Find Nearby Plumbers In Schenectady, New York

Lou demonstrates consistently strong performance across all dimensions. Professionalism is exemplary, with all five reviews explicitly praising responsiveness, friendliness, punctuality, and cleanliness. Project completion is reliable—jobs are finished on time, callbacks are honored, and work exceeds expectations. Pricing is fair and transparent, with multiple reviewers noting competitive rates compared to competitors. Technical skill is evident in problem-solving ability and quality workmanship, particularly on complex jobs like century-old home installations. The only minor limitation is review recency: one review dates to 2018 and another to 2020, though three recent reviews (2023-2024) confirm continued quality.

• Review from 2018 and 2020 are older than 12 months; however, three recent reviews (2023-2024) confirm consistent quality standards remain in place.
• No fake review patterns detected. Reviews contain specific details (washer/dryer hookups, water heater emergency, basement installations, cleanliness, responsiveness) and vary in length and phrasing naturally.

This WW Score of 89.3 is highly reliable, based on five detailed reviews with consistent positive evidence across all four dimensions and strong recent validation.

Drain Solutions demonstrates strong professionalism with consistent punctuality, friendly demeanor, and responsive communication across 68 reviews. Pricing is a significant strength, with 45 reviews praising fair, reasonable, and transparent rates. However, project completion shows notable weakness: while many jobs are completed successfully, 5 reviews explicitly document failures to follow through on callbacks, rescheduled appointments, and no-shows, creating reliability concerns. Technical expertise is solid with 42 mentions of skilled diagnostics and quality workmanship, though some older reviews (2011-2018) show inconsistency in execution.

• RELIABILITY PATTERN: Five 1-2 star reviews (2025-05-10, 2025-04-10, 2021-07-22, 2018-03-24, 2016-01-06, 2011-09-09) document serious follow-through failures including no-shows, failure to return after rescheduling, and unresponsiveness to callbacks. This directly contradicts the overwhelmingly positive narrative.
• RECENCY CONCERN: Majority of reviews cluster in 2023-2024 (40+ reviews) with many dated 2024-06-09 specifically. Earlier reviews (2011-2018) show more mixed results with documented scheduling and communication issues.
• POTENTIAL FAKE REVIEW PATTERN: Multiple reviews from 2024-06-09 share nearly identical phrasing ('highly recommend', 'professional', 'fair price', 'same day service') with minimal specific detail. While not conclusive, this clustering warrants caution.
• INCONSISTENT TEAM PERFORMANCE: Reviews reference multiple technicians (Dave, Jeremy, Bobby, Chris, Tommy, Josh) with varying quality levels. Some customers report excellent experiences with specific individuals but poor experiences with others, suggesting inconsistent service delivery.
• TIME MANAGEMENT ISSUE: One 5-star review (2020-11-29) explicitly states 'time-management is not their strong suit' despite praising quality, indicating a known operational weakness.

This WW Score of 82.3 should be treated with moderate caution: while professionalism and pricing dimensions are well-supported by high-mention counts, the project completion score is significantly dragged down by documented failures in follow-through and reliability, and the recent clustering of nearly identical positive reviews raises questions about review authenticity. The company demonstrates strong technical capability and customer service intent but has a documented pattern of scheduling and communication failures that directly impact trustworthiness.

Mark's Plumbing demonstrates strong overall performance across all dimensions, with particular strength in technical expertise and experience (87/100). Professionalism scores well at 84/100, supported by 28 mentions of punctuality, communication, and courteous service. Project completion (83/100) is solid with evidence of timely work and follow-through, though a few negative reviews cite incomplete solutions and delayed callbacks. Pricing (79/100) is generally praised as fair and competitive, but three reviews explicitly mention billing disputes or unexpected charges, which moderately constrains this score. The company benefits from long-term customer relationships and strong referral patterns, indicating sustained reliability.

• Three negative reviews (2012, 2015, 2020) describe serious service failures: incomplete work, billing disputes, and failure to follow through on promised solutions. These are not isolated complaints but represent material gaps in execution.
• Review from 2020-01-06 describes a Christmas emergency where promised solution was never delivered despite multiple calls and follow-ups, and customer was billed for incomplete work. This is a significant red flag for project completion reliability.
• Review from 2021-05-18 reports unexpected $300 billing increase months after water heater installation, suggesting potential transparency issues in pricing communication.
• Review from 2015-06-18 describes punctuality failure (1 hour late) and poor attitude when called out, contradicting the otherwise strong professionalism narrative.
• Most reviews are 5-star with enthusiastic language, but negative reviews are detailed and specific, suggesting they are genuine rather than fake. No evidence of fabricated reviews detected.
• Recency note: 18 of 38 reviews (47%) are from 2019 or earlier. Only 8 reviews (21%) are from 2024. Recent data is limited, which slightly reduces confidence in current performance assessment.

This WW Score of 82.1 is reliable with HIGH overall confidence due to substantial mention counts across all dimensions (18-28 mentions each) and a large review sample (38 reviews). However, the score should be interpreted as representing a company with strong baseline performance that has experienced occasional but serious execution failures, particularly around project completion follow-through and billing transparency. Recent reviews are limited, so current performance may differ from this historical average.

Superior Co-op demonstrates strong technical expertise and generally reliable project completion, with most reviews praising knowledge, efficiency, and workmanship. However, two severe negative reviews from 2021 and 2018 involving unprofessional behavior, safety violations, and aggressive customer interactions significantly impact the professionalism score. Pricing feedback is mixed but generally positive when mentioned. The company shows inconsistency in service quality and customer treatment, with excellent performance in most cases undermined by critical failures in professionalism and judgment.

• CRITICAL: Two 1-star reviews document serious professionalism failures—one involving safety violations (bypassing furnace safety switches), incompetence, and dismissive owner response (12/13/2021); another involving aggressive threats, rudeness, and door-slamming over service charges (12/30/2018). These are not isolated complaints but documented incidents of unacceptable behavior.
• RECENCY CONCERN: Most positive reviews are from 2016–2019 (older than 5 years). The most recent negative review is from 2021, suggesting potential ongoing issues. Limited recent positive reviews make it difficult to assess current service quality.
• INCONSISTENCY PATTERN: Stark contrast between glowing 5-star reviews emphasizing professionalism and two detailed 1-star reviews documenting unprofessional conduct. This suggests either highly variable service quality depending on technician assigned, or inconsistent management oversight.
• OWNER BEHAVIOR: Both negative reviews involve the owner (Gerald/Gerry) directly or his response. In 2021 review, owner offered no apology and was dismissive. In 2018 review, owner threatened customer with police and service charges. This raises concerns about company culture and accountability.
• SAFETY VIOLATION: The 2021 review documents a technician bypassing furnace safety switches—a serious HVAC safety violation that could endanger customers. No evidence of corrective action or follow-up.

This score should be treated with caution. While the numerical WW Score of 82.1 reflects predominantly positive reviews, the two severe negative reviews documenting safety violations, unprofessional behavior, and aggressive customer treatment represent critical failures that outweigh volume of positive feedback. The company's reliability is compromised by inconsistency and lack of accountability. Prospective customers should be aware of documented risks before engaging this company.

Crisafulli Bros (formerly Simons Heating & Cooling) demonstrates strong technical competence and generally professional field technicians, with particularly high marks for punctuality, friendliness, and workmanship quality. However, the company is significantly hampered by inconsistent follow-through on callbacks, unresponsive office communication, and pricing transparency issues. Multiple customers report being ignored after initial service calls, delayed estimates, and unresolved refund requests. While recent reviews (2025) show improved performance with specific technicians like Mitch Heym and Felix De Jesus, older patterns of poor administrative follow-up persist, and several customers report being charged for unnecessary or ineffective work.

• FAKE REVIEW PATTERN DETECTED: Multiple reviews from 2025-03-11 use nearly identical Disney-themed language ('#Disney', 'Disney Prince', 'Disney customer service course') praising different technicians (Zac, Ken, Josh, Cameron). This appears to be coordinated or template-based praise rather than organic customer feedback. Confidence in these specific reviews is LOW.
• DUPLICATE REVIEW: The Stephanie review about air duct cleaning appears twice (2015-08-11 with timestamps and without), suggesting data quality issues.
• MULTIPLE PLACEHOLDER REVIEWS: Approximately 15 reviews contain only 'unknown', '.', or 'oiuytrew9876543' as text with 5-star ratings. These provide no usable data and suggest review system manipulation or data corruption.
• RECENCY BIAS NOTED: Strong concentration of detailed 5-star reviews from May-June 2025 (all praising Mitch Heym or similar technicians) contrasts sharply with older reviews showing systemic communication failures. Recent reviews may not reflect company-wide practices.
• CRITICAL SERVICE FAILURES: Multiple customers report being completely ignored after service calls (2018-2019 furnace saga, 2024 mini-split installation abandonment, 2023 rebate paperwork never submitted). These are not isolated incidents but suggest systemic administrative breakdown.
• PRICING TRANSPARENCY ISSUES: Customers report surprise charges ($395 for ineffective work, $230+ for incomplete service, $99 truck fees for 6-mile trips). Pricing dimension scored conservatively due to limited explicit mentions but clear pattern of customer dissatisfaction.
• QUALITY CONTROL VARIANCE: Significant disparity between technician performance. Named technicians (Mitch Heym, Felix De Jesus, Ken, Eric) receive consistent praise; unnamed or different technicians associated with poor outcomes (wrong AC size, duct tape repairs, incomplete work).

This WW Score of 78.2 should be treated with MODERATE-TO-HIGH confidence for field technician performance but LOW confidence for overall company reliability. The company excels at technical installation and punctuality but fails consistently at administrative follow-through, callback responsiveness, and pricing transparency. Customers should expect good workmanship but should not rely on the company to resolve post-service issues or honor commitments made during initial contact. Recent 2025 reviews suggest possible improvement, but this contradicts the pattern of failures documented in 2023-2024, warranting skepticism about sustainability of improvements.

Jack Hall Plumbing & Heating demonstrates strong technical expertise and generally professional conduct, with many customers praising technician knowledge, skill, and courteous behavior. However, the company is significantly hampered by serious pricing concerns—multiple reviews document quotes 3–5 times higher than competitors for identical work, and allegations of overcharging for parts and labor. Project completion issues are evident, including missed appointments, incomplete follow-through on contracted work (notably the EmPower mini-split installation), and inconsistent service quality depending on which technician is assigned. While recent reviews (2024–2025) are predominantly positive, older reviews reveal patterns of aggressive upselling, misdiagnosis to justify expensive replacements, and poor customer service recovery. The company has made some efforts to address complaints, but pricing remains a critical weakness.

• PRICING RED FLAG: Multiple independent reviews (2024, 2018, 2019) document quotes 3–5× higher than competitors for identical work. Examples: $21,000 estimate vs. $7,000 actual cost; $600 repair vs. $170 elsewhere; $699 for basic sink hookup (30 parts); $1,000+ estimates repaired by others for <$200.
• MISDIAGNOSIS PATTERN: Several reviews allege technicians recommended expensive replacements when simple repairs sufficed (boiler airflow adjustment charged $450, fixed by second opinion for free; furnace deemed inoperable, actually needed minor adjustment; water main issue misdiagnosed, town supervisor solved it).
• PROJECT COMPLETION FAILURES: One customer reported contracted EmPower mini-split installation never completed despite repeated follow-up calls to Scott Brumley with no response. Another customer paid $250 for AC service that left thermostat misconfigured, resulting in no AC in any bedroom.
• APPOINTMENT RELIABILITY: Multiple reviews document cancelled/rescheduled appointments without notice, no-shows, and failure to arrive at scheduled times, forcing customers to take time off work.
• INCONSISTENT SERVICE QUALITY: Explicit statement in one review: 'Their service is very dependent on which technician you get.' Quality varies significantly by individual technician.
• CUSTOMER SERVICE TONE: Several older reviews describe rude, dismissive phone staff ('well I guess that's your problem isn't it'). One review alleges company shared customer personal information and records with third parties without consent.
• RECENT REVIEW SURGE: 20+ five-star reviews clustered in 2024–2025 with minimal detail or generic praise ('Great Job, Great Service, Great Price!' with no specifics). Three reviews contain no text, only 5-star ratings. This pattern suggests possible review manipulation or incentivized reviews, though recent detailed reviews do provide specific technician names and legitimate detail.
• HISTORICAL SEVERITY: Older reviews (2015–2020) contain serious allegations: acid damage to customer's bathtub with no remediation, false emergency reports, gas shutoff without cause, overcharging seniors, and billing for hours not worked. Tone and frequency of complaints suggest systemic issues in earlier years, though recent reviews show improvement.
• RECENCY BIAS CONSIDERATION: Most recent reviews (2024–2025) are significantly more positive than 2015–2020 reviews. This may reflect genuine operational improvement or increased review filtering/management.

This WW Score of 72.8 should be treated with MODERATE-TO-HIGH caution. While recent reviews (past 12 months) are predominantly positive and support a higher score, the company's documented history of aggressive pricing, misdiagnosis, and poor customer service recovery creates legitimate concern. The score reflects current performance based on recent data, but customers should independently verify pricing against competitors and request detailed written estimates before committing. The company appears to have improved significantly since 2020, but pricing remains a critical weakness that is not fully captured in the WW Score formula.