Find Nearby Plumbers In Orland Park, Illinois

Leipart Heating and Cooling demonstrates strong overall performance across all dimensions. Professionalism is a clear strength, with extensive evidence of punctuality, responsiveness, and courteous communication—particularly notable for same-day/emergency service and owner availability. Project completion is consistently reliable, with customers reporting thorough work and follow-through on callbacks. Technical expertise is evident across HVAC and plumbing services. Pricing shows moderate confidence due to mixed feedback: while most reviews praise fair and reasonable rates, several customers (5 reviews) explicitly cite overcharging, price gouging, or unexpectedly high quotes, suggesting inconsistency in pricing practices or communication.

• PRICING INCONSISTENCY: Five negative reviews (1-star ratings from 2018-01-04, 2017-09-05, 2015-12-31, 2014-06-19, 2014-06-03) explicitly cite overcharging, price gouging, or bait-and-switch pricing tactics. This contradicts the overwhelmingly positive pricing narrative in other reviews and suggests either inconsistent pricing practices, poor quote communication, or selective service quality.
• REVIEW REMOVAL ALLEGATION: One 1-star review (2018-01-04) alleges the owner removed a negative review from Yelp, citing inability to recognize the reviewer's account. This raises concerns about review authenticity and potential manipulation of ratings.
• SERVICE INCONSISTENCY: Multiple reviews (2014-11-03, 2016-02-13, 2014-06-03) report no-shows, missed appointments, or failure to follow up after initial contact, contradicting the strong responsiveness narrative in other reviews.
• INCOMPLETE WORK: One detailed 1-star review (2014-06-03) documents multiple incomplete jobs (ductwork cleaning, AC balancing, sink installation, sewer line inspection) with forgotten follow-ups, suggesting potential project management issues on complex jobs.
• RECENCY NOTE: Most reviews are from 2013-2018 (older than 12 months). Only ~15 reviews are from 2023-2024. Recent data is limited, making current performance assessment less reliable.

This WW Score of 84.2 should be treated with MODERATE-TO-HIGH caution. While the volume of positive reviews is substantial and dimensions show HIGH confidence, the presence of five explicit pricing complaints, allegations of review removal, and documented service failures on complex projects introduces material uncertainty. The score reflects strong average performance but masks significant inconsistency in pricing practices and occasional project management failures. Recent review volume is low, limiting confidence in current operational standards. Prospective customers should specifically discuss pricing upfront and clarify scope for complex multi-part jobs.

Southtown Plumbing demonstrates strong overall performance across all measured dimensions. Professionalism is a clear strength, with 11 reviews explicitly praising punctuality, communication, courtesy, and responsiveness—including same-day and emergency service. Project completion is solid with 10 mentions showing jobs finished correctly and on time, though one serious 2017 incident (hot water heater temperature adjustment) significantly damaged trust. Pricing receives moderate confidence (7 mentions) with generally fair estimates and transparent quotes, though one review notes they are 'not cheap.' Experience is well-documented across 9 reviews, highlighting skilled technicians, problem-solving ability, and quality workmanship. The company's age (reviews span 2011–2021) and consistency across multiple reviewers strengthen confidence, though the 2017 negative review and older review dates (most pre-2020) warrant some caution.

• One critical negative review from 2017 alleging negligence: plumber allegedly turned down hot water heater temperature, then blamed the equipment. This directly contradicts the otherwise consistent positive pattern and raises questions about quality control and accountability.
• Most reviews are older than 3 years (2011–2019); only 3 reviews from 2020–2021. Recency is limited, making current service quality assessment difficult.
• Review from 2019-07-30 and 2019-02-02 contain generic praise with minimal specific detail ('best,' 'highly recommend,' 'trustworthy') but lack concrete examples. However, other reviews provide substantial detail, so this is not indicative of systematic fake review patterns.
• One review (2011-07-25) notes 'not cheap' pricing, suggesting premium positioning; this aligns with fair pricing mentions but may indicate higher cost structure than competitors.

This WW Score of 84.2 is reliable with HIGH overall confidence due to 14 usable reviews with strong mention counts across all dimensions (7–11 per dimension). However, the 2017 negligence incident and limited recent reviews (post-2020) suggest caution: current service quality cannot be fully verified, and the company's accountability practices warrant clarification before engaging for critical work.

Lake House PHC demonstrates strong performance across all dimensions with consistent positive feedback from customers. Professionalism is a clear strength, with 10 mentions highlighting punctuality, communication, politeness, and responsiveness—particularly same-day service and thorough explanations. Project completion is solid with 9 mentions of finished work and follow-through, though one 2016 review noted they declined a quote due to workload. Pricing receives 7 mentions with generally favorable feedback on fair and reasonable rates, though one 2020 review raised concerns about a $395 total cost ($125 service call + $250 labor) for clearing a bird nest with no parts replaced, creating some pricing perception variance. Experience is well-documented across 8 mentions, with customers praising technical knowledge, quality workmanship, and problem-solving ability. The company's longevity and repeat customer base strengthen confidence in these scores.

• Recency concern: 8 of 13 reviews are older than 3 years (2013–2017), with only 5 reviews from 2018 onward. Most recent substantive feedback is from October 2024, but historical weight may not reflect current operations.
• Pricing variance: One 2020 review (2-star) explicitly criticized service call fees and labor costs as excessive, contrasting sharply with other reviews praising 'reasonable' and 'great' pricing. This suggests pricing perception is not uniform.
• One negative review (1-star, 2016) reflects a declined quote due to workload, not service quality—this is a business decision rather than performance failure, but it does represent a customer dissatisfaction event.
• No fake review patterns detected. Reviews contain specific details (bird nests, furnace installations, same-day service, senior customer assistance) and vary in tone and length, suggesting authentic feedback.

This WW Score of 82.3 is reliable with HIGH overall confidence due to strong mention counts across all dimensions (7–10 mentions each) and consistent positive patterns, but should be interpreted with awareness that most historical reviews predate 2018 and one pricing complaint suggests current pricing may warrant verification with recent quotes.

Suburban Chicago Plumbing Experts demonstrates strong overall performance across all measured dimensions. Professionalism scores highest (85.3) with consistent mentions of punctuality, courteous staff, and responsive communication across 32 reviews. Project completion (84.2) is well-supported by 28 reviews detailing successful job resolution, follow-up work, and warranty-backed repairs. Experience (86.1) is validated by 24 reviews praising technical skill, problem-solving, and honest diagnostics. Pricing (76.5) is the weakest dimension, with 13 mentions showing mixed feedback—many customers praise fair and competitive rates, but several older reviews cite high costs and one recent review reported a $1,700 diagnostic fee that failed to locate the leak. The WW Score of 82.1 reflects a reliable contractor with strong execution, though pricing transparency and consistency warrant attention.

• Four 1-star reviews from 2014–2023 (older reviews) describe serious issues: poor workmanship, code violations, overcharging, and unprofessional behavior. These are geographically and temporally distant from the recent 5-star cluster (2024–2025), suggesting possible management/staff changes or inconsistent service quality over time.
• One recent 1-star review (2024-11-11) provides vague complaints ('subpar service,' 'dishonesty,' 'misrepresented capabilities') without specific details, reducing its evidentiary weight.
• One detailed negative review (2021-04-06) documents significant professionalism failures: late arrival, unprepared crew, broken equipment, incomplete work, and poor follow-up. This contradicts the recent positive trend and suggests occasional lapses in project management.
• One recent 1-star review (2024-11-11) reports a $1,700 thermal imaging diagnostic that failed to locate a leak, with unclear pricing communication upfront. This is the only recent pricing complaint and warrants scrutiny.
• Two reviews from 2021-08-02 appear to be duplicates or near-duplicates of the same large sewer line replacement project, slightly inflating the appearance of project completion mentions.
• Four reviews (2025-05-10 and 2025-05-10) contain no text, only 5-star ratings. These cannot be analyzed for dimension-specific evidence.
• The overwhelming majority of recent reviews (2024–2025) are 5-star with detailed, specific praise, while older reviews (2014–2023) contain multiple 1-star complaints. This temporal clustering suggests either genuine service improvement or potential review manipulation. Recommend treating recent scores with slightly elevated caution.

This WW Score of 82.1 is reliable for recent service expectations (2024–2025) based on 40+ recent detailed reviews with HIGH confidence across three dimensions, but should be tempered by awareness of serious documented failures in 2021 and earlier, inconsistent pricing communication, and the temporal clustering of positive reviews which warrants monitoring for authenticity.

Krupske Sprinkler Systems demonstrates strong professionalism with consistent praise for courteous, knowledgeable technicians and responsive customer service across 12 reviews. Technical expertise is well-documented with 9 mentions of skilled workmanship and problem-solving. However, project completion is significantly impacted by three serious negative reviews (2024, 2019, 2015) detailing damage to underground drainage systems during installation and unresolved disputes, lowering this dimension to 72. Pricing is generally perceived as fair and reasonable across 6 mentions. The company's strength in customer interaction and technical skill is undermined by documented failures in accountability and damage remediation.

• CRITICAL: Three 1-star reviews document installation damage to underground drain tiles/extensions with company refusal to repair. Two reviews (2024-02-09 and 2019-07-30) describe identical issues: cutting into drain lines during installation and refusing responsibility. This pattern suggests systemic installation quality control problems.
• DISPUTE HANDLING CONCERN: 2015 review indicates owner Bob Krupske refused to acknowledge or remedy a lost/replaced RPZ valve after 23 years of service, showing poor conflict resolution and customer retention practices.
• SERVICE AREA LIMITATION: 2022 review indicates company refuses service in certain nearby areas (Beecher, IL), which may reflect capacity or business model constraints.
• RECENCY BIAS: Most positive reviews are from 2019-2024, but critical negative reviews span 2015-2024, indicating long-standing unresolved issues. Recent positive reviews (2024) may not account for documented installation problems.
• FAKE REVIEW RISK - MODERATE: Review from 2023-06-30 uses generic language ('always the best service, professional') with minimal specifics and reads formulaic, but insufficient pattern to conclusively flag as fake.

This WW Score of 81.2 should be treated with caution despite HIGH overall confidence. While professionalism and experience scores are well-supported by 12 and 9 mentions respectively, the three documented cases of installation damage causing long-term property harm (drainage system failures, sinkholes, sidewalk collapse) represent material failures in project completion that are not fully reflected in the 72 score due to limited mention count. Prospective customers should prioritize the installation damage pattern and dispute-handling concerns over the generally positive service reviews.

The overwhelming majority of reviews praise professionalism, punctuality, communication, and friendly attitudes across multiple technicians and owners (Aaron, Mike, Guillermo, Ron, and others), driving a strong but not perfect professionalism score. Pricing scores well overall — many reviewers explicitly cite reasonable, fair, or competitive pricing — but is tempered by several notable complaints: one reviewer was charged nearly $700 for a snake with no resolution, another documented being charged over double the market rate for HVAC maintenance, one experienced a mid-job price change from $285 to $388.50, and another felt labor charges for a warranty replacement were excessive. Project completion scores solidly given the large volume of reviews describing completed jobs, same-day or next-day service, and follow-through, but is reduced by a handful of reviews describing abandoned callbacks, a technician who left without hot water working, a dishwasher leveling issue that took two weeks to resolve, and a misdiagnosis case where a competitor fixed what A-1 could not. Experience scores high based on numerous explicit mentions of skill, technical knowledge, and problem-solving ability, including complex jobs like CIPP lining, tankless water heater repair, and leak detection under homes.

• A significant number of reviews (approximately 40) contain no text — only a star rating. These blank reviews cannot contribute usable data to any dimension and were excluded from scoring.
• Several reviews appear to reference entirely different companies or technicians (e.g., A-1 Total Service Plumbing with Guillermo/Esteban/Osvaldo/Leo vs. Complete Plumbing with Aaron/Mike Torculas). This review set appears to aggregate reviews from at least two or possibly three distinct businesses. Scores reflect the combined pool but reliability is reduced because performance may vary significantly between entities.
• Multiple reviews for 'Complete Plumbing' reference owner Mike Torculas and span back to 2011, while others reference Aaron Petrossian as owner of Complete Plumbing — these may be two separate businesses operating under the same name in different regions.
• Pricing dimension has meaningful negative signal: at least 4 reviews explicitly describe overcharging, hidden fees, or price changes mid-job, which significantly tempers the otherwise positive pricing sentiment.
• One review (2025-03-11, 1-star) explicitly warns readers to get a second opinion on A-1 Total Service Plumbing recommendations, citing a misdiagnosis and an unnecessary $2,400 repair quote when a $400 hydrojet and simple obstruction removal solved the problem.
• One review (2025-05-10, 2-star) describes being charged nearly $700 for a snake that did not resolve the issue, followed by a $7,000 camera quote and then no response when requesting camera footage — suggesting possible upselling and poor follow-through.
• One review (2024-11-11, 1-star) and one review (2018-07-28, 1-star) cite rude phone/office staff, and one review (2022-08-17, 1-star) describes the owner being rude and late to an estimate appointment — a recurring pattern of customer service issues at the front-end of the business.
• One review (2017-07-17, 1-star) describes a technician breaking faucet handles and then becoming unreachable for follow-up repair — a project completion failure.
• One review (2021-03-03, 1-star) describes incomplete work and a system left without hot water after the technician departed.
• Review dates span from 2011 to 2025. Reviews older than 12 months (pre-June 2024) should be weighted less heavily. The most recent reviews (2025) are mixed, with both strong positives and notable negatives appearing in the same period.

This WW Score carries HIGH data confidence due to the large volume of substantive reviews, but its reliability as a single-entity score is meaningfully reduced by the apparent aggregation of reviews from at least two distinct businesses; prospective customers should verify which specific company and technician they are engaging before relying on this score.