Find Nearby Plumbers In New Orleans, Louisiana

D&D Maintenance has a mixed but generally positive track record across reviews spanning 2015–2023. Professionalism is the most-mentioned dimension and is dragged down significantly by two serious negative reviews: one describing a complete failure to show up for multiple scheduled appointments, and another describing rude, callous behavior by a worker toward a customer on the street. The positive reviews consistently praise timeliness, friendliness, and pleasant interactions, but the no-show pattern is a meaningful reliability concern. Pricing is mentioned favorably in a small number of reviews, with terms like 'fair' and 'competitively priced' used. Project completion scores reflect that most jobs described were completed successfully and on time, but the repeated no-show incident in one review is a direct completion failure that cannot be ignored. Experience scores are moderately positive, with reviewers citing knowledgeability and technical competence across electrical and plumbing tasks.

• Two reviews are from 2017 and two from 2015–2016, making the majority of reviews older than 5 years. Only one review is from the past 12 months (2023). Recency weighting significantly limits confidence in current service quality.
• The 2019 review describing two consecutive no-shows with no proactive communication is a serious reliability red flag and was weighted heavily against professionalism and project completion scores.
• The 2023 review describes unprofessional employee behavior in a public setting. While not a direct service failure, it reflects on company culture and was counted against professionalism.
• Several positive reviews are brief and lack specific detail (e.g., 'best,' 'great at all kinds of things'), which slightly reduces their evidentiary weight. However, they do not appear to be fake — they contain personal context and varied language.
• No reviews mention hidden charges, billing disputes, or warranty/callback issues, so those sub-factors within pricing and project completion could not be assessed.

This WW Score carries MODERATE overall reliability due to a small review pool of 8 reviews, the majority of which are more than 5 years old, combined with two substantive negative reviews that reveal real concerns about punctuality and employee conduct.

Michel's Plumbing receives consistently positive feedback across all four dimensions, with particular strength in professionalism — all four reviews mention responsiveness, friendly staff, or outstanding customer service. Pricing stands out in two reviews, including one where their quote came in over $1,000 cheaper than a competitor, suggesting genuine value. Project completion is supported by three reviews referencing completed jobs including a complex tunnel dig and emergency sewer repair, with no mention of abandoned or incomplete work. Experience is touched on in two reviews, with specific praise for the quality of workmanship and cleanliness of the tunnel crew. However, the small review pool and the age of most reviews (three of four are from 2021–2023) limit confidence in these scores.

• Only 4 reviews total — WW Score should be treated as preliminary and not fully reliable.
• Three of four reviews are older than 12 months (dated 2021 and 2023); only one review is from the past 12 months (May 2024). Recency weighting is limited.
• All reviews are 5-star with no negative feedback of any kind. While the reviews do contain specific details (tunnel dig, $1,000 price difference, emergency sewer repair), the uniformly perfect ratings warrant mild caution.
• No mentions of any negative experiences, delays, or pricing concerns — this may reflect genuine quality or a self-selected review pool.

This WW Score is based on only 4 reviews, most of which are over one year old, and should be considered a low-confidence preliminary assessment that requires more recent and numerous reviews to be fully trusted.

Affordable Plumbing receives consistently positive feedback across all four scored dimensions, with professionalism being the most frequently and explicitly praised attribute — multiple reviewers specifically called out Sheldon's professional demeanor, communication, and reliability. Pricing is mentioned favorably in two reviews, with one reviewer noting a 'very fair price' and another affirming the company name reflects reality, though the limited mentions keep confidence conservative. Project completion is supported by references to quality work, same-day emergency service, and Sheldon going above and beyond to ensure a perfect installation outcome. Experience is evidenced by descriptions of knowledgeable, efficient, and high-quality workmanship across three reviews. The overall score is tempered by the small review pool of only four reviews, two of which are over two years old.

• Only 4 reviews total — WW Score should be treated as preliminary and not fully reliable.
• Two of the four reviews are from 2021, making them over two years old at time of analysis; the two most recent reviews are from early-to-mid 2023.
• All reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative or mixed feedback — while the reviews do contain specific details that reduce fake review suspicion, the uniformity warrants mild caution.
• No reviews mention any negative experiences, delays, or pricing concerns — absence of complaints cannot be interpreted as evidence of perfection given the very small sample size.

This WW Score is based on only 4 reviews and should be considered a preliminary indicator only — a minimum of 10+ reviews would be needed to establish a reliably representative score for this contractor.

Paul D Plumber earns consistently positive marks across all four dimensions from a small but informative review set. Professionalism is the strongest and best-supported dimension, with all five reviewers noting courteous, organized, and responsive behavior including prompt scheduling and professional appearance. Pricing is described as reasonable or fair in three reviews, supporting a solid but not exceptional score. Project completion scores slightly lower due to one explicit note that work was not delivered when originally promised, which prevents a top-tier score despite all jobs appearing to have been finished. Experience is reflected positively through multiple reviews describing efficient, skilled work across varied plumbing tasks, though the sample size limits confidence.

• Only 5 reviews total — WW Score should be treated as preliminary and directional only, not definitive.
• Two reviews (2017 and 2018) are more than 5 years old and may not reflect current service quality. These were included but carry reduced reliability.
• No obvious fake review patterns detected — reviews contain specific details, varied language, and named individuals, which supports authenticity.
• One review explicitly noted the job was not completed when promised, which is a minor but real project completion flag.

This WW Score is based on only 5 reviews spanning 6 years, making it directionally positive but statistically limited — more recent and numerous reviews would be needed to establish a truly reliable score.

Three of the four reviews contain substantive, usable feedback. Professionalism is the best-supported dimension, with multiple reviewers explicitly praising punctuality, courtesy, responsiveness, and communication. Project completion is also reasonably supported, with references to jobs finishing on time and repairs holding up without issues. Pricing received only one explicit mention — described as fair — so that score is conservative and carries limited confidence. Experience is touched on in two reviews, noting knowledgeable and skilled workmanship, but the sample is too small to score with confidence. All reviews are from mid-2022, making them over two years old, which reduces their relevance to current performance.

• All 4 reviews are dated from May–June 2022, meaning they are over 2 years old. Current performance cannot be reliably inferred from this data.
• One review ('Got the needed handrails') is extremely brief and provides no usable dimensional data. It was excluded from scoring.
• Sample size is very small (4 reviews total, 3 usable). The WW Score should be treated as preliminary and not definitive.
• No reviews mention negative experiences, callbacks, or any friction — while this could reflect genuine quality, it may also reflect a small and potentially self-selected sample. No fake review patterns detected, but specificity is limited across most reviews.

This WW Score carries LOW overall reliability due to the very small review sample (4 reviews), the age of all reviews (2022), and the limited dimensional coverage across most categories — treat this score as a rough early indicator only, not a confident assessment of current contractor quality.

All four reviews speak positively to professionalism, highlighting responsiveness, friendliness, and courteous behavior, which drives the strongest dimension score. Project completion is supported by three reviews describing jobs that were finished promptly and satisfactorily. Pricing is mentioned in two reviews as reasonable or fair, but the limited evidence warrants a conservative score. Experience is referenced in two reviews through mentions of knowledgeability and the breadth of services offered, though specifics are sparse. Overall, the scores are credible in direction but must be treated cautiously given the very small review pool.

• Only 4 reviews total — WW Score reliability is significantly limited; results should be treated as directional only.
• Three of four reviews are older than 12 months (2020–2021); only one review is from the past 12 months (August 2024). Recency weighting is poor.
• Reviews are generically positive with limited specific detail about the work performed, which slightly reduces confidence in authenticity, though no strong fake-review pattern is detected.
• First review references a friend's opinion rather than direct personal experience, reducing its evidentiary weight.

This WW Score is based on only 4 reviews, three of which are over two years old, making it LOW reliability — the score indicates a positive trend but should not be considered a definitive assessment of this contractor's current performance.