Find Nearby Plumbers In Rochester Hills, Michigan

Only a single review is available, dated October 2019, which is well over one year old and therefore carries reduced recency weight. The reviewer explicitly praises quick response time, professionalism, and reasonable pricing, and confirms that multiple distinct projects were completed successfully including an outdoor faucet leak, kitchen faucet replacement, and basement drain relocation. Scores across all four dimensions are kept conservative given the extremely limited sample size. No negative signals were detected, but the absence of additional reviews means no meaningful pattern of quality can be established.

• Only 1 review analyzed — WW Score cannot be calculated reliably per minimum threshold of 3 reviews.
• Review is dated October 2019, making it over 5 years old. Recency weight is significantly reduced.
• With only one review, there is no way to detect consistency, fake review patterns, or trends over time. All dimension scores should be treated as highly tentative.

This score is not reliable and should not be used for decision-making — it is based on a single review that is over five years old, providing insufficient data across all dimensions.

Insufficient Data — cannot calculate WW Score reliably. Only one review was analyzed. The review mentions quality workmanship and commitment to doing work correctly (experience dimension), and implies project completion through the phrase 'doing it right the first time,' but provides no explicit evidence regarding professionalism (punctuality, communication, attitude) or pricing. The single review is generic praise without specific details about actual service delivery.

• Only 1 review analyzed — statistically insufficient for reliable scoring
• Review contains generic praise with no specific examples or details
• No mention of pricing, communication, punctuality, or responsiveness
• Review date is over 2 years old (June 2022)
• Suspiciously generic language ('best of the best') without concrete evidence

This score cannot be reliably calculated or trusted due to insufficient review volume (n=1) and lack of specific, verifiable details about service delivery across key dimensions.

This single review paints a deeply negative picture across all four dimensions. The technician failed to complete the job, citing a circular logic problem — refusing to install a pump because water was present, yet the pump was needed to remove the water — suggesting poor problem-solving and limited experience. Professionalism was notably poor, as the technician left used booties in the customer's garage and required supervisor consultation before making any decision. The $71 service call fee was charged despite zero work being performed, raising serious concerns about pricing fairness and transparency. Project completion received the lowest score, as the core task was entirely abandoned with no resolution offered.

• Only 1 review is available — WW Score cannot be calculated reliably with fewer than 3 reviews.
• Review is dated April 2014, making it over 10 years old. This data is significantly outdated and may not reflect current business practices.
• All scores are based on a single mention and should be treated as very low confidence despite the detail provided.

This score is based on a single review from 2014 and should not be considered a reliable representation of this contractor's current quality or practices.