heater installation. Several reviews also describe deceptive pricing practices, including quotes that changed after work began, failure to disclose service fees upfront, and pressure tactics targeting vulnerable customers including seniors and non-English speakers.

• DUPLICATE REVIEWS DETECTED: A significant number of reviews appear to be exact or near-exact duplicates posted on different dates (e.g., multiple identical reviews for 'Gio,' 'Gabriel,' 'Daniel,' 'Gus,' 'Giovanni,' and others). This inflates the apparent review count and may indicate a review solicitation system that caused customers to submit the same review twice, or potential manipulation. Confidence in raw review count is reduced.
• BLANK REVIEWS: Approximately 150-200 reviews contain no text and only a star rating (almost all 5-star). These provide no usable data for any dimension and were excluded from scoring but inflate the total count.
• PRICING COMPLAINTS ARE SEVERE AND SPECIFIC: Negative pricing reviews are not vague — they cite specific dollar amounts, compare to competitor prices, and describe practices such as quoting after work begins, refusing to honor coupons, and charging elderly or non-English-speaking customers without disclosure. This is a systemic pattern, not isolated incidents.
• SCHEDULING AND NO-SHOW COMPLAINTS: Multiple reviews describe technicians failing to arrive within promised windows, no-call-no-shows, and dispatch communication failures. This is a recurring pattern affecting the project completion score.
• WARRANTY DISPUTES: Several reviews describe Roto-Rooter refusing to honor stated warranties, including a 6-month guarantee and a 30-day guarantee, with customers being charged again for the same recurring issue.
• WORK QUALITY FAILURES: A small but notable number of reviews describe active harm caused by technicians — flooding a kitchen, improperly setting a toilet, changing the wrong pipe, leaving sewage handprints, and damaging property with no accountability.
• PREDATORY PRICING PATTERN: Multiple reviews describe technicians quoting extremely high prices and then reducing them when customers push back, suggesting initial quotes are inflated as a negotiating tactic rather than honest pricing.
• RECENCY: All reviews are dated between approximately May 7, 2025 and June 9, 2025 — all within the past 12 months. Recency weighting is fully applied.

This WW Score is based on an exceptionally large review set and carries HIGH overall confidence, but the score should be interpreted with caution given confirmed duplicate reviews inflating volume, a strong and consistent pattern of severe pricing complaints that meaningfully suppresses the score, and documented instances of incomplete work and warranty non-compliance that suggest the positive technician-level experience does not always translate to a satisfactory overall customer outcome.