Find Nearby Plumbers In Westland, Michigan

Only a single review is available, dated December 2018, making it over 6 years old and of limited current relevance. The review praises professionalism and workmanship in general terms, supporting modest scores in those dimensions. However, no information is provided about pricing, project completion, punctuality, or specific technical skills. Because the praise is generic and undetailed, scores are kept conservative per scoring rules.

• Only 1 review analyzed — far below the minimum threshold of 3 required for a reliable WW Score.
• Review is from December 2018, which is over 6 years old. Recency weighting significantly reduces reliability.
• Review language is generic and lacks specific detail (no job type, no specifics on workmanship, no mention of pricing or timeline). This limits confidence in all dimension scores.
• Pricing and Project Completion dimensions have no data and cannot be scored.

This WW Score cannot be calculated reliably due to insufficient review volume (1 review) and the age of the sole available review; no meaningful conclusions about current contractor performance should be drawn from this data.

Only a single review exists for this contractor, which describes a serious failure: the contractor did not show up for a scheduled appointment and provided no communication explaining the absence. Professionalism is scored near zero due to the explicit no-show and complete lack of follow-up communication. Project completion is scored at zero because no work was ever started, let alone finished. Pricing and experience cannot be assessed as neither topic was mentioned in the review. With only one review, no reliable WW Score can be calculated.

• Only 1 review available — far below the minimum threshold of 3 required for a reliable WW Score.
• The sole review is a 1-star complaint describing a no-show and zero communication — this is a significant reliability red flag.
• Pricing and experience dimensions have no data whatsoever and cannot be scored.
• Recency note: The single review is dated April 2023, which is over 12 months old depending on current date — no recent activity to assess trend.

This score report is based on a single negative review and should be considered highly unreliable — no meaningful conclusions about this contractor's overall quality can be drawn until substantially more reviews are available.

This single review describes severe failures across multiple dimensions. The contractor abandoned the project for extended periods (6 months without bathroom access), required the customer to hire someone else to complete work, and the original work required costly redoing years later. Communication and responsiveness were absent, and the customer reports a pattern of collecting payment then disappearing. However, with only one review available, a reliable WW Score cannot be calculated. This review alone is insufficient to establish a trustworthy overall assessment.

• CRITICAL: Only 1 review analyzed — insufficient data for reliable WW Score calculation per Rule 4 (minimum 3 reviews required)
• Review is dated 2023 (approximately 1-2 years old) — within recency window but limited by sample size
• Extremely negative single review with serious allegations; cannot be validated against other customer experiences
• Customer reports inability to obtain regulatory agency assistance, which is notable but unverified

This assessment is unreliable and should not be used for decision-making. A single review, regardless of severity, cannot establish a trustworthy contractor rating. Minimum 3 reviews are required; ideally 5+ reviews across recent timeframe for meaningful confidence.

This single review describes a contractor who failed to show up on two separate occasions without notice, then made a verbal commitment to reschedule and again did not appear. The reviewer explicitly characterizes this as very poor customer service and was forced to hire someone else. Professionalism and project completion both score extremely low as a result, reflecting a no-call-no-show pattern and complete failure to follow through. No information was provided regarding pricing or technical skill, so those dimensions cannot be scored.

• Only 1 review available — WW Score cannot be calculated reliably with fewer than 3 reviews.
• No pricing or experience data present — two dimensions are entirely unscored.
• Review is from 2021, which is more than 12 months old. Recency weighting is reduced.
• Single data point: scores for professionalism and project completion are directionally valid but carry very low statistical confidence.

This score report is based on a single review from 2021 and should not be considered a reliable representation of this contractor's overall performance — far more reviews are needed before any meaningful conclusions can be drawn.