Find Nearby Plumbers In Freeport, New York

This single review provides explicit positive feedback across all four dimensions. The reviewer praised Tim and Dave's professionalism (great attitude, correct communication), pricing (reasonable charges), project completion (fixed multiple issues including filter, pressure bladder, and shower head), and experience (many years of experience, showed customer how to fix fixtures in future). However, with only one review, confidence in any calculated score is severely limited and cannot reliably represent contractor performance.

• Only 1 review analyzed — insufficient data to calculate reliable WW Score. Minimum 3 reviews required.
• Review is from 2016 (8+ years old) — does not reflect current service quality or recent performance.
• Single positive review with no counterbalancing negative feedback — cannot assess consistency or identify potential weaknesses.
• Reviewer provided personal contact information and offered as reference — suggests strong satisfaction but also indicates potential bias or personal relationship.

This analysis cannot produce a reliable WW Score due to insufficient review volume (n=1). At minimum, 3 independent reviews are required to establish baseline confidence. Current data is too limited to trust as a representation of contractor performance.

Only one review was provided, which is insufficient to calculate a reliable WW Score. The single review praises professionalism (communication, punctuality, responsiveness) and experience (knowledge, technical competence), but provides no information about pricing or project completion. The review is dated July 2020, over 3 years old, which limits its relevance to current service quality.

• Insufficient data: only 1 review provided. Minimum 3 reviews required for reliable scoring.
• Review is dated July 2020 — over 3 years old. Does not reflect current service quality.
• No pricing information mentioned — cannot assess Price Friendly dimension.
• No explicit confirmation of project completion — only mentions service was provided.

This analysis cannot produce a trustworthy WW Score due to insufficient review volume (n=1). At least 3 reviews are required to establish meaningful patterns and confidence levels.

Only a single review exists for this contractor, making any scoring highly unreliable. That sole review is a 1-star complaint alleging severe price gouging on an emergency boiler repair, with parts billed at approximately $800 when actual cost was under $100, and labor billed at $200 for under one hour of work. Professionalism scores very low due to the alleged exploitation of a vulnerable elderly customer in an emergency situation. Pricing scores near the floor given the explicit claim of an approximately 8x markup on parts with no transparency. Project completion receives a marginally higher score only because the repair appears to have been physically completed, though under deeply questionable ethical circumstances. No data exists to assess technical experience or workmanship quality.

• ONLY 1 REVIEW: WW Score cannot be calculated. A minimum of 3 reviews is required for any reliable scoring.
• SERIOUS PRICING ALLEGATION: Reviewer explicitly claims parts were billed at ~$800 when actual cost was under $100, representing a potential 8x markup. This is a significant red flag if accurate.
• VULNERABILITY EXPLOITATION CONCERN: Reviewer alleges the contractor took advantage of an elderly customer during an emergency cold-weather situation, which is a serious ethical and reputational concern.
• REVIEW AGE: This review is from March 2015, making it over 9 years old. It carries very limited relevance to current business practices and should be weighted accordingly if newer reviews become available.
• NO CORROBORATING REVIEWS: There is no way to determine whether this incident is representative of typical business conduct or an isolated case.

This score is extremely unreliable and should not be used for any decision-making, as it is based on a single review that is over 9 years old; the contractor's current practices, quality, and pricing cannot be assessed from this data alone.

Only one review is available for analysis, which is insufficient to calculate a reliable WW Score. The single review mentions fair pricing, quick completion, and professional conduct (mask-wearing during COVID), but with only one data point, confidence in any dimension is severely limited. No information about technical skill or experience level was provided.

• Insufficient review volume (n=1) — WW Score cannot be calculated reliably
• Review is from January 2021 (over 3 years old) — recency is a concern
• Generic praise language with minimal specific detail about the actual work performed
• No mention of technical skill, problem-solving, or quality of workmanship

This analysis cannot produce a trustworthy WW Score due to insufficient data; a minimum of 3 reviews is required for reliable scoring.