Find Nearby Plumbers In Des Plaines, Illinois

Kevin from KPW Plumbing demonstrates consistently strong performance across all four dimensions. Professionalism is exceptionally high, with 10 of 11 reviews explicitly praising punctuality, responsiveness, friendliness, cleanliness, and courteous behavior. Pricing is fair and transparent according to 7 reviews, with customers noting honest quotes and no pressure to overspend. Project completion is solid across 9 reviews, with customers reporting timely work, thorough follow-through, and emergency responsiveness. Technical expertise is evident in 8 reviews, with customers highlighting problem-solving ability, knowledge of complex systems, and quality workmanship on diverse projects ranging from old homes to new installations.

• All 11 reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative feedback, which is statistically unusual and warrants caution
• Review dates cluster heavily in 2016 and 2020; only 3 reviews are from 2021 or later, limiting recency of data
• Language patterns show some repetition (e.g., 'fair price,' 'highly recommend,' 'honest') across multiple reviews, though not identical enough to definitively flag as fake
• No reviews mention any problems, delays, or dissatisfaction, which is atypical for a contractor with 11+ reviews

This WW Score of 89.2 is based on consistently positive data across all dimensions with HIGH confidence, but the absence of any critical feedback and the age of most reviews (5+ years old) suggest this score should be treated as a strong baseline rather than current performance; verification of recent work quality is recommended.

ABV Plumbing earns strong marks across all four dimensions, driven by a large and consistent body of reviews spanning 2019 through mid-2025. Professionalism is the standout dimension, with dozens of reviewers explicitly praising punctuality, courteous behavior, use of shoe covers, mask compliance, and clear communication — including named technicians like Ivo, Hristo, and Wafiq receiving repeated individual praise. Project completion scores are high, with the vast majority of reviewers confirming jobs were finished cleanly, on time, and without callbacks needed, though two reviews (one involving an improper water heater install and one involving a refused service call) introduce minor deductions. Pricing is generally viewed favorably — multiple reviewers cited fair quotes, upfront pricing, and one notable instance where a plumber charged less than the agreed rate after a quick repair — but one 2-star review flagged a $245 labor-only quote as excessive, preventing a higher score. Experience scores well based on numerous mentions of skilled diagnostics, problem-solving on difficult jobs, and technical competence, though the 2021 water heater complaint (citing improper installation requiring a competitor to fix) is a meaningful negative data point that tempers the score.

• 8 reviews contain no text whatsoever — only a star rating. These were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable evidence.
• A cluster of reviews dated 2025-05-10 (6 reviews on the same date) and 2025-04-10 (4 reviews on the same date) warrants mild scrutiny. However, the reviews contain varied language, specific technician names, and differing job types, suggesting they are likely legitimate Home Depot installation batch reviews rather than fabricated entries.
• One review (2021-08-04, 1 star) explicitly states ABV improperly installed a water heater and that a competitor had to fix it. This is a significant quality failure and was weighted accordingly in the Experience and Project Completion scores.
• One review (2022-06-09, 1 star) describes a refused service call for an outdoor spigot, citing unclear scope-of-work policies. This reflects a communication or service-scope issue rather than a workmanship failure.
• One review (2023-07-31, 2 stars) flagged a $245 labor-only quote for a one-hour faucet replacement as unreasonable. This was factored into the Pricing score.
• The majority of reviews are from 2024–2025 and are therefore within the recency window. Older reviews (2019–2021) are consistent in tone and were given slightly reduced weight per recency rules.
• Overall review sentiment is overwhelmingly positive (5-star), which is statistically unusual. However, the presence of specific names, job details, and a handful of genuine negative reviews reduces the likelihood of systematic fake review inflation.

This WW Score is based on 101 reviews with usable content spanning approximately six years, with strong recency representation, and carries HIGH overall confidence — though users should note the isolated but serious water heater installation complaint and the pattern of same-day review clusters when making a final hiring decision.

Perfect Turf and Steve receive overwhelmingly positive feedback across all four dimensions. Professionalism is the standout strength, with nearly every reviewer explicitly praising responsiveness, communication, punctuality, and courteous attitude — including Steve personally accompanying clients to nurseries and returning calls promptly. Project completion scores are strong, with multiple reviewers confirming work was delivered on time, on budget, and with follow-through including a callback to address leaning trees. Experience is well-supported by detailed accounts of skilled grading, sod installation, plant selection guidance, and design problem-solving. Pricing is noted favorably in five reviews, with one reviewer explicitly stating Steve's price was more reasonable than competitors for equivalent work. The only caveat is that the majority of reviews are from 2017–2021, with only one review from 2023, so recency of evidence is somewhat limited.

• All 14 reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative or mixed feedback — this warrants mild caution, though most reviews contain specific project details and named individuals which reduces the likelihood of fabrication.
• Review recency concern: 12 of 14 reviews are older than 2 years as of 2025, and only 1 review is from the past 12 months (2023). Current performance cannot be fully confirmed from this dataset.
• Two reviews (2020-06-02 and 2017-10-20) both mention being referred by Lurvey's Garden Center — this is a consistent detail that adds authenticity rather than raising concern, but is noted for transparency.
• No negative reviews or constructive criticism present in the dataset. While reviews appear genuine due to specificity, the absence of any critical feedback means the score reflects a best-case picture and may not capture occasional service failures.

This WW Score is moderately reliable — the high mention counts across all dimensions and the specificity of individual reviews support confidence in the scores, but the near-total absence of recent reviews (post-2023) and the all-5-star pattern mean the score should be treated as a strong historical indicator rather than a fully current assessment.

Dave's plumbing business demonstrates strong performance across all dimensions, with particularly high marks for professionalism (92/100) and technical expertise (90/100). Ten reviews explicitly praise his trustworthiness, communication, punctuality, and quality workmanship. Pricing is consistently described as fair and transparent across five mentions. Project completion is solid, though one 2018 review reports an unresolved callback issue that significantly impacts this dimension. The business shows remarkable consistency over a 9-year period, with long-term customer retention and repeat business being common themes.

• One significant negative review from 2018 (1-star) reports a leaking fixture and complete failure to return calls/texts over 5 months. This is a material service failure that substantially lowers the project_completion score despite otherwise excellent feedback.
• Most reviews are older than 12 months (9 of 11 reviews predate 2024). Only 1 recent review from November 2024 provides current-year data. Recency is limited.
• While reviews are overwhelmingly positive, they lack specific technical detail in some cases. However, this does not suggest fake reviews—the language is varied, specific incidents are described, and the one negative review provides credible detail.

This WW Score of 88.2 is reliable and should be trusted, supported by 11 reviews with consistent positive feedback across all dimensions and HIGH confidence across the board. However, the 2018 callback failure and limited recent data (only 1 review in past 12 months) suggest caution—current service quality should be verified with recent references before engaging.

Scott demonstrates strong performance across all four dimensions with consistently high marks from customers spanning multiple decades. Project completion is his strongest area, with 10 mentions highlighting on-time delivery, thorough work, and follow-through on complex jobs. Pricing receives strong marks (88/100) with customers repeatedly noting fair, reasonable, and transparent quotes with significant savings. Professionalism scores 85/100, with notable strengths in responsiveness and courtesy, though one 2011 review mentions he was late and failed to provide a written quote as promised. Experience is well-documented at 89/100, with customers praising his technical knowledge, problem-solving ability, and meticulous workmanship across diverse projects (plumbing, electrical, basement remodeling, deck building).

• Review age: 11 of 15 reviews are older than 8 years (pre-2017), with only 2 reviews from 2016-2017. Most data reflects performance from 2005-2013, limiting recency validity.
• One review (2015-08-14) contains only a period (.) with a 3-star rating and provides no usable data.
• One review (2011-07-10) is a single sentence complaint with no context, rated 1-star, but lacks detail on whether this reflects a pattern or isolated incident.
• Potential survivorship bias: Highly satisfied customers may be more likely to leave detailed reviews; dissatisfied customers may not return to review.
• No reviews from past 12 months limits ability to assess current service quality or whether standards have changed.

This WW Score of 87.2 carries HIGH overall confidence based on substantial mention counts across all dimensions, but should be interpreted cautiously due to significant review age—the majority of data is 8+ years old, and only 2 reviews are from 2016-2017, making it unclear whether current performance matches historical standards.

All Town Plumbing has a large and generally positive review base spanning over a decade, with consistent praise for responsiveness, after-hours availability, and knowledgeable technicians — particularly Jerry and Rigo. Pricing is frequently cited as fair or affordable, and the majority of customers report jobs completed same-day or as promised. However, the score is meaningfully tempered by a notable cluster of serious negative reviews describing scare tactics and upselling, poor workmanship with cheap materials, a dramatic cost overrun from $800 to $1800 with disputed quality, a no-call/no-show, and at least two instances of rude or dismissive behavior. These negative reviews are specific, credible, and detailed enough to carry significant weight against the otherwise positive trend. The recency of reviews is generally strong, with many from 2024–2025, though a substantial portion of the review base dates from 2016–2022.

• FAKE REVIEW CONCERN — MODERATE: A significant number of reviews from the 2018–2022 period share identical or near-identical phrasing (e.g., two reviews dated 2021-06-10 are word-for-word duplicates: 'Jerry's the best! I liked that I dealt with him and not some call center. He's extremely experienced and resolved my issue quickly.'). Additionally, several reviews dated 2017–2020 use suspiciously generic language with no job-specific detail. Confidence in the aggregate positive score is slightly reduced as a result.
• BLANK REVIEWS: At least 6 reviews contain no text whatsoever (only a star rating). These were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable data.
• UNKNOWN/PLACEHOLDER REVIEWS: Three reviews contain only the word 'unknown' as text. These were excluded from dimension scoring.
• SERIOUS NEGATIVE INCIDENTS: Multiple detailed 1-star reviews describe specific misconduct including: (1) upselling via scare tactics on a shutoff valve and supply line at $200+ for ~$15 parts; (2) installation of cheap plastic gaskets that broke within a week with no improvement to the stated problem; (3) a job that ballooned from $800 to $1800 with disputed workmanship, alleged intoxication of the owner on-site, and incomplete repairs at time of payment demand; (4) a no-call/no-show after a confirmed appointment; (5) an arrogant technician attempting to sell an irrelevant product; (6) a boiler tune-up resulting in dangerously high CO2 levels with rude follow-up service.
• RECENCY NOTE: The majority of reviews with substantive content are from 2018–2025, which is acceptable for scoring purposes. Reviews from 2013–2015 were given reduced weight. Most recent reviews (2024–2025) remain largely positive, suggesting the serious negative incidents may be isolated or historical rather than a current pattern — but this cannot be confirmed with certainty.
• MULTIPLE TECHNICIANS: Reviews reference at least five different technicians (Jerry, Rigo, Sean/Shawn, Coco, Chuck, Dan, Jonathan). Quality and conduct appear to vary by individual, which may explain the wide variance between glowing and severely negative reviews.

This WW Score is based on a large review sample (141 reviews) with HIGH confidence across all four dimensions, but should be interpreted with caution due to confirmed duplicate reviews suggesting possible fake or incentivized submissions, a meaningful number of credible and detailed negative reviews describing serious service failures, and quality variance across multiple technicians — consumers should read negative reviews carefully before hiring.