Find Nearby Plumbers In Paterson, New Jersey

Eco Plumbing demonstrates strong technical competence and generally reliable service delivery, with many customers praising quick response times, professional demeanor, and effective problem-solving. However, the company is significantly hampered by serious pricing concerns—multiple reviews explicitly describe overcharging, inflated quotes, hidden fees, and aggressive upselling tactics that undermine trust. Project completion shows mixed results with some no-shows and follow-up failures, though most completed jobs are well-executed. The wide variance between glowing 5-star reviews and scathing 1-star complaints suggests inconsistent service quality or potential review authenticity issues.

• PRICING RED FLAGS: Multiple independent reviews (2024, 2023, 2020, 2018, 2018, 2018) describe aggressive upselling, inflated quotes 4x market rate, hidden service fees, and misrepresentation of equipment age/condition. Pattern is consistent and specific, not generic complaints.
• POTENTIAL SCAM INDICATORS: 2024 review details sophisticated bait-and-switch (posing as S&B Plumbing via Google), false diagnosis without inspection, and pressure tactics. 2020 review describes similar false diagnosis (cracked tank with no evidence). These are not isolated incidents.
• COMMUNICATION FAILURES: Multiple reviews (2022, 2022, 2018, 2018) document appointment no-shows, failure to return calls for weeks, and scheduling system failures despite online booking and phone confirmation.
• INCONSISTENT QUALITY: Stark contrast between enthusiastic 5-star reviews (many from 2018-2020, some with minimal detail) and detailed 1-star complaints with specific evidence. Some 5-star reviews lack specificity or detail, raising authenticity concerns.
• RECENCY CONCERN: Most positive reviews cluster in 2018-2020 period. Recent reviews (2024, 2023, 2022) are predominantly negative or critical, suggesting service quality deterioration.
• TECHNICIAN VARIANCE: Named technicians (Moe/Mohammed, Ali) receive consistent praise, but unnamed technicians are associated with scam allegations and poor service, suggesting quality depends heavily on individual assignment.

This WW Score should be treated with CAUTION. While the 72.8 reflects measurable data across all dimensions, the company exhibits a troubling pattern of pricing deception and communication failures that are explicitly documented in recent reviews, and the stark contrast between glowing older reviews and detailed recent complaints suggests either service deterioration or potential review manipulation. Customers should independently verify pricing and seek multiple quotes before engaging this company.

Mackenzie Plumbing demonstrates strong technical expertise and generally professional service delivery, with multiple reviews praising quick response times, knowledgeable staff, and quality workmanship. However, the score is significantly impacted by serious follow-through failures: two separate instances where promised callback work (faucet replacement, communication after emergency service) was never completed, resulting in customer disputes and credit card chargebacks. Pricing transparency issues are also evident, with one customer charged an unexpected $500 after service completion. While recent reviews (2023-2024) show improved performance, the pattern of incomplete commitments and communication breakdowns creates material trust concerns.

• CRITICAL: Two documented instances of failure to follow through on promised work — faucet replacement (2021) and post-service communication (2021) — both resulting in customer escalation/chargeback. This is a project completion red flag.
• Pricing transparency issue: Customer charged $500 additional fee via phone call after leaving house (2023), despite prior $375 payment. Suggests unclear quoting or scope creep.
• Communication failures: One customer reported no callback within 24 hours as promised (2023); another reported 14 days with no response to 3 voicemails and direct email to owner (2021).
• Recency note: Most negative reviews are from 2021-2023. Most recent review (2024-11-08) is positive, suggesting possible improvement, but sample size of recent reviews is small (n=2).
• Inconsistent service quality: Same contractor (Ken/Kenny/MacKenzie) receives both 5-star emergency service praise and 1-2 star follow-through failures, indicating reliability variability.

This score should be treated with MODERATE caution. While technical expertise and initial response are consistently praised, documented failures in project completion and communication—particularly the unfulfilled faucet replacement promise and multi-week communication blackouts—represent material risks. The recent positive trend is encouraging but based on limited recent data (2 reviews in past 12 months). Customers should verify all promises in writing and establish clear follow-up timelines before engaging this contractor.

Garthwaite Plumbing shows strong technical expertise and generally fair pricing, but is significantly undermined by serious project completion and professionalism failures documented in a detailed 2021 complaint. The negative review describes incomplete repairs, unresponsiveness for 2 months, wrong equipment delivered (8-year vs. 10-year water heater), and poor follow-through on damage caused during installation. Five positive reviews from 2013–2020 praise professionalism, timeliness, and work quality, but the recent complaint suggests a decline in service standards or accountability. The stark contrast between glowing older reviews and the recent detailed complaint raises concerns about consistency and reliability.

• CRITICAL: One detailed 1-star review (May 2021) documents serious failures including incomplete repairs, 2-month unresponsiveness, wrong equipment substitution, and damage not remedied. This is recent and specific, not generic criticism.
• RECENCY CONCERN: Five positive reviews are from 2013–2020 (oldest is 8+ years old). The most recent review is the negative one from May 2021, suggesting possible service degradation.
• PATTERN ALERT: Positive reviews use similar generic praise language ('best', 'highly recommend', 'excellent work') with limited specific detail, while the negative review is highly detailed and specific. This asymmetry warrants caution.
• PROFESSIONALISM SCORE DEPRESSED: The 2021 complaint documents poor communication (ignored calls/texts for 2 months), incomplete work, and lack of accountability. This heavily influences the professionalism dimension downward despite positive mentions in other reviews.
• PROJECT COMPLETION SCORE DEPRESSED: The 2021 complaint explicitly documents incomplete repairs (valve stem never replaced, only handle pushed on) and wrong equipment delivered. This is a critical failure in the project completion dimension.

This score should be treated with caution. While the company demonstrates strong technical skills and fair pricing, the recent detailed complaint about incomplete work and unresponsiveness for 2 months suggests either a significant service decline or inconsistent quality. The WW Score of 72.8 reflects this tension, but potential customers should heavily weight the 2021 complaint and request recent references before hiring.

Lee's Plumbing shows strong technical expertise and professionalism in routine service calls, with multiple reviews praising his knowledge, reliability, and attitude. However, a critical recent failure (October 2024) involving a faulty water heater installation and complete non-responsiveness to follow-up requests significantly undermines confidence in project completion and accountability. The positive reviews are primarily from institutional/long-term clients and older dates, while the most recent review documents a serious service failure with financial consequences to the customer. This creates a concerning pattern where initial work quality may be inconsistent and post-sale support is unreliable.

• CRITICAL: Most recent review (Oct 2024) documents severe project failure — faulty water heater installation requiring $400-600 in corrective work and complete non-responsiveness to customer callbacks over 3+ days. This directly contradicts claims of reliability in older reviews.
• POTENTIAL FAKE REVIEW PATTERN: Reviews from 2021-2022 use suspiciously generic praise ('excellent,' 'highly professional,' 'best contractor') with minimal specific technical details. One review (Mike O, 2022) reads like a testimonial rather than a customer experience and references 'hundreds of jobs' without specifics.
• RECENCY BIAS: Four of five reviews are from 2021-2022 (2-3 years old). The single recent review (Oct 2024) is highly negative, suggesting possible service quality decline or inconsistency.
• INCOMPLETE DATA: No reviews mention pricing, transparency, or value assessment. Cannot evaluate fairness of rates.

This score should be treated with caution. While historical reviews suggest competence, the recent documented failure with non-responsiveness is a serious red flag that contradicts the positive pattern and suggests either inconsistent service quality or deteriorating customer service standards. The score is artificially elevated by older, potentially unreliable testimonials and lacks sufficient recent data to establish current reliability.

Mr. Pipe receives strong praise from the majority of reviewers for punctuality, communication, and courteous service, with Hector specifically called out repeatedly for responsiveness and follow-through. However, two highly detailed 1-star reviews describe serious failures: one alleges a botched heat pump installation, deliberate wire tampering, and weeks of non-response leaving a family without heat; another describes catastrophic workmanship as a subcontractor including flooding, improper sizing, and workers arriving impaired. These negative reviews are specific, credible, and heavily impact the project completion and experience scores. Pricing is generally viewed favorably by those who mention it, but the sample is limited. The overall picture is a contractor with a capable and personable lead technician for routine plumbing work, but with documented serious failures on more complex HVAC and construction projects.

• Two highly detailed 1-star reviews describe serious workmanship failures, safety concerns, and alleged dishonest behavior — these are credible and specific and carry significant weight despite being outnumbered by positive reviews.
• One negative review alleges technicians arrived impaired (smelling of marijuana), which is a serious professionalism and safety concern.
• One negative review alleges deliberate wire tampering to avoid warranty coverage — if accurate, this constitutes fraudulent behavior.
• Several positive reviews are older than 3 years (2017–2019) and per RULE 6 carry reduced weight; only 2 reviews fall within the past 12 months from the most recent review date.
• Some positive reviews are somewhat generic in praise (e.g., 'prompt and address the issue quickly') with limited specifics, though most include enough detail to be considered credible.
• The business appears to operate under multiple names or with multiple technicians (Hector, Andres), and the negative reviews involve different personnel or subcontractor contexts — this inconsistency in service quality is a notable concern.
• Most reviews reference routine plumbing tasks where performance appears solid; the failures occurred on more complex HVAC and multi-trade construction work — prospective customers should weigh this distinction carefully.

This WW Score is based on 10 reviews with a meaningful spread of positive and negative feedback; the score carries MODERATE overall reliability due to the presence of two credible, detailed negative reviews that significantly temper an otherwise positive trend, and the fact that several positive reviews are more than 3 years old.

Overall Plumbing receives strong praise across multiple reviews for professionalism, technical knowledge, and personable service, with several reviewers specifically highlighting Dave's expertise and reliability. However, one detailed and credible 1-star review from 2024 significantly weighs down the scores, describing a job that went 50% over budget, was not completed correctly, and required a second plumber to fix — directly contradicting the positive pattern. Pricing is mixed: most reviewers cite fair or reasonable pricing, but the negative review describes a budget overrun that cannot be ignored. Project completion is the most concerning dimension, as the 2024 negative review explicitly describes incomplete and substandard work, which is a serious flag against an otherwise positive trend. The score reflects a contractor with apparent skill and a loyal customer base, tempered by at least one serious failure that is recent and well-documented.

• One highly credible 1-star review (May 2024) describes incomplete work, budget overrun of 50%, and workmanship so poor that a subsequent plumber questioned whether a licensed professional had done it — this is a significant red flag and has been weighted heavily.
• Four of the five positive reviews use notably enthusiastic language with multiple exclamation points and broad praise; while not conclusive, this pattern warrants mild scrutiny for authenticity.
• Two reviews are dated January 5, 2022 with identical timestamps (00:00:00), which may indicate imported or manually entered reviews rather than organically submitted ones — confidence in those two reviews is reduced.
• Two of the six reviews lack any specific job details, offering only generic praise ('Amazing people and service'), which limits their evidentiary value.
• Recency note: The most recent review (2024) is the only negative one. The majority of positive reviews are from 2022–2023, meaning recent performance may be declining.

This WW Score is based on a small sample of 6 reviews with meaningful data quality concerns, including a serious recent negative review and two reviews with suspicious identical timestamps, so the score should be treated as a preliminary signal rather than a definitive assessment of contractor quality.