Find Nearby Plumbers In Hagerstown, Maryland

Trim Tek demonstrates exceptional performance across all dimensions. Professionalism is consistently praised with all 7 reviews highlighting friendly demeanor, quick response times, punctuality, and excellent communication. Project completion is strong with 6 reviews confirming same-day or rapid service and full resolution of plumbing emergencies. Experience is well-documented through 5 mentions of skilled workmanship, technical knowledge, and efficient problem-solving. Pricing receives positive feedback in 3 reviews, with customers noting transparency, fairness, and even instances of bill reduction when labor time was less than estimated.

• All 7 reviews are 5-star ratings with uniformly positive language and no critical feedback. While the reviews contain specific details (names, dates, problem types) that suggest authenticity, the complete absence of any negative or mixed feedback is unusual and warrants caution.
• 5 of 7 reviews are from September 2024 or earlier, with 2 reviews from December 2023. Recent review concentration (5 within past 3 months) is positive for recency but combined with perfect ratings suggests possible selection bias.
• Repetitive mention of 'Austin' and 'professional' across reviews, though this may reflect genuine repeat customer satisfaction rather than fabrication.

This WW Score of 93.2 is based on consistently positive data across all dimensions with HIGH overall confidence, but the perfect 5-star rating pattern and absence of any critical feedback should be interpreted with awareness that this may not represent the full spectrum of customer experience.

Aquarius Plumbing (Nate) receives overwhelmingly positive feedback across all four dimensions, with professionalism being the most consistently praised attribute — reviewers repeatedly highlight punctuality, clear communication, courtesy, and responsiveness across decades of reviews. Pricing scores well but is tempered slightly by two reviewers noting costs felt a little high, and one reviewer explicitly calling a $75 visit charge 'kinda ridiculous,' preventing a perfect score. Project completion is strong, with the vast majority of reviewers confirming jobs were finished correctly and on time, though one serious negative review describes Aquarius failing to return calls when a furnace broke down before Christmas — a significant reliability flag. Experience scores very highly, with numerous reviewers praising Nate's diagnostic skill, technical knowledge, creative problem-solving, and willingness to educate customers rather than upsell unnecessary work.

• ONE SERIOUS NEGATIVE REVIEW (2-star, Jan 2017): A customer reported that Aquarius installed their furnace but completely failed to return multiple calls when it broke down two days before Christmas, leaving the household without heat. The customer states they never heard back to this day. This is a significant project completion and professionalism failure that contrasts sharply with the otherwise positive record.
• ONE ADDITIONAL NEGATIVE REVIEW (2-star, Oct 2020): A customer complained that online quoting was advertised but a phone call was required to get a quote, resulting in the customer doing the work themselves. This suggests a responsiveness/communication gap for certain inquiry types.
• RECENCY NOTE: The majority of reviews are older than 12 months relative to a current 2024/2025 date. Only 4 reviews are from 2022–2023. The most recent review is from June 2023. The bulk of the review base spans 2014–2021, meaning current service quality cannot be fully confirmed from recent data alone.
• ONE REVIEW (Mike/boiler, Nov 2022) references a different technician ('Mike') and appears to be for a different job type (boiler replacement). This may indicate the business has grown or uses subcontractors, which could introduce variability in service quality not fully captured by the Nate-centric reviews.
• NO FAKE REVIEW PATTERNS DETECTED: While many reviews share similar praise themes, they contain specific job details, unique personal anecdotes, varied writing styles, and span nearly a decade. This is consistent with genuine organic reviews rather than fabricated ones.

This WW Score is based on a large, detailed, and temporally diverse review set and carries HIGH overall confidence, but prospective customers should note that the most recent reviews are from 2022–2023 and that at least one serious unresolved complaint about emergency non-responsiveness exists in the record.

Kenny demonstrates consistently strong performance across all four dimensions. Professionalism is evidenced by quick response times, courteous communication, and punctuality across multiple reviews. Pricing is fair and transparent, with customers noting he sticks to estimates even when projects exceed expectations. Project completion is reliable, with multiple customers hiring him repeatedly over years and praising follow-through on complex jobs. Technical expertise is evident in his problem-solving ability and quality workmanship on specialized plumbing tasks like sump pump replacement and grinder pump diagnosis.

• All 11 reviews are 5-star or 4.5-star ratings with no negative feedback — this is unusually uniform and may suggest selection bias in the review sample rather than fake reviews per se
• One review (2018-08-10) contains no text, only a 5-star rating — excluded from analysis
• Most reviews are older than 12 months (8 of 10 usable reviews predate 2021); only 1 review from 2023. Recent performance data is limited
• Reviews lack specific detail about pricing amounts or project timelines in most cases, making pricing and completion scores somewhat conservative

This WW Score of 89.3 is reliable based on consistent positive evidence across all dimensions and adequate mention counts, but should be interpreted with awareness that the review sample is heavily skewed toward older feedback (2018–2020) with minimal recent data, and the absence of any negative reviews suggests possible selection bias rather than perfect performance.

Supreme Plumbing demonstrates strong performance across all dimensions with a WW Score of 87.2. Professionalism is a standout strength (89.5), with extensive evidence of punctuality, responsiveness, clear communication, and courteous behavior across 58 reviews. Project completion scores well at 86.0 based on 51 mentions, showing consistent job finishing and follow-through, though two significant negative reviews document incomplete work and non-responsiveness to callbacks. Pricing is solid at 82.0 across 22 mentions, with customers frequently praising fair rates and transparency, though a few reviews note higher-than-expected costs. Experience/workmanship rates 88.5 across 45 mentions, reflecting skilled technical work and problem-solving ability. The company benefits from strong recent review activity (majority from 2021 onward) and consistent positive feedback from repeat customers.

• Two critical negative reviews (1-star ratings from 2023-06-10 and 2021-12-17) document serious service failures: one involving $20,000 in work with repeated no-shows and rescheduling; another involving a major installation error (dishwasher drain connected to air vent) causing $2,000+ in water damage and mold, with the contractor refusing responsibility. These are not minor complaints and significantly impact reliability assessment.
• One 3-star review (2024-09-12) documents failure to respond to 5 emails and 1 text requesting W-9 tax information after job completion, indicating communication breakdown on administrative follow-up.
• One 3-star review (2013-05-20) notes pricing significantly higher than competitors for similar work, and one 1-star review (2012-07-09) documents no callback on pricing and missed appointment.
• One review (2022-06-10) is blank with only a 5-star rating and no text content—cannot be evaluated for data.
• Majority of reviews are 5-star with highly positive language, but this is mitigated by presence of substantive negative reviews with specific details, suggesting reviews are generally authentic rather than fake. However, some reviews use very similar phrasing ('highly recommend,' 'professional,' 'responsive') which is common in plumbing industry reviews.
• Review date range spans 2005–2025, with significant clustering in 2021–2025 (approximately 65 of 80 reviews). Older reviews (pre-2015) are sparse and may not reflect current operations.

This WW Score of 87.2 is reliable with HIGH overall confidence, supported by 51–58 mentions across three dimensions and consistent positive feedback from repeat customers. However, the score should be interpreted with caution: two serious documented failures (no-shows on $20,000 project; installation error causing $2,000+ damage) indicate that while the company typically performs well, it is capable of significant lapses in accountability and quality control. The score reflects average performance across a large sample, but prospective customers should be aware that worst-case scenarios documented in negative reviews are possible. Recommend requesting references and clarifying warranty/liability terms before engaging for major projects.

Coleman Plumbing demonstrates strong performance across all dimensions with consistent positive feedback spanning over a decade. Professionalism is a clear strength, with 18 mentions highlighting punctuality, courteous communication, and responsive service. Project completion is solid with 12 mentions confirming jobs finished properly and callbacks honored. Experience and technical knowledge are well-documented with 10 mentions of skilled workmanship and problem-solving. Pricing receives 9 mentions as fair and reasonable, though one review noted reluctance on a senior discount. The company shows strong customer care and follow-through, including owner involvement in customer satisfaction.

• Three reviews contain only placeholder text ('unknown', '.', 'noted above') and were excluded from scoring—these 1 review with usable data reduces confidence slightly
• Review from 2016-12-15 (2-star rating) mentions frustration with wait times and unclear follow-up expectations, creating a notable outlier in otherwise uniformly positive feedback
• Majority of reviews are older than 5 years (21 of 27 usable reviews predate 2016), limiting recency assessment; only 1 review from past 12 months
• High concentration of 5-star ratings (24 of 27) with limited negative detail may suggest selection bias in review platform, though the single 2-star and one 4-star review provide some balance

This WW Score of 86.2 is reliable and should be trusted, supported by HIGH confidence in professionalism and project completion dimensions based on substantial mention counts. However, the age of most reviews (pre-2016) and lack of recent data mean this score may not fully reflect current service quality; verification with recent customer references is recommended.

Doug's plumbing service demonstrates strong overall performance with particular strengths in pricing, professionalism, and technical expertise. The majority of reviews (44 of 50) are highly positive, praising his fair pricing, quick response times, friendly demeanor, and quality workmanship. However, four negative reviews from 2013-2014 reveal significant project completion issues including no-shows, missed appointments, and incomplete work, which substantially impact this dimension's score. Recent reviews (2021-2025) are overwhelmingly positive with no completion complaints, suggesting potential service improvements over time. The WW Score of 82.1 reflects strong capability tempered by documented reliability concerns.

• Four 1-star reviews (2013-2014) document serious project completion failures: no-shows on scheduled appointments, incomplete work lasting 4+ days beyond estimate, and poor communication. These are not generic complaints but specific, detailed accounts of unmet commitments.
• Two additional 1-star reviews (2024, 2014) cite refusal to serve and unprofessionalism regarding customer eligibility and emergency response.
• Temporal pattern: Negative reviews cluster in 2013-2014 period; all reviews from 2021 onward are 5-star except one blank 1-star with no text (2021). This suggests either service improvement or potential review filtering.
• Two blank reviews (one 5-star, one 1-star from 2021 and 2020) provide no usable data but are counted in total.
• Positive reviews show some repetitive phrasing ('saved the day,' 'came to the rescue,' 'amazing') but include specific details (leak locations, response times, pricing comparisons) that indicate genuine experiences rather than fake reviews.
• No evidence of fake review patterns in negative reviews—all contain specific, credible complaints with dates and details.

This score is reliable for recent service quality (2021-present) but should be interpreted with caution regarding project completion reliability, as historical data (2013-2014) documents serious scheduling and follow-through failures that may or may not persist. Recommend verifying current scheduling practices before committing to multi-day projects.