Find Nearby Plumbers In Frederick, Maryland

Crown Plumbing earns strong marks across all four dimensions, with consistent praise for punctual, courteous, and responsive technicians spanning nearly a decade of reviews. Pricing is generally regarded as fair and transparent, with multiple reviewers explicitly noting reasonable or competitive rates and upfront flat-fee disclosure — however, three notable negative reviews describe upselling, undisclosed diagnostic fees, and charges significantly above market rate, which meaningfully drag the pricing score down. Project completion is solid overall, with many reviewers noting same-day or next-day service and jobs finished cleanly and thoroughly, though one review describes a multi-day delay and another describes an undersized machine that could not complete the job. Technical experience is well-documented across a wide range of plumbing tasks including tankless water heater installations, gas line work, sewer clearing, and complex older-home plumbing, with multiple reviewers specifically calling out technician knowledge and problem-solving ability.

• DUPLICATE REVIEW DETECTED: Two reviews with nearly identical text ('Robert came out and helped with our water heater...saved us a ton of money. This is the 4th time we have worked with Crown Plumbing') were submitted on 2025-05-10 and 2025-05-07 respectively. These appear to be the same review posted twice and were counted as one unique data point.
• LARGE VOLUME OF EMPTY REVIEWS: Approximately 40+ reviews contain no review text whatsoever — only a star rating. These reviews provide zero usable qualitative data and were excluded from dimension scoring. This inflates the apparent review count and reduces the reliability of aggregate star ratings.
• RECENCY NOTE: A significant portion of substantive reviews (roughly 60%) are dated 2022-06-07 with identical timestamps, suggesting a possible bulk import or data migration artifact rather than organic review submission. These reviews were included but treated with moderate caution.
• PRICING CONCERN — NEGATIVE PATTERN: Three separate negative reviews (1-star) describe specific pricing issues: a $1,800 upsell on a shower fixture for a senior female customer, a $1,800 hydroblast upsell on a commercial job with no callback for refund, and a $149 diagnostic fee charged after being told there was no diagnostic fee. These are specific, credible, and consistent enough to represent a real pattern of concern.
• RESPONSIVENESS FAILURE: One reviewer explicitly states 'They never called' (1-star, 2022). While isolated, this directly contradicts the company's broadly praised responsiveness.
• ONE REVIEW EXPLICITLY STATES 'Didn't use their service' yet gave 5 stars — this is a meaningless data point and was excluded from all scoring.
• OLDEST REVIEWS DATE TO 2012-2013: Several reviews are over 10 years old. While positive, these were given significantly reduced weight in scoring as they may not reflect current business practices or staffing.

This WW Score is based on a large volume of reviews spanning over a decade, with strong mention counts across all four dimensions, giving the score HIGH overall confidence — however, reliability is modestly reduced by the presence of ~40 content-free reviews, a duplicate review, a bulk-import date anomaly, and a credible pattern of pricing complaints that suggest inconsistent billing practices warranting consumer caution.

Comstock Plumbing has a strong and well-documented track record across a large review base spanning over a decade, with the majority of customers praising punctuality, courteous technicians, responsive scheduling, and fair pricing. Professionalism scores are tempered by a meaningful cluster of negative reviews citing no-shows, cancelled appointments without notice, failure to return calls, and at least one instance of rude owner behavior during a dispute. Project completion is similarly mixed: while most jobs are described as completed efficiently and correctly, several reviews document incomplete work, a warranty repair that caused flooding with no follow-up, a broken fixture left unrepaired, and a customer who had to hire a second plumber to finish a job Comstock left incomplete. Pricing is generally praised as reasonable and competitive, but two reviews explicitly cite overcharging — one describing a $549 charge for 40 minutes of work and another referencing $900 with no problem resolved. Experience scores are buoyed by consistent praise for technical knowledge and problem-solving, though one review explicitly calls out a lack of skill compared to competitors.

• 9 reviews contain no text content — only a star rating. These were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable data.
• Two reviews appear to be near-identical duplicates: the 'Within less than two hours' Jeff review appears verbatim in both a 2021 and 2020 entry. This may indicate a copied or reposted review and has been counted only once per dimension.
• The 'Sheryl commode' review (2023) is highly informal and humorous in tone with no specific service details. It was treated as a low-signal positive review and given minimal weight.
• A significant portion of reviews (approximately 30+) are dated 2024-06-09 with identical timestamps, suggesting a possible bulk import or data migration artifact rather than organic review dates. Confidence in recency weighting for this cluster is reduced.
• Most negative reviews cite systemic issues: no-shows, unreturned calls, incomplete work, and billing disputes. These are not isolated incidents and represent a recurring pattern across multiple years (2013, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2024), which prevents the score from reaching the high 80s or 90s despite the volume of positive reviews.
• No suspected coordinated fake review campaign detected, but the volume of generic short positive reviews (e.g., 'Great company', 'Great customer support', 'Great people and service') with no specifics slightly inflates the positive signal. These were scored conservatively.

This WW Score is based on a large and diverse review set spanning over a decade and carries HIGH overall confidence, but consumers should weigh the recurring negative patterns around scheduling reliability, job completion follow-through, and billing transparency before engaging this contractor.

Putman Plumbing earns strong marks for professionalism and experience, with the overwhelming majority of recent reviews praising courteous, knowledgeable technicians who communicate clearly and complete jobs efficiently. Project completion scores are solid, supported by numerous accounts of jobs finished on time and follow-through on callbacks and emergency visits, though one notable negative review describes a technician who refused to complete a reconnection job and another describes a rescheduled appointment that left a customer without hot water for a weekend. Pricing is the weakest dimension: while several reviewers describe fair or reasonable pricing, there are multiple credible negative reviews citing a $4,000 water heater quote, a $375 inspection fee, $90 for a one-minute filter change, and a disputed $49 return-visit charge, pulling the pricing score down significantly. The bulk of reviews are from 2025 and reflect a consistently positive recent trend, though the negative pricing and professionalism complaints span multiple years and cannot be dismissed as isolated incidents.

• Two reviews contain no text — only a 5-star rating — and were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable data.
• A cluster of 5-star reviews from April and June 2025 share generic phrasing ('great job', 'very professional', 'outstanding service') with no specifics; while not conclusive, this pattern warrants mild caution about review authenticity for a subset of short reviews.
• Several reviews are older than 12 months (2024 and earlier), including the most detailed negative reviews (2018, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024); these were included but given reduced weight relative to the large volume of 2025 reviews.
• Pricing dimension contains a meaningful split: multiple credible negative reviews cite specific dollar amounts suggesting high or opaque pricing, while positive pricing mentions tend to be brief and non-specific. The score reflects this tension conservatively.
• One review (2018) describes a technician damaging a hose bib during a visit and then attempting to charge a return-visit fee, which raises a project completion and professionalism concern that is not reflected in the majority of recent reviews but is noted here for transparency.

This WW Score is based on a substantial volume of 55 usable reviews with strong mention counts across all four dimensions, making it statistically reliable overall; however, the pricing score in particular should be treated with caution given the sharp divide between brief positive mentions and detailed, specific negative accounts.

Master Plumbing demonstrates strong technical competence and generally professional service, with most recent reviews (2018-2024) praising responsiveness, honesty, and workmanship. However, pricing practices are a significant concern, with multiple reviews citing unexpected charges, diagnostic fees that don't fully credit toward work, and aggressive upselling. Project completion is solid overall, though one critical failure (non-functional sump pump installation) and occasional reluctance to tackle complex jobs are noted. The company shows inconsistency in customer service quality, with some interactions described as dismissive or rude, particularly from ownership.

• PRICING INCONSISTENCY: Multiple reviews (2015, 2016, 2021) report diagnostic fees ($60) that are only partially credited, surprise cost escalations, and aggressive upselling. This pattern suggests systematic pricing practices that frustrate customers despite eventual work quality.
• OWNERSHIP CONDUCT: Two separate reviews (2021, 2012) describe rude or dismissive behavior from co-owner Billy Silk and inflexible scheduling policies. One customer reported being told 'I can tell I'll get complaints from you' during estimate consultation.
• PROJECT FAILURE: One review (2012) reports a backup sump pump installation that never functioned, discovered months later. Owner refused to send alternate technician for repair, insisting on original technician despite scheduling conflicts.
• RECENCY BIAS: Most negative reviews are from 2012-2016 (older); most positive reviews are from 2018-2024 (recent). This suggests possible improvement over time, but pricing complaints persist through 2015-2016.
• SERVICE CHARGE DISPUTES: Multiple customers (2015, 2016) report frustration with diagnostic/service fees and unclear communication about when these apply, indicating potential customer service training gaps.

This score should be trusted with moderate-to-high confidence for technical competence and professionalism, but pricing practices remain a legitimate concern; customers should expect transparent, detailed estimates and clarify all fees upfront before engaging this company.

Eagle Plumbing demonstrates solid overall performance with a WW Score of 76.8, reflecting a company with genuine strengths but also notable inconsistencies. Professionalism scores 78.5 based on 89 mentions, with many customers praising punctuality, courtesy, and communication—though a significant subset reports rude phone staff, no-shows, and late arrivals. Pricing scores 77.0 across 52 mentions; customers frequently cite fair and reasonable rates, though some object to parts markups and the $100 minimum service call fee. Project Completion scores 75.2 from 78 mentions, revealing a critical weakness: while many jobs are completed successfully, a substantial number of reviews document incomplete work, warranty disputes, poor craftsmanship, and failures requiring callbacks or outside contractors. Experience scores 80.5 from 68 mentions, with strong technical knowledge and problem-solving ability consistently praised, though some reviews cite incompetence or misdiagnosis. The company shows a pattern of excellent work from certain technicians (Jeff, Tim, Victor, Kevin, Bob) alongside poor experiences with others and persistent phone-based customer service issues.

• CRITICAL: Two major negative reviews (Sept 2024, 0.5 and 1.0 stars) document severe project failures on a 4-plex replumbing job—trenched and cracked sewer line covered up without repair, dozens of installation errors, extended timeline (5+ weeks vs. 1.5 weeks promised), sloppy workmanship, and incomplete follow-through. These are detailed, specific, and credible complaints suggesting systemic quality control issues on larger projects.
• PATTERN: Multiple reviews (2013–2021) report no-shows, missed appointment windows, and lack of communication despite scheduled service times. This pattern suggests operational/dispatch issues that persist across years.
• PATTERN: Recurring complaints about rude, dismissive, or sarcastic phone staff (multiple reviews mention 'Steve' and unnamed female receptionist with poor attitude). This is a consistent weak point in customer experience.
• PATTERN: Several reviews document warranty disputes, refusals to honor work guarantees, and demands that customers prove fault before service is provided at no charge.
• CONCERN: Reviews from 2024 show the company still operating, but the Sept 2024 4-plex disaster and earlier major failures suggest quality control remains inconsistent, particularly on complex/large jobs.
• RECENCY: Most recent reviews (2025, 2024) are predominantly 5-star with minimal detail, which may indicate selection bias or review platform changes. However, the Sept 2024 negative reviews are detailed and credible.
• FAKE REVIEW RISK: LOW-MODERATE. Several reviews are blank (5-star with no text) or extremely generic ('Great job,' 'Wonderful,' 'unknown'). However, the majority of reviews contain specific details, named technicians, and varied experiences, suggesting authentic feedback overall. The pattern of detailed negative reviews alongside detailed positive ones supports authenticity.

This WW Score of 76.8 should be treated with MODERATE-TO-HIGH caution: the company demonstrates genuine competence and customer satisfaction in routine jobs and with specific technicians, but exhibits serious inconsistencies in project completion quality, phone-based customer service, and performance on complex/large projects. Customers should expect variable service quality depending on technician assignment and job complexity, and should be prepared for potential communication friction and warranty disputes. The Sept 2024 4-plex failure is particularly concerning and suggests the company may struggle with scope management and quality oversight on larger engagements.

Stang Plumbing demonstrates strong technical expertise and generally professional service delivery, with most customers praising workmanship quality and responsiveness. However, the company is significantly hampered by persistent pricing concerns—multiple reviews explicitly cite high hourly rates ($180–$300/hour), aggressive markup practices, lack of itemized invoices, and perceived price gouging. Project completion is solid but marred by occasional follow-up failures and incomplete work requiring callbacks. Professionalism is strong across punctuality, courtesy, and communication, though some responsiveness issues and customer service gaps are documented.

• PRICING PATTERN: Systematic complaints about high rates and non-transparent billing. Multiple reviews cite $300/hour rates, $7,500 charges for $1,600 equipment, and refusal to itemize invoices. This is the single largest driver of negative sentiment.
• DUPLICATE REVIEW DETECTED: The $7,500 tankless water heater complaint appears twice (2024-06-09 and 2024-03-22) with nearly identical wording, suggesting either a repost or coordinated complaint.
• INCONSISTENT QUALITY: Wide variance in outcomes—some jobs completed flawlessly on first visit; others required multiple callbacks, caused collateral damage, or left work incomplete. This suggests inconsistent technician quality or supervision.
• FOLLOW-UP FAILURES: Multiple reviews report failure to return calls, provide quotes, honor commitments, or complete promised callbacks. This undermines otherwise positive service experiences.
• WARRANTY/GUARANTEE ISSUES: Several customers report Stang refusing to warranty work or honor commitments made during service calls, creating trust erosion.
• RECENCY NOTE: Most recent reviews (2024–2025) show mixed sentiment with pricing complaints concentrated in recent years, suggesting possible recent business model changes that have negatively impacted customer perception.

This WW Score of 76.8 is reliable and reflects genuine strengths in technical expertise and professionalism offset by significant and well-documented pricing and follow-up execution issues. The HIGH confidence is justified by 150 reviews with substantial mention counts across all dimensions, though the score should be understood as reflecting a company with strong capabilities but problematic business practices around transparency and customer commitment follow-through.