Find Nearby Plumbers In Lincoln, Nebraska

Franzen Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism with consistent praise for punctuality, communication, and respectful technicians across 15 reviews. Project completion is solid with 14 mentions showing reliable follow-through and quality workmanship, though one 2021 complaint suggests occasional execution issues. Experience scores well at 85.0 based on 10 mentions highlighting problem-solving ability and technical knowledge. However, pricing emerges as a significant weakness (71.3) with 9 mentions revealing concerns about quote accuracy, hidden charges, and billing discrepancies—particularly two detailed 1-star reviews from 2020-2021 alleging deceptive pricing practices and overcharging. The company's strong recent track record (2023-2024) contrasts with documented pricing complaints from 2020-2021.

• PRICING INTEGRITY CONCERN: Two detailed 1-star reviews (2020-07-17 and 2020-07-09) allege deceptive pricing practices, misrepresented hourly rates, undisclosed per-mile charges, and billing significantly above quoted amounts. These are specific, credible complaints with named individuals and detailed timelines—not generic criticism.
• RECENCY BIAS: Most reviews are from 2023-2024 (11 of 20), while the two most damaging pricing complaints are from 2020-2021. Recent reviews are overwhelmingly positive (5-star), suggesting either improved practices or potential selection bias in recent feedback.
• PRICING CONSISTENCY: Multiple reviews mention 'fair pricing' and 'honest service,' but this directly contradicts the detailed 2020 complaints. Suggests pricing practices may have changed, or that pricing transparency varies by technician/situation.
• ONE EXECUTION FAILURE: 2021-08-25 review reports $2,500 spent with non-functional result after 6 hours on-site. This is the only explicit project failure mentioned but represents a serious quality control issue.

This WW Score of 82.1 is moderately reliable but should be interpreted with caution: while recent reviews (2023-2024) are consistently excellent and support high professionalism and completion scores, documented pricing complaints from 2020-2021 create legitimate concern about billing practices that are not fully resolved by positive recent feedback. Prospective customers should explicitly clarify pricing structure, hourly rates, and per-trip/per-mile charges in writing before engaging services.

Midtown Plumbing earns strong marks for professionalism, with dozens of reviews praising punctuality, communication, friendliness, and responsiveness across multiple technicians including Jason, David, Tim, and Tracy. Experience scores are also solid, with multiple reviewers citing skilled diagnostics, problem-solving, and quality workmanship — including one notable case where Midtown correctly identified a problem three other companies missed. Project completion is generally positive, with most jobs described as fully finished and followed through, but is tempered by two notable negative reviews: one describing abandoned/sloppy sewer pipe work and one describing a scheduling failure where the company did not show up on the correct day and then canceled the rescheduled appointment. Pricing is the weakest dimension, with multiple reviewers across different years explicitly calling out high or unfair pricing — including charges of $475 for toilet rebuilds, $175 for a 10-minute valve replacement, and $400 for a running toilet repair — partially offset by reviews praising competitive or fair pricing.

• 5 reviews contain no text at all (only a 5-star rating with no written content) — these were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable data.
• A large cluster of reviews share the same date of 2025-05-10 and 2025-04-10, which may reflect batch imports or review solicitation campaigns rather than organic posting. Language varies sufficiently to avoid a fake review determination, but the date clustering warrants caution.
• One review (2025-05-10, Peter) is rated 5 stars but explicitly criticizes pricing as reflecting 'corporate greed' — the star rating does not match the written sentiment on the pricing dimension, and the written content was weighted over the star rating for scoring purposes.
• The negative scheduling/cancellation review (2021-06-16) describes the owner laughing at a crying customer and canceling service as retaliation for a threatened negative review — this is a serious conduct flag that weighs against professionalism despite being a single incident.
• Several reviews are more than 3 years old (2012–2021). Per recency rules, reviews from 2025 and 2024 were weighted more heavily. Older negative pricing reviews (2016, 2017) were still counted as they reflect a consistent pattern corroborated by more recent pricing complaints.
• The review from 2021-06-29 describes sloppy sewer pipe work, exposed pipe left unreplaced, and poor communication — this is a meaningful project completion failure that was factored into the project completion score.
• The review from 2019-09-09 (2-star) describes a 3-day callback failure with no response — this negatively impacts both professionalism and project completion scores.
• The review from 2018-10-29 (2-star) describes refusal to treat no hot water as an emergency for a repeat customer — factored into professionalism and responsiveness scoring.

This WW Score is based on 55 reviews with usable content spanning 2012–2025, with strong data density across all four dimensions; the score is considered moderately reliable overall, though the pricing dimension reflects a consistent multi-year pattern of complaints that meaningfully drags the composite score, and the conduct-related flag from 2021 introduces reputational risk not fully captured by numeric scoring alone.

The overwhelming majority of reviews praise this business — operating under the '1st Choice Plumbing' name across multiple markets and technicians including Eric, Linneer, Thomas, Scott, Coy, Jeff, and others — for strong professionalism, technical knowledge, and fair pricing. Recurring themes include punctuality, courteous communication, honest assessments, and willingness to honor warranties and return at no charge. However, a meaningful cluster of negative reviews (approximately 18-20 reviews, roughly 9-10% of the total) describes serious failures: missed appointments with no callbacks, overcharging, misdiagnosis, failure to honor refund commitments, and rude or dismissive responses when confronted. These negative reviews span multiple years and multiple named technicians or operators, indicating these are not isolated incidents. The professionalism and project completion scores are moderated downward to reflect these documented failures, which are specific and credible rather than vague. Experience scores remain relatively strong given the volume and specificity of positive technical praise, but are not scored at the ceiling due to at least two reviews citing misdiagnosis or incorrect work.

• MULTI-ENTITY CONCERN: Reviews reference numerous different technicians (Eric, Linneer, Thomas, Scott, Coy, Jeff, Adam, Vito, Josh, Robby, Curtis, Jacob, Tim, Hunter, Moe, Chris, Brendan, Rick, David, Alan, Thomas Carter) and appear to span multiple geographic markets (Los Angeles/San Fernando Valley, Washington DC, Rock Hill SC, Colorado, Parker CO, Baltimore MD). This is almost certainly an aggregated review set covering more than one business operating under the '1st Choice Plumbing' name. Scores reflect the aggregate but users should verify which specific operator and market applies to their situation.
• FAKE REVIEW SUSPICION — MODERATE: A large cluster of reviews dated exactly '2023-06-10', '2024-06-09', '2022-06-10', and '2021-06-10' with no specific timestamps (all 00:00:00) are suspicious. Many of these are short, generic, and lack specific job details. While some are detailed and credible, the pattern of identical dates across many reviews suggests possible bulk submission or platform migration artifacts. Confidence is not fully reduced because many of these reviews do contain named technicians and specific job descriptions, but this pattern warrants caution.
• DUPLICATE REVIEW DETECTED: Two reviews with nearly identical text praising 'Mr. Laneer' for sump pump replacement appear to have been submitted twice (dated 2019-06-11 and 2019-03-27). This may indicate a copy-paste submission error rather than deliberate manipulation, but is flagged for transparency.
• RESPONSIVENESS FAILURES DOCUMENTED: At least 8 distinct negative reviews cite complete failure to return calls or show up for scheduled appointments, spanning from 2012 through 2022. This is a recurring and credible pattern that meaningfully impacts the professionalism and project completion scores.
• PRICING COMPLAINTS DOCUMENTED: At least 4 negative reviews (Vito-related reviews, the R. Brown review, the Josh review, and the detailed slab leak review) cite specific overcharging, price inflation after agreement, or billing for time not worked. These are specific and credible and are factored into the pricing score.
• RECENCY NOTE: Reviews span from 2010 to June 2025. The most recent 12 months (mid-2024 to mid-2025) contain predominantly positive reviews with high specificity, which is a positive signal for current service quality. However, the negative reviews from 2024 (Vito overcharging, unresponsiveness) indicate issues persist in at least some service areas.
• BLANK REVIEWS EXCLUDED: Several reviews contained no text (only a star rating). These were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable evidence per scoring rules.

This WW Score carries HIGH data confidence due to the large volume of reviews, but should be interpreted with caution given strong evidence that the review set aggregates multiple distinct businesses or operators under the same name across different geographic markets, and a documented recurring pattern of responsiveness failures and pricing disputes that meaningfully offsets the otherwise strong positive signal.

Kings Peak Plumbing and its predecessor Peak Plumbing have accumulated a large body of reviews spanning over a decade, with the overwhelming majority being strongly positive across all four dimensions. Professionalism is the most frequently praised attribute, with dozens of reviewers citing punctuality, communication, friendliness, and respectful conduct. Pricing scores moderately well — many reviewers praised fair and transparent pricing, and several noted the final bill came in under the original quote, but two negative reviews specifically called out overpricing and one described feeling taken advantage of due to lack of plumbing knowledge, which tempers the score. Project completion is generally strong, with most jobs described as fully resolved, though one reviewer cited missed appointments and a $150 charge for a follow-up visit that should have been covered, and a 1-star review alleged low-quality workmanship. Experience scores well overall, with multiple reviewers praising diagnostic skill, technical knowledge, and problem-solving, though the 1-star review alleging 'low class work' and a separate review describing needing a second plumber to fix mistakes introduce meaningful doubt.

• MIXED ENTITY CONCERN: Reviews appear to span multiple distinct business entities and operators over time — including 'Jeff' (original Peak Dumbing owner), 'Eric Burgett' (described as new owner of Peak Plumbing), and 'James and Jason' (Kings Peak Plumbing & Drains brothers). These may be separate businesses or ownership transitions. Scores may reflect different teams and quality standards across eras.
• RECENCY NOTE: A significant portion of reviews (roughly 20+) are from 2011–2020 and may not reflect current ownership or service quality. The most recent reviews (2024–2025) are predominantly for Kings Peak Plumbing & Drains (James and Jason) and should be weighted more heavily for current assessments.
• NEGATIVE REVIEW FLAGS: Four 1-star reviews raise serious concerns — one alleges overpricing and mediocre work requiring a second plumber to fix mistakes, one alleges a rude attitude and calling the customer a liar, one alleges property damage (marred porcelain sinks) and an unfulfilled refund promise by a prior owner named Tammy, and one is based on personal conduct at a lake rather than service quality (low evidentiary value for scoring).
• POSSIBLE FAKE OR THIN REVIEWS: Seven reviews contain no text at all (rating only). These were excluded from dimension scoring. Additionally, several short reviews ('Fast friendly and fair', 'Attentive and prompt service!', 'Honest and knowledgeable') are generic and lack specifics, which slightly reduces confidence in the aggregate positive signal.
• GEOGRAPHIC INCONSISTENCY: One review references Jacksonville, one references San Diego, and the primary business appears to be based in Park City, Utah. This further supports the multi-entity or multi-location concern and suggests some reviews may not be for the same business.
• OWNERSHIP TRANSITION RISK: The 2018 1-star review explicitly warns of a change in ownership and describes a dramatic drop in service quality under new owners. This historical pattern warrants caution when interpreting older positive reviews as predictive of current performance.

This WW Score carries moderate-to-high reliability for the current Kings Peak Plumbing & Drains operation (James and Jason, 2024–2025 reviews), but overall confidence is diluted by the presence of reviews spanning multiple ownership eras, at least two distinct business entities, and four substantive negative reviews citing overpricing, poor workmanship, property damage, and unprofessional conduct.

Matt's Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism with consistent praise for responsiveness, punctuality, and courteous behavior across 32 reviews. Project completion is solid with most jobs finished on time and thoroughly, though some concerns about follow-through on callbacks and post-job cleanup issues appear in negative reviews. Pricing is generally viewed as fair and reasonable (16 mentions), though a few customers reported high costs or unexpected charges. Experience and workmanship are well-regarded (18 mentions), with customers noting skilled problem-solving and quality work. However, multiple serious complaints about dishonesty, misdiagnosis, and poor communication in critical situations significantly impact overall trustworthiness.

• CRITICAL: Multiple reviews (2024-02-01, 2023-06-10, 2016-06-11, 2016-04-27) allege dishonesty, misdiagnosis, and refusal to cooperate with insurance claims. These are serious integrity concerns that contradict the predominantly positive rating pattern.
• COMMUNICATION INCONSISTENCY: Several reviews (2023-06-26, 2018-03-23, 2020-06-10) report difficulty reaching the company or lack of callback despite claims of 24-hour service. This contradicts the high professionalism scores from other reviews.
• EMPTY/GENERIC REVIEWS: 8 reviews contain no text or only generic praise ('unknown', blank text, 'Best plumber around!'), suggesting possible review manipulation or placeholder entries.
• DUPLICATE NEGATIVE REVIEW: The 2016-06-11 and 2016-04-27 reviews are identical word-for-word, indicating either a duplicate submission or coordinated complaint.
• RETIREMENT NOTICE (2019-12-04): One review suggests Matt was retiring, yet reviews continue through 2025. Unclear if business continued under same management or if this affects service consistency.
• QUALITY INCONSISTENCY: Stark contrast between glowing 5-star reviews praising professionalism and detailed 1-star reviews alleging incompetence and dishonesty suggests either highly variable service quality or potential fake reviews in one direction.

This WW Score of 78.2 should be treated with CAUTION despite HIGH overall confidence. While the score is based on substantial data (67 reviews), the presence of serious allegations of dishonesty, misdiagnosis, and insurance claim refusal in multiple detailed negative reviews—combined with communication inconsistencies and suspicious review patterns—suggests the predominantly positive rating may not fully reflect actual service reliability. Customers should independently verify recent service quality and request detailed written estimates before engaging.

Dakota's company demonstrates strong professionalism across all three reviews, with explicit mentions of excellent communication, punctuality, and responsiveness. Pricing is supported by one mention of a reasonable bid. Project completion is evidenced by successful faucet replacement and multiple project completions. Experience is reflected in quality workmanship descriptions. However, the small sample size (3 reviews) and lack of detailed specificity limit confidence in the overall score.

• All three reviews are 5-star ratings with generic praise language ('great job', 'highly recommend', 'won't be disappointed') and minimal specific detail about work performed
• Two reviews (2022-09-25 and 2022-12-14) are older than 12 months; only one recent review from 2024-05-29
• Limited sample size (3 reviews) provides insufficient data for high-confidence scoring
• Suspicious pattern: all perfect ratings with similar enthusiastic but non-specific language suggests possible review curation or fake reviews

This score should be treated with caution due to the very small sample size, age of most reviews, and suspicious pattern of uniformly perfect ratings with generic language; additional recent reviews with specific details are needed to establish reliable confidence.