Find Nearby Plumbers Companies In 60302, Cicero, Illinois

Andres Plumbing earns consistently strong marks across all four dimensions, with every review contributing usable data. Professionalism is the most frequently praised attribute — punctuality, responsiveness, and courteous communication are cited across nearly every review, including by a general contractor who uses him as a trusted sub. Pricing is highlighted as transparent, honest, and competitive with or below larger companies, with one reviewer specifically noting he was advised to get a second opinion before committing — a rare and trust-building gesture. Project completion is well-supported, with multiple reviewers noting repeat use over years and jobs finished on time and to a high standard. Experience and workmanship are praised directly, including for technically complex jobs such as submeter installation requiring city permits and specialized licensing. The primary caveat is that the review base is small (8 reviews) and the most recent review is from 2023, with the majority of reviews being 3–10 years old, which limits how well this score reflects current performance.

• All 8 reviews are 5-star ratings, which warrants mild scrutiny; however, reviews contain specific job details, named comparisons to competitors, and varied writing styles, reducing the likelihood of fabrication.
• RECENCY WARNING: Only 1 review is within the past 12 months (2023). 5 of 8 reviews are more than 5 years old, and 3 are more than 8 years old. The WW Score may not reflect current performance.
• Small sample size (8 reviews) limits statistical reliability despite HIGH confidence labels on individual dimensions. Scores should be interpreted with this context in mind.

This WW Score is moderately reliable given the consistent quality of review content and full dimensional coverage, but should be treated with caution due to the small review pool and the fact that the majority of reviews are significantly dated, with limited evidence of recent performance.

This contractor shows inconsistent performance across dimensions. Professionalism scores reasonably well (76) with 6 mentions highlighting friendly, responsive, and courteous behavior, though some reviews note communication failures. Project completion is the weakest area (62.5), with multiple reviews documenting incomplete work, abandoned jobs, and failure to follow through on callbacks—most critically a 2019 review describing over a month of non-communication after initial contact. Pricing appears fair (73.3) based on limited mentions, and technical experience is solid (82) when work is actually completed. The significant gap between older positive reviews (2014-2015) and recent negative experiences (2019) suggests declining service quality or consistency issues.

• RECENCY CONCERN: Most positive reviews are from 2014-2015 (5-9 years old). The most recent review (2019) is highly negative, describing severe follow-up failures and abandonment of work. This suggests potential service degradation over time.
• PROJECT COMPLETION RED FLAG: Multiple reviews (2019, 2014) document incomplete work, non-responsiveness to callbacks, and jobs left unfinished. One review explicitly states they were charged for work not performed and calls were never returned.
• INCONSISTENCY PATTERN: Stark contrast between glowing older reviews and damaging recent review suggests either declining quality or inconsistent service delivery across different plumbers/teams.
• COMMUNICATION FAILURES: Two separate reviews mention failure to follow up or return calls, which directly undermines professionalism claims.

This score should be treated with caution due to significant recency bias (most positive data is 5+ years old) and a concerning recent negative review documenting serious follow-through failures. The MODERATE overall confidence reflects conflicting evidence and the small sample size; potential customers should heavily weight the 2019 review as more current and representative of actual service delivery.

Professionalism is the strongest and most consistently mentioned dimension, with multiple reviewers praising responsiveness, punctuality, communication, and polite demeanor across several reviews. Project completion scores well, with reviewers noting jobs were seen through to resolution — including weekend and emergency callbacks — though the small total review count limits confidence. Pricing is mentioned positively in a few reviews, with one reviewer explicitly calling the price fair for a large Sunday job and another noting reasonable pricing, but the limited mentions keep this score conservative. Experience is supported by references to diagnosing complex issues, explaining the process, and delivering quality workmanship, though again the low review volume constrains confidence. One review (the window-cleaning review) appears to be for an entirely different type of business and was treated as non-applicable to plumbing-specific scoring.

• One review (dated 2016-09-06) describes a window-cleaning service with a crew of three and references Angie's List coupons — this is almost certainly a misattributed review for a different business entirely and was excluded from dimension scoring.
• One review (dated 2014-10-22) contains only the word 'unknown' with no usable content and was excluded from all scoring.
• All reviews are rated 5.0 stars with no negative or mixed feedback, which warrants mild fake-review awareness caution, though most reviews do contain specific, credible details that reduce this concern.
• All reviews are older than 12 months — the most recent plumbing-relevant review dates to January 2018, making this data significantly outdated. Current performance cannot be reliably inferred.
• Total usable review count is very low (7 reviews, with only 6 fully applicable to plumbing). Scores should be treated as directional only.

This WW Score carries LOW overall reliability due to the very small number of usable reviews, the complete absence of any negative feedback across all ratings, the presence of one clearly misattributed review, and the fact that all reviews are more than six years old — meaning this score should not be used as a confident indicator of current contractor quality.