Find Nearby Plumbers In Reno, Nevada

DeHart Plumbing, Heating & Air shows strong technical expertise and professionalism from individual technicians, with many customers praising punctuality, knowledge, and courteous service. However, the company is significantly hampered by pricing concerns—numerous reviews cite overcharging, inflated quotes, and misleading pricing practices—and inconsistent project completion, with multiple reports of missed appointments, delayed follow-ups, and incomplete work requiring callbacks. While recent reviews (2024-2025) are predominantly positive, older reviews reveal a pattern of customer dissatisfaction with business practices, particularly around transparency and accountability. The WW Score reflects this mixed profile: strong individual performance undermined by systemic operational and pricing issues.

• PRICING RED FLAG: Multiple reviews (at least 15+) explicitly cite overcharging, inflated estimates, and dishonest pricing practices. Examples include: $762 for $50 in parts (Love Club membership issue), $16,681 quote later fixed for $80 capacitor, $407 to snake a drain, $2,100 for bathroom dampers (parts ~$100), and systematic upselling of unnecessary services.
• PROJECT COMPLETION CONCERNS: Significant pattern of missed appointments without notification (at least 8 reviews), delayed callbacks, incomplete work requiring multiple visits, and poor follow-through on promised services. Several customers report being left without service during emergencies.
• DISHONESTY ALLEGATIONS: Multiple reviews allege deliberate misrepresentation—false claims about competitor companies going out of business, fake phone calls to supervisors, and dishonest diagnoses designed to force unnecessary replacements (e.g., claiming cracked heat exchangers that don't exist, recommending full system replacements when simple repairs suffice).
• RECENCY BIAS NOTED: Reviews from 2024-2025 are predominantly 5-star with generic praise, while reviews from 2019-2023 contain substantially more detailed complaints about pricing, dishonesty, and service failures. This shift warrants caution—either practices have genuinely improved or recent reviews may be less representative of typical customer experience.
• COMMUNICATION FAILURES: Repeated complaints about unresponsive management, ignored voicemails, failure to return calls, and poor coordination between office and field staff.
• INCONSISTENT QUALITY: Same company receives both 5-star reviews praising technicians and 1-star reviews from customers who felt scammed by the same company, suggesting high variability in service delivery and sales practices.

This WW Score should be treated with caution. While the numerical score of 72.8 reflects genuine strengths in technical expertise and professionalism, it masks a company with serious systemic issues around pricing transparency and business integrity. The high proportion of recent 5-star reviews conflicts with the substantial body of detailed complaints about overcharging and dishonest practices from prior years. Customers should obtain multiple independent quotes, verify diagnoses with second opinions, and carefully review all pricing before committing to work with this company.

Jet Plumbing shows mixed performance across all dimensions. Professionalism scores 74, reflecting consistent punctuality and friendly technicians, but marred by recurring complaints about rude office staff, scheduling failures, and no-shows. Pricing is the weakest dimension at 58, with extensive complaints about inflated labor charges, hidden fees, minimum hour billing, and dramatic price increases between quotes. Project completion scores 71, with many successful jobs but significant issues including incomplete work, callbacks not honored, and warranty claims denied. Experience scores highest at 80, with strong technical knowledge and problem-solving demonstrated by individual technicians, though some diagnostic errors noted. The company shows stark inconsistency: excellent individual technician performance contrasts sharply with poor office management, billing practices, and follow-through on commitments.

• PRICING CONCERNS: Systematic pattern of complaints about labor billing practices—charging for minimum 8 hours regardless of actual time worked, charging travel time as billable hours, and dramatic price increases between initial quotes and final bills. Multiple reviews cite this as deceptive.
• OFFICE MANAGEMENT ISSUES: Recurring complaints about rude, dismissive, or unresponsive office staff and dispatchers. Several customers report being hung up on, ignored, or treated poorly when raising legitimate concerns.
• NO-SHOW AND SCHEDULING FAILURES: Multiple instances of technicians not showing up for scheduled appointments, canceling appointments without notice, or failing to honor callback commitments. This undermines reliability.
• QUALITY CONTROL INCONSISTENCY: Wide variance in technician performance. Some reviews praise exceptional work; others report incomplete repairs, diagnostic errors, and damage caused during service (e.g., flooring damage, wall damage, improper installations).
• WARRANTY AND FOLLOW-UP ISSUES: Several customers report warranty claims denied, refusal to honor warranty work, or poor after-sales service. One customer reported a 2021 job that failed and was not properly remedied.
• OWNERSHIP CHANGE IMPACT: Multiple recent reviews (2024) reference new ownership and cost-cutting measures, correlating with increased complaints about service quality and billing practices.
• FAKE REVIEW RISK - LOW: While some very generic 5-star reviews with minimal detail exist (e.g., 'Always have great service!', blank reviews rated 5.0), the volume of detailed negative reviews with specific incidents suggests authentic customer feedback. No obvious coordinated fake positive pattern detected.
• RECENCY CONCERN: Most recent reviews (2024-2025) skew negative, suggesting deterioration in service quality post-ownership change. Older reviews (2012-2019) show higher satisfaction rates.

This WW Score of 72.8 should be treated with caution: while based on substantial data (227 reviews, 5+ mentions per dimension), the company exhibits extreme inconsistency between individual technician performance and organizational/billing practices. The score reflects an average that masks a bifurcated reality—customers often praise specific technicians but condemn the company's billing, office management, and follow-through. Recent deterioration post-ownership change suggests the score may be trending downward. Customers should expect variable service quality and should carefully review all quotes and billing practices before engaging this company.

This contractor/plumber business shows mixed performance across multiple locations and technicians. Professionalism scores are solid (76.5) with strong punctuality and communication from many technicians like Matt, Tom, and Keith, though several reviews cite no-shows and poor responsiveness from others (Adrian, Simply Plumbing staff). Project completion is the weakest dimension (71.0), with recurring complaints about abandoned work, incomplete callbacks, and follow-through failures. Experience and technical knowledge are strong (79.5), with consistent praise for diagnostic ability and workmanship quality. Pricing presents significant concerns (68.0), with multiple complaints about overcharging, hidden fees, and quotes substantially higher than competitors. The business appears to operate multiple brands/locations with highly variable service quality.

• CRITICAL: Multiple reviews (Adrian/Simply Plumbing) describe potential fraud patterns—taking service fees without completing work, no-shows without communication, and refusal to return calls. At least 8 reviews allege this behavior across different time periods.
• INCONSISTENT QUALITY: Stark contrast between highly positive reviews (Matt, Tom, Keith, InMotion Mechanical staff) and severely negative ones (Adrian, Simply Plumbing). Suggests either multiple businesses operating under same name or significant quality variance by technician.
• PRICING COMPLAINTS: Recurring pattern of customers reporting overcharges (e.g., $900 for $50 job, $470 for $35-40 thermostat, $1,395 vs. $600 for same work). At least 6 reviews explicitly cite unfair pricing.
• NO-SHOW PATTERN: Multiple reviews from different years (2024, 2022, 2021, 2020, 2014) describe missed appointments with no communication. This is a systemic issue, not isolated incidents.
• CALLBACK FAILURES: At least 12 reviews mention failure to return calls, voicemails going unanswered, or lack of follow-up communication.
• POTENTIAL FAKE REVIEWS: Approximately 20 reviews with no dates (all 5-star, generic praise like 'Matt was professional,' 'great work,' minimal detail) may be artificially generated. These inflate scores artificially.
• WARRANTY COMPANY ISSUES: Multiple reviews indicate problems when customers are referred through home warranty companies (Choice Home Warranty, etc.), suggesting potential conflicts of interest or different service standards.
• INCOMPLETE WORK: Several reviews describe jobs left unfinished, partial repairs, or work that failed shortly after completion (e.g., water heater stand not included, pressure valve leaking within 1 year).

This WW Score of 72.8 should be treated with CAUTION. While the HIGH confidence reflects substantial review volume, the data masks a deeply bifurcated business: some technicians (Matt, Tom, Keith, InMotion staff) deliver excellent service consistently, while others (Adrian, Simply Plumbing associates) show patterns of fraud, no-shows, and overcharging. The ~20 undated 5-star reviews with minimal detail appear artificially generated and inflate the score. Customers should verify which specific technician/location they are hiring and research that individual thoroughly before committing. The business's reliability varies dramatically by technician and location.

Easy Rooter demonstrates solid technical competence and experience, with many customers praising individual technicians' skill and professionalism. However, the company is significantly hampered by chronic scheduling and communication failures—numerous no-shows, late arrivals without notification, and broken promises appear across multiple review periods. Pricing concerns are substantial, with repeated complaints about hidden charges, inflated quotes, and refusal to honor stated prices or provide discounts when jobs prove simpler than estimated. While individual technicians often deliver quality work, systemic operational issues around dispatch, accountability, and transparent pricing substantially undermine overall customer satisfaction.

• PATTERN OF NO-SHOWS AND LATE ARRIVALS: At least 15+ reviews explicitly mention missed appointments, no-call-no-shows, or significant delays (often 2+ hours) without customer notification. This is a recurring systemic issue across multiple years (2013–2025).
• PRICING TRANSPARENCY FAILURES: Multiple reviews (at least 10+) report hidden charges, unexpected upcharges, refusal to honor quoted prices, or charges that appear excessive relative to work performed. Examples include $8,460 quote for work completed in 5 hours, $315 'extra time' charge with no advance notice, and $982 toilet installation when similar units cost ~$140.
• DISPATCH AND COMMUNICATION BREAKDOWN: Customers report rude dispatchers, lack of callback notifications, contradictory information about appointment times, and dismissive attitudes when complaints are raised.
• DUPLICATE REVIEWS DETECTED: Two nearly identical reviews from 'Female homeowners BEWARE' (dated 2024-07-03 and 2024-07-03 00:00:00) with identical phrasing suggest possible duplicate submission rather than fake review fabrication.
• INCONSISTENT QUALITY: While many reviews praise specific technicians (Mikey, Karl, Ryan, Chuck, James, etc.) by name, the company's operational failures (scheduling, billing, dispatch) create a disconnect between technician quality and overall company reliability.
• RECENCY NOTE: Negative patterns persist across the entire review timeline (2013–2025), indicating systemic issues are not recent aberrations but long-standing problems.

This WW Score of 72.8 should be trusted as a fair representation of Easy Rooter's performance, but with the critical caveat that the score masks a company with strong technical talent undermined by severe operational dysfunction—customers should expect quality work but prepare for scheduling chaos, communication failures, and potential billing disputes.

Desert Air demonstrates strong technical expertise and professionalism, with technicians frequently praised for knowledge, punctuality, and courteous demeanor. However, the company is significantly hampered by pricing concerns and project completion issues. Multiple reviews cite unexpectedly high bills, hidden charges, drive-time fees, and markups on parts. Project completion problems include missed appointments, delayed callbacks, incomplete work requiring multiple visits, and poor communication during delays. While recent reviews (2024-2025) are predominantly positive, older reviews reveal systemic issues with scheduling reliability and follow-through that persist across the company's history.

• PRICING VOLATILITY: 18 mentions of pricing issues reveal a pattern of customer dissatisfaction. Complaints include: unexpected charges beyond estimates, drive-time fees charged at full hourly rates, 30% markups on parts, dispatch fees not credited to invoices, and quotes significantly lower than final invoices. This suggests inconsistent pricing practices.
• PROJECT COMPLETION FAILURES: Multiple reviews document missed appointments, no-shows, incomplete work, and poor communication. Examples include: AC out for 2 weeks with multiple failed appointments (2023), furnace installation 2 hours late with incomplete work (2021), AC installation missing parts with no proactive communication (2016), and technician no-show with 6+ hour delay (2021).
• DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY CONCERNS: At least 3 reviews describe misdiagnosis or unnecessary recommendations: thermostat issue misdiagnosed as control board failure ($660 unnecessary charge), AC unit replacement recommended when simple fuse was the issue, and furnace control panel replacement recommended when thermostat was simply unseated.
• RECENCY BIAS NOTED: Reviews from 2024-2025 are overwhelmingly 5-star with minimal critical detail, while 2020-2023 reviews contain substantial complaints about operations. This temporal pattern suggests either significant operational changes or potential review manipulation.
• COMMUNICATION FAILURES: Multiple reviews cite lack of proactive communication during delays, missed callbacks, and unresponsiveness to customer concerns, particularly in 2020-2023 period.
• WARRANTY AND FOLLOW-UP ISSUES: Several reviews document refusal to honor warranties, reluctance to address installation defects, and poor handling of customer complaints.

This WW Score of 72.8 should be treated with caution due to significant temporal inconsistency in review quality and content. While recent reviews (2024-2025) are highly positive and support a higher score, the substantial volume of detailed complaints from 2014-2023 regarding pricing, scheduling, and project completion suggest systemic issues that may not be fully resolved. The score reflects a company with strong technical capability and professionalism but persistent operational and pricing transparency problems. Customers should obtain detailed written estimates, clarify all fees upfront, and establish clear communication protocols before engaging this company.

Master Service Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism and technical expertise, with 45 reviews explicitly praising punctuality, communication, courtesy, and responsiveness. However, the company is significantly hampered by serious pricing concerns (12 mentions) with multiple customers reporting excessive charges, hidden fees, and inflated labor rates, resulting in a conservative 58/100 pricing score. Project completion issues (18 mentions) reveal a troubling pattern: incomplete work, installation errors, failed callbacks, and unresolved disputes. While recent reviews (2024-2025) are overwhelmingly positive, older reviews (2015-2023) contain severe complaints about quality control, billing disputes, and unprofessional conduct. The weighted WW Score of 72.8 reflects strong operational execution undermined by persistent financial and follow-through problems.

• TEMPORAL BIAS DETECTED: 38 of 60 reviews (63%) are from May 2025 alone, with 45 reviews from 2024-2025. Only 15 reviews predate 2024. Recent reviews are uniformly 5-star with minimal critical detail, while older reviews contain substantive complaints. This suggests either recent service improvement or potential review manipulation.
• FAKE REVIEW PATTERN: Multiple recent reviews use nearly identical phrasing ('professional, knowledgeable, friendly,' 'on time,' 'great service'). Reviews from 2025-05-19 and 2025-05-10 cluster suspiciously with generic praise and no specific details. Two reviews are completely blank (2025-05-19, 2024-11-11) yet rated 5.0.
• CRITICAL PRICING RED FLAGS: 12 reviews explicitly mention overcharging, inflated travel time fees ($110/hr for 45-min drive), excessive parts markups (part cost $65 charged as $134), and aggressive collections practices. One customer was threatened with a mechanical lien over a $90 disputed estimate.
• SERIOUS CONDUCT ISSUES: Multiple reviews (2015-2023) document aggressive behavior, profanity, threats of physical violence, hanging up on customers, and dismissive responses to complaints. One owner allegedly threatened to 'kick your teeth in' during a dispute.
• PROJECT COMPLETION FAILURES: 8+ reviews document incomplete work, installation errors (water lines backwards, valve installed upside down, drain line knocked out), damage to property, and failure to honor callbacks or follow-up commitments.
• BILLING DISPUTE PATTERN: At least 4 reviews describe billing disputes, non-responsive communication, continued collections threats despite payment, and refusal to acknowledge customer concerns.
• RECENCY CONCERN: The dramatic shift from 1-star complaints (2015-2023) to 5-star praise (2024-2025) warrants skepticism. No negative reviews appear after March 2024, suggesting either genuine improvement or suppression of negative feedback.

This WW Score should be treated with CAUTION. While the 72.8 score reflects genuine strengths in professionalism and technical skill, the data is heavily skewed by a recent cluster of suspiciously uniform 5-star reviews that lack specificity, combined with a complete absence of recent critical feedback despite historical patterns of serious billing and conduct issues. The company's older track record reveals significant problems with pricing transparency, project completion, and customer service recovery. Prospective customers should request detailed references from recent projects, obtain written quotes with itemized labor and travel charges, and establish clear payment terms before engaging services. The company's willingness to address disputes and improve service is unclear given the communication breakdowns documented in historical reviews.