Find Nearby Plumbers In Chicago, Illinois

All Plumbing & Sewer Services earns strong marks across all four dimensions based on a large and detailed review base spanning over a decade. Professionalism scores are high but tempered by three credible 1-star reviews specifically citing repeated failure to return calls or follow up on estimates — a meaningful and consistent pattern that cannot be dismissed. Pricing is a genuine standout, with numerous reviewers explicitly noting costs significantly below competitor quotes, no upselling, and honest diagnosis that saved customers money. Project completion is well-supported, with many reviewers describing same-day or next-day service, thorough work, clean-up, and follow-through including honoring quotes even when jobs ran long. Experience scores are among the highest, with reviewers frequently praising the team's diagnostic ability, technical knowledge, and willingness to educate customers — including multiple instances where they correctly overruled other companies' expensive and unnecessary recommendations.

• THREE credible 1-star reviews (2024-09-12, 2020-06-10, 2019-06-13) all describe the same failure pattern: calls not returned, promises of callbacks not honored, customers left waiting days without contact. This is a recurring and specific complaint that meaningfully impacts the professionalism score.
• One 2021-06-10 review notes waiting on a callback despite giving 5 stars, and one 2021-06-10 review notes the job was 'a little too expensive for half hour of work' — minor but additional signals of inconsistency.
• Five reviews contain no text (rating only) and were excluded from dimension scoring. These blank 5-star reviews slightly inflate the raw star average but do not affect WW Score calculations.
• One review (2023-09-04) appears to be a near-duplicate of a review dated 2024-06-09, with nearly identical wording about a toilet replacement and Keith/Colin. This may be a reposted review rather than a separate event. Flagged as a possible duplicate but not removed, as the names and details are consistent with the company's actual staff.
• The majority of reviews are older than 12 months (pre-May 2024), with only 4 reviews from the past 12 months. The callback failure pattern appears in both recent and older reviews, suggesting it may be an ongoing structural issue rather than a resolved one.
• No fake review patterns detected. Reviews are highly specific, name individual technicians, describe distinct plumbing scenarios, and include both positive and negative experiences. Review authenticity appears HIGH.

This WW Score is based on 70 reviews with strong textual detail across all four dimensions and is considered highly reliable, though the recurring callback failure pattern documented in multiple independent 1-star reviews represents a real and unresolved weakness in responsiveness that prospective customers should weigh carefully.

D.E. Mathieu Plumbing earns strong scores across all four dimensions, driven by an exceptionally large and consistent body of reviews praising responsiveness, punctuality, honest communication, and fair pricing. Professionalism is the standout dimension, with dozens of reviewers explicitly noting on-time arrivals, same-day or next-day availability, friendly demeanor, and clear communication. Pricing scores very well, with numerous reviewers independently describing quotes as fair, reasonable, or competitive — and several noting the final bill came in at or under the estimate. Project completion is also strong, with most jobs described as completed efficiently and thoroughly, though one significant negative review from 2015 describes abandoned or incomplete cleanup after a sewer connection job, which moderately tempers that dimension's score. Experience is well-supported, with reviewers citing accurate diagnoses, problem-solving on complex or unusual jobs, and quality workmanship across a wide variety of plumbing tasks.

• One 1-star review (2015) describes a sewer connection project where the yard was left in poor condition and Don refused to return to clean up, with the reviewer alleging she was taken advantage of as a single woman. This is a meaningful project completion and professionalism concern and was factored into scoring.
• One 2-star review (2021) describes a failure to follow up after an initial contact, indicating a responsiveness lapse. This was factored into the professionalism score.
• The overwhelming majority of reviews are 5-star with only 2 negative reviews across 46 total. While this could suggest selection bias on the review platform, the reviews contain sufficient specific detail, varied job types, and unique phrasing to be considered largely authentic.
• Several reviews are older than 3 years (2013, 2015, 2019). The 2015 negative review is the oldest substantive complaint and was given reduced weight relative to the large volume of recent positive reviews from 2020–2024. However, it was not ignored.
• No fake review patterns detected. Reviews vary in length, specificity, job type, and writing style, which supports authenticity.

This WW Score is based on 46 reviews spanning 2013–2024 with strong mention counts across all four dimensions, making it one of the more reliable scores possible; the primary caveat is the platform-level 5-star skew and one unresolved negative experience from 2015 that slightly tempers full confidence in project completion.

Daniel and his team receive consistently strong marks across all four dimensions, with professionalism being the standout driver — reviewers repeatedly cite punctuality, clear communication, pleasant demeanor, and daily site cleanup. Pricing is described as competitive and good value across multiple reviews, though no reviewer reported a negative pricing experience, which slightly limits the contrast needed for a higher score. Project completion is well-supported, with multiple reviewers noting jobs were finished on time, thoroughly, and with follow-through — including one reviewer who immediately requested a second project upon completion of the first. Experience scores are solid, with reviewers praising quality workmanship across a diverse range of trades including plumbing, electrical, drywall, concrete, and painting. One Spanish-language review from January 2023 rated 3 stars mentions punctuality for an estimate and good suggestions but does not confirm whether work was ultimately completed, introducing a minor cautionary note.

• One review (2023-01-14, 3 stars) is in Spanish and references only an estimate visit — it is unclear if work was ever contracted or completed, so it contributes limited signal to project completion or experience dimensions.
• One review (2023-06-16) refers to the contractor as 'David' rather than 'Daniel' — this may be a name error by the reviewer or could indicate a different individual; treated as the same contractor given business context but noted as a minor inconsistency.
• All reviews are 5 stars except one 3-star review, and several reviews use similarly enthusiastic language. However, reviews contain specific project details, varied trade types, and distinct writing styles, which reduces concern about fake review patterns. No strong fake review signal detected.
• One review (2023-06-16) is older than 12 months relative to the most recent review date; the majority of reviews fall within the past 12 months (2024), so recency weighting is favorable overall.

This WW Score is based on 11 reviews with strong specificity and dimensional coverage across all four scored areas, yielding HIGH confidence across the board — the score of 87.6 can be considered a reliable representation of this contractor's recent performance, with only minor caveats around one ambiguous 3-star review and a single name inconsistency.

Bubba, Wayne & Tim Sewer Service earns strong scores across all four dimensions, driven by an exceptionally large and long-standing customer base spanning decades of repeat use. Professionalism scores well overall but is tempered by a recurring minority thread of complaints about curt or rude staff — particularly on the phone — and one incident of an employee littering from a company vehicle. Pricing is consistently described as fair, reasonable, and competitive (often cited as significantly cheaper than Roto-Rooter and other large chains), though one older review flagged a sump pump quote as overpriced, and one review described a last-minute price reversal. Project completion is a clear strength: the company is repeatedly praised for prompt response, same-day or next-day scheduling, follow-through on complex multi-day jobs, honoring callbacks, and coordinating with city inspectors — though one credible 1-star review alleged that root-clearing work was not completed as claimed on the first visit, requiring a return trip only after the customer confronted them. Experience is the highest-confidence dimension, with dozens of reviewers citing decades of trust, successful resolution of difficult problems that other companies failed to solve, and strong technical knowledge of Chicago's aging sewer infrastructure.

• 5 reviews contained no text whatsoever (blank body, 5-star rating only) and were excluded from dimension scoring. These blank reviews slightly inflate the raw star average and should be treated with skepticism.
• The review corpus spans from 2009 to 2025. Reviews older than 12 months (pre-June 2024) were given reduced weight in scoring. The majority of reviews are older than 1 year, though there is a healthy cluster of recent 2024-2025 reviews confirming continued service quality.
• One credible 1-star review (2019) alleged incomplete work on a root-clearing job, with the owner dismissing the complaint and refusing to cover the cost of a re-scope necessitated by their incomplete first visit. This is a meaningful quality-control flag.
• One 1-star review (2013) describes a last-minute price reversal on a scheduled job, with the reviewer alleging the timing was deliberate to exploit weather-related demand. This is a pricing integrity flag.
• One 1-star review (2016) cited poor workmanship on a french drain cleaning and poor attitude. One 1-star review (2011) cited a rude phone hang-up. One 3-star review (2010) noted inconsistent crew quality — one team helpful, another rude. These collectively indicate a recurring but minority pattern of customer service inconsistency, particularly by phone staff.
• One 1-star review (2024) cited a driver throwing trash from a company vehicle. While not directly related to service quality, it reflects on company culture and employee conduct.
• One older review (2011) noted the company provided sewer camera footage on VHS tape. A later review (2018) confirmed they had upgraded to USB flash drives, suggesting this is no longer an issue.
• No fake review patterns detected. Reviews are highly specific, include named staff members, describe distinct job scenarios, span 15+ years, include multiple negative and mixed reviews, and vary meaningfully in length and detail. The review set appears authentic.

This WW Score is based on 83 reviews with usable content spanning 15+ years, with strong representation across all four scored dimensions, and should be considered highly reliable — though prospective customers should note a consistent minority pattern of phone-staff curtness and at least one credible allegation of incomplete work being misrepresented as complete.

American Sewer and Drain (Jason) earns strong marks across all four dimensions based on a solid volume of reviews spanning 2018–2024. Professionalism is the most frequently mentioned dimension, with reviewers consistently praising punctuality (often arriving early), quick responsiveness, courteous demeanor, and clear communication. Pricing scores well due to multiple explicit mentions of fair, reasonable, and transparent costs — including one notable case where the final bill came in well below expectation and another where Jason saved a customer over $1,000 by repairing rather than replacing. Project completion is well-supported, with reviewers describing jobs finished cleanly, efficiently, and without recurring issues, including several urgent or same-day calls handled successfully. Experience scores highest in qualitative praise, with multiple reviewers noting Jason's diagnostic skill, technical knowledge, and willingness to educate customers — including instances where he correctly identified smaller problems that other contractors had misdiagnosed as major ones. Two 1-star reviews introduce a minor drag: one citing poor communication on a quote request, and one citing a perceived lack of attentiveness on a phone call — neither describes a failed job, but both reflect isolated service friction.

• Two 1-star reviews exist: one citing an unhelpful Yelp quote response with no date or time included, and one citing poor phone communication. Neither describes a failed project, but both suggest occasional responsiveness or attentiveness gaps.
• The review dated 2019-12-20 (1 star) contains a self-credentialing opener ('Qualified CPA here') which is a mild flag for emotionally motivated reviewing, though the complaint itself is plausible and not fabricated-sounding.
• A majority of reviews are older than 12 months (most fall between 2018–2023), with only 3 reviews from the past 12 months (2024). Recent performance appears consistent with historical patterns, but the lower volume of recent reviews slightly reduces certainty about current service quality.
• No strong fake review patterns detected. Reviews vary in length, specificity, and detail. Multiple reviews name the technician (Jason), reference specific jobs, and describe unique circumstances — consistent with authentic customer experiences.
• One review (2021-08-17) is a 5-star review for a referral interaction where no actual work was performed. This review was counted toward total reviews analyzed but excluded from dimension scoring as it provides no usable workmanship or service data.

This WW Score is based on 27 reviews with usable data across a 6-year span, with strong mention counts across all four dimensions and no significant fake review signals, making it a moderately reliable representation of this contractor's performance — tempered slightly by the recency gap, as only 3 reviews come from the past 12 months.

Arbi Plumbing receives consistently strong reviews across all four dimensions, with pricing and technical experience drawing particular praise — multiple reviewers explicitly noted fair, transparent pricing and no upselling, which is a meaningful differentiator. Professionalism scores are high but are modestly reduced by one notable 3-star review describing pushy behavior and demanding payment without prior approval, which is a legitimate concern that cannot be dismissed. Project completion is well-supported, with numerous reviewers describing jobs completed promptly, on the same visit, and with follow-through on complex work such as full pipe replacement. The one 1-star review citing a flat refusal to even assess a job, and one reviewer who received no service at all, introduce minor but real signals of inconsistent availability or customer handling.

• One 3-star review (2024-09-25) explicitly describes pushy behavior and demanding payment without prior approval — this is a professionalism concern and was weighted accordingly.
• One 1-star review (2021-09-20) describes being refused service with a single-word reply ('No'), suggesting possible inconsistency in customer communication or availability.
• Several reviews (2019–2022) are older than 1 year and were given reduced weight relative to the six reviews from 2024, which are more recent and directly relevant.
• A mild pattern of enthusiastic, superlative language appears across multiple reviews (e.g., 'FANTASTIC, superior, amazing'), but most reviews include specific details (dates, job types, pricing comparisons) that reduce fake review concern. No strong evidence of coordinated fake reviews detected.
• Two reviews (2022-09-21 and 2021-03-07) are brief and generic with no job-specific detail — these were treated as lower-evidential-weight entries.

This WW Score is based on 19 reviews spanning 2019–2024, with strong mention counts across all four dimensions and six reviews from the past 12 months, making it a reasonably reliable representation of current contractor performance — though the two negative reviews signal that experiences are not universally positive.