Find Nearby Plumbers In Taunton, Massachusetts

S&G Plumbing demonstrates strong performance across all dimensions, with particular strength in professionalism, experience, and project completion. The company consistently receives praise for punctuality, communication, responsiveness, and technical skill across 13 reviews. Work quality and problem-solving ability are frequently highlighted, including complex jobs like major pipe replacement and European faucet installation. Pricing is generally described as reasonable and fair, though one 2010 review flagged a significantly higher estimate (50%+ above competitors) for a major sewer replacement, which moderates the pricing score. The single 3-star review is substantially older (2010) and reflects isolated concerns about follow-up responsiveness on a secondary request, not core service delivery.

• Recency bias: 11 of 14 reviews are from 2012 or earlier; only 3 reviews from 2020 onward. Most data is 10+ years old, which may not reflect current operations.
• One dissenting review (2010, 3-star) cites pricing concern (50% higher than competitors) on major project, which is material but isolated and dated.
• All reviews are 5-star except one 3-star; no 2, 3, or 4-star reviews in the recent period (2020+). This concentration of perfect ratings in older reviews warrants caution about representativeness.
• Recent reviews (2020-2024) are uniformly 5-star with specific details, suggesting authentic feedback, but the small sample (3 reviews) limits confidence in current performance trends.

This WW Score of 87.2 is reliable for assessing historical performance quality and professionalism, but should be interpreted cautiously due to heavy weighting toward reviews from 2012 and earlier; current performance may differ. The single pricing concern from 2010 is notable but does not override the consistent positive feedback on core service delivery across the dataset.

Kelly Plumbing & Heating demonstrates strong overall performance across all dimensions. Professionalism is a standout strength with 98 mentions emphasizing punctuality, courteous technicians (especially Ryan Bishop and DJ), clear communication, and respectful service. Experience is equally robust with 89 mentions highlighting technical competence, problem-solving ability, and skilled installation crews. Project completion is solid with 67 mentions confirming timely work, thorough follow-through, and honored commitments. Pricing receives moderate support with 32 mentions; while many customers praise fair and transparent pricing, some note the company is not the cheapest option, and a few complaints exist about specific service charges. The company's family-owned structure and long-term employee retention reinforce quality consistency.

• Potential fake review pattern detected: Multiple empty or minimal-text reviews with 5-star ratings (at least 3 instances) suggest possible review padding, though this is minor relative to the overall dataset.
• Recency bias: Approximately 60% of reviews are from 2025 and 2024, with older reviews (2011-2016) showing slightly more critical feedback. Recent reviews are overwhelmingly positive.
• Negative reviews are sparse (5 one-star, 3 two-star ratings out of 150) but reveal legitimate service gaps: communication failures, missed appointments, incomplete repairs requiring callbacks, and one significant oversizing/upselling incident from 2022.
• One detailed negative review (2022-06-08) describes an oversized HVAC system sold in 2009 that caused years of problems and an incomplete permit process—this suggests potential historical sales practices issues, though recent reviews do not echo this concern.
• Customer service responsiveness issues noted in 3 reviews (2020, 2018) regarding difficulty reaching the office and missed callbacks, though this appears less frequent in recent reviews.

This WW Score of 84.2 is highly reliable, based on 150 reviews with strong data density across all dimensions. The company excels in professionalism and technical expertise, with consistent positive feedback from long-term customers. However, the score is tempered by documented communication lapses, a few incomplete repairs, and pricing concerns that prevent a higher rating. Recent reviews (2024-2025) are substantially more positive than older reviews, suggesting operational improvements. The sparse but substantive negative feedback indicates real service gaps that should not be ignored despite the overwhelming 5-star majority.

Jamie demonstrates strong professionalism across all five reviews, with consistent praise for friendliness, responsiveness, and reliability. Project completion is consistently affirmed with multiple examples of successful installations and repairs completed promptly. Technical expertise is evident through problem-solving ability and thorough diagnostics. Pricing feedback is limited to two mentions but both describe fair and transparent pricing. The WW Score of 89.3 reflects strong performance, though the small sample size (5 reviews) and age of most reviews (3 of 5 from 2019–2020) warrant moderate overall confidence.

• Small sample size: only 5 reviews analyzed. Score reliability improves significantly with 10+ reviews.
• Recency concern: 3 of 5 reviews are from 2019–2020 (4+ years old). Only 2 reviews from 2021–2022. Recent performance data is limited.
• All reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative feedback. While not necessarily fake, the absence of any critical detail or constructive criticism is atypical and should be noted.
• Pricing dimension based on only 2 mentions; confidence in pricing score is limited.

This score should be treated as a positive indicator but not definitive due to small sample size and age of most reviews; additional recent reviews would significantly strengthen confidence in the overall assessment.

Pratt Plumbing earns strong marks across all four dimensions based on a large and mostly positive review base, with the majority of recent reviews praising technicians — especially German and Mark — for friendliness, communication, punctuality, and solid workmanship. However, several substantive negative reviews meaningfully drag down every dimension: one detailed 1-star review describes a failed job, confusing and inconsistent pricing quotes, poor follow-through, and unreturned calls; another describes flooded rooms, incomplete work, and rude staff; and a third alleges significant overcharging, an uncharged gas leak left unresolved, and a $1,600 unauthorized bank draft. Pricing confidence is tempered by these serious complaints about hidden charges, inconsistent quoting, and a high diagnostic fee, even though many customers praised value. Project completion scores are reduced because multiple reviews explicitly describe jobs left unfinished or requiring a second company to correct Pratt's work. The overall WW Score of 78.4 reflects a company that performs well in the majority of cases but has a documented pattern of serious failures that prospective customers should weigh carefully.

• Multiple reviews from 2024-06-09 share the exact same date, suggesting possible batch submission or review solicitation campaign — confidence in that cluster is slightly reduced though content is varied enough to avoid full fake-review flag.
• One review (2020-02-22) is explicitly written by the owner's father-in-law praising the owner — this is a conflicted-interest review and was excluded from scoring.
• One review (2024-08-13) contains no text, only a 5-star rating — excluded from usable data.
• One review (2024-06-09, rating 4.0) contains only a cryptic technical comment with no actionable review content — treated as minimal data.
• Three detailed 1-star reviews (2025-03-11, 2017-11-27, 2016-09-05) describe serious failures: incomplete jobs, flooded rooms, unauthorized bank charges, unreturned calls, and rude staff. These are specific, credible, and materially impact all dimension scores.
• A 1-star review (2017-06-28) describes a receptionist hanging up on a customer — this is a professionalism flag for office/admin staff, not just field technicians.
• Several negative reviews are older (2015–2017), but the 2025-03-11 negative review confirms that some of these issues (incomplete work, poor follow-up communication) persist under current ownership.
• The majority of reviews are 5-star with positive language, but the presence of multiple detailed, credible negative reviews prevents this from being treated as a uniformly high-performing contractor.

This WW Score of 78.4 is based on 53 reviews with usable data spanning 2011–2025 and carries HIGH overall confidence, but prospective customers should weigh the recurring pattern of serious complaints about incomplete work, inconsistent pricing, and poor complaint resolution before hiring.

Kennedy Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism across multiple reviews, with consistent praise for punctuality, courtesy, and responsiveness. Pricing is generally viewed favorably with transparent quotes and competitive rates. However, project completion shows a significant vulnerability: while most jobs are completed on time and to specification, one detailed 1-star review documents a critical installation error (toilet installed too close to wall, causing water damage) that suggests quality control lapses. Experience is solid overall, with technicians demonstrating technical knowledge and problem-solving ability, though the installation defect raises concerns about consistency. The company's longevity and repeat customer base are positive indicators, but the severity of the documented failure warrants a more conservative score.

• RECENCY CONCERN: Most reviews are from 2011-2017 (6 of 7 reviews older than 6 years). Only one review from 2021. Limited recent data to assess current performance.
• CRITICAL QUALITY ISSUE: One detailed 1-star review documents a serious installation defect (toilet installed 0.5 inches too close to wall, causing water damage to first floor). This is a specific, verifiable technical failure that contradicts claims of professional workmanship.
• POTENTIAL FAKE REVIEW PATTERN: Reviews from 2011 and 2017 contain some generic praise language ('never had one issue', 'nothing but great experiences') with minimal specific detail, though not conclusively fake.
• SAMPLE SIZE LIMITATION: Only 7 reviews total is a small dataset. Confidence in overall score is limited by volume.

This score should be treated with caution due to small sample size (7 reviews), heavy skew toward older reviews (6 of 7 pre-2020), and one well-documented critical failure that significantly impacts project completion confidence. Recent performance data is insufficient to determine if quality issues have been addressed.

Sousa Plumbing shows strong professionalism in customer interactions, responsiveness, and cleanliness across multiple reviews, earning a 78 score. However, project completion is significantly undermined by a major warranty dispute and failure to stand behind installed equipment, resulting in a 65 score. Pricing transparency is severely damaged by one explicit complaint about unexplained high labor charges and dismissive customer service responses, scoring 35. Experience is mixed—while long-term customer relationships and diverse job scope are noted positively, the installation of a faulty water heater that failed within 14 months raises serious quality concerns, yielding a 60 score. The 2013 negative review is over a decade old but reflects systemic issues with warranty accountability.

• RECENCY CONCERN: Two of three reviews are significantly dated (2021 and 2017). The most damaging review is from 2013, over 11 years old, which limits its current relevance but suggests long-standing business practices.
• WARRANTY DISPUTE RED FLAG: The 1-star review explicitly documents a warranty denial and refusal to honor a stated 5-year warranty on a faulty installation. This is a critical project completion and professionalism failure that contradicts the positive reviews' claims of reliability.
• PRICING TRANSPARENCY ISSUE: The negative review documents dismissive and evasive responses to pricing inquiries ('that's what we charge'), suggesting poor communication around costs.
• PRODUCT QUALITY CONCERN: The faulty water heater installation that failed at 13 months raises questions about equipment selection and installation quality, despite positive reviews praising the company's work.

This score should be treated with caution due to limited sample size (3 reviews) and significant recency gaps. The two positive reviews are 6+ years old and may not reflect current practices. The single negative review, while dated, documents serious warranty and pricing issues that directly contradict claims of reliability in other reviews. A more recent review sample is needed to establish current trustworthiness.