Find Nearby Plumbers In Yonkers, New York

Complete Plumbing Services earns strong marks across all four dimensions, driven by an overwhelming volume of positive reviews praising Sal and his crew for responsiveness, punctuality, fair pricing, and skilled workmanship. Professionalism is the most frequently cited dimension, with dozens of reviewers specifically noting courteous behavior, timely arrivals, and clear communication. Pricing scores well with many reviewers explicitly comparing Sal favorably against competitors and noting honest, transparent quotes. Project completion is solid but tempered by four notable negative reviews describing unfinished work, a callback that was never honored, a faulty installation that leaked within six months and was charged again to fix, and a failed installation visit — these meaningfully reduce the project completion score. Experience scores highly based on specific technical praise across complex jobs including tankless water heaters, gas lines, full repipes, and permitted inspections that passed without issue.

• DUPLICATE REVIEWS DETECTED: A large number of reviews appear to be exact or near-exact duplicates posted on the same or adjacent dates (e.g., multiple identical reviews on 2022-08-24, 2022-05-25, 2021-06-28, 2021-06-03, 2021-05-26, 2021-03-06, 2021-03-01, 2016-04-08, 2016-06-18, and many others). These duplicates have been counted as single unique reviews for scoring purposes and inflate the total review count significantly.
• MULTIPLE TECHNICIAN NAMES: Reviews reference Sal, Salvador, Jeff, Brad, Richard, Nick, Shannon, Mike, Marty, and Skippy — suggesting this profile may aggregate reviews for multiple businesses or locations operating under the 'Complete Plumbing Services' name, which reduces confidence that all reviews reflect the same team or service quality.
• NEGATIVE REVIEWS WITH SERIOUS CONCERNS: Four 1-star reviews describe: (1) a $400 charge for a sink repair that was not fixed, followed by a demand for another $200-$400 to complete the job; (2) a technician who could not diagnose a heating/hot water issue, overcharged for a thermostat, and then became unreachable; (3) a leaking faucet repair that was not fixed and the plumber stopped responding for 3+ weeks; (4) a failed water heater installation where the technician did not check power supply, then the company became unavailable for follow-up despite advertising 24-hour service.
• RECENCY NOTE: The majority of reviews with substantive detail are from 2021–2025, which is positive. However, a cluster of reviews from 2016–2019 reference different named technicians (Marty, Mike, Brad, Nick) suggesting possible business ownership or staffing changes over time.
• BLANK REVIEWS: Three reviews contained no text (only a star rating) and were excluded from dimension scoring but counted in total reviews analyzed.
• ONE REVIEW (2020-08-25) noted a voicemail box that was perpetually full, raising a minor responsiveness concern.

This WW Score carries HIGH data confidence due to the large volume of substantive reviews, but should be interpreted with caution given confirmed duplicate review patterns, multiple technician identities suggesting possible profile aggregation, and four credible negative reviews describing incomplete work, billing disputes, and post-job unresponsiveness that meaningfully offset the otherwise strong positive record.

Gleason Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism with consistent praise for punctuality, responsiveness, and courteous communication across 11 reviews. Technical expertise is well-documented with 8 mentions highlighting skilled workmanship and problem-solving ability. Project completion is solid across 10 reviews, though two significant failures (wrong parts, incomplete repairs requiring rework) and one overpriced service call create material concerns. Pricing receives mixed signals: several reviews praise fair and transparent pricing, but two negative reviews cite excessive charges ($250 toilet repair, overpriced work), creating a moderate score of 73.3 despite positive mentions. The WW Score of 82.1 reflects strong operational execution tempered by occasional quality and pricing inconsistencies.

• Two critical service failures: Review from 2023-12-29 reports wrong parts installed requiring professional rework; Review from 2020-10-09 reports $250 toilet repair followed by overflow failure next day. These represent material project completion failures.
• Pricing inconsistency: Multiple reviews praise fair pricing and transparency, but two reviews cite excessive charges ($250 toilet repair, unspecified overpriced work). This suggests either inconsistent pricing practices or variable technician judgment.
• Review age distribution: 5 reviews are from 2023-2024 (recent), but 4 reviews are from 2013-2016 (8+ years old). Recent reviews are predominantly 5-star with no negative feedback, while older reviews include detailed context. Recommend weighting recent reviews more heavily.
• No fake review patterns detected: Reviews show varied specificity, different writing styles, and include both positive and negative experiences with concrete details. Authenticity appears high.

This WW Score of 82.1 is reliable with HIGH overall confidence due to 14 usable reviews with strong mention counts across all dimensions (5-11 mentions each). However, the score masks material concerns: two documented service failures and pricing inconsistencies warrant caution despite strong professionalism ratings. Recent reviews (2023-2024) show no failures, suggesting possible improvement, but the historical pattern of occasional critical failures should be considered in hiring decisions.

Patrick demonstrates strong professionalism across all three reviews, with explicit mentions of responsiveness, quick turnaround, and courteous service. Project completion is consistently evidenced by timely job delivery and thorough follow-through on repairs and installations. Technical skill is reflected in the quality of workmanship described (bidet toilet repair, garbage disposal installation). However, pricing is never mentioned in any review, preventing assessment of value for money. The small sample size (3 reviews) and lack of pricing data limit overall confidence, though all recent reviews (July–October 2024) are positive.

• Only 3 reviews analyzed — sample size is minimal and limits statistical reliability
• No pricing or value-for-money feedback provided in any review — cannot assess Price Friendly dimension
• All reviews are 5-star ratings with positive sentiment; no negative feedback to balance assessment
• Reviews show some generic praise language ('amazing job', 'immaculate experience') but include specific details (bidet repair, garbage disposal, 30-min fix time), so not flagged as fake

This WW Score should be treated as preliminary and directionally positive, but is based on a very small sample size with no pricing data; additional reviews are needed to establish reliable confidence in contractor performance.

A&S Plumbing earns strong marks across all four dimensions, with professionalism and experience being the most consistently praised attributes — reviewers frequently cite punctuality, courteous technicians, and skilled diagnostics. Project completion scores well overall, with the vast majority of jobs described as fully resolved in a timely manner, though two notable negative reviews (one from 2018 describing an unresolved toilet repair with no callback, and one from 2013 describing a complex gas/generator job with serious technical failures and poor responsiveness) meaningfully drag this dimension down. Pricing is generally viewed favorably, with multiple mentions of fair and affordable rates and even discounts offered, but one older review describes a final bill that nearly doubled the original estimate, introducing enough uncertainty to prevent a higher score. The bulk of reviews are recent (2024–2025), which increases confidence in the current state of the business, though the older negative reviews are substantive enough to warrant attention.

• 5 reviews contain no text whatsoever — only a star rating. These were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable evidence.
• One review (2013-02-11, 1-star) describes serious technical deficiencies including incorrect gas line sizing, failure to coordinate with the utility provider, no-shows, and unreturned calls. This is a detailed and credible negative review that meaningfully impacts project_completion and experience scores.
• One review (2018-12-24, 1-star) describes a toilet repair left in worse condition than before, with the technician not responding to follow-up texts. This negatively impacts both project_completion and professionalism scores.
• One review (2013-03-05, 1-star) describes a final bill of $3,250 against an original estimate of $1,650 — nearly double — with disputed labor time. This is a credible pricing concern that suppresses the pricing score.
• One review (2013-09-30) contains only the text 'Same as above.' with no context. This was excluded as uninterpretable.
• Several reviews use very similar phrasing (e.g., 'prompt, professional, efficient') but are attributed to different named technicians and specific job types, which reduces — but does not eliminate — fake review concern. No definitive fake review pattern detected, but the volume of brief, generic 5-star reviews warrants mild caution.
• A significant portion of negative reviews are from 2012–2013, which are over 10 years old. These were weighted conservatively but not ignored, as they describe substantive failures rather than minor complaints.
• RECENCY NOTE: The overwhelming majority of reviews from 2024–2025 are positive, suggesting the business may have improved significantly over time. However, the 2018 negative review is recent enough to remain relevant.

This WW Score is based on a large and diverse review set with HIGH confidence across all four dimensions; however, the presence of three substantive negative reviews describing incomplete work, billing disputes, and technical errors prevents a top-tier score and should be carefully considered by prospective customers.

Chris Bartolini receives consistently strong marks for professionalism, with numerous reviewers explicitly praising his punctuality, communication, responsiveness, and courteous manner across many years of reviews. Pricing is generally viewed as fair or reasonable, though one reviewer noted a quote felt excessive and another gave a B grade on price, preventing a higher score. Project completion is solid overall, with most reviewers describing jobs that were finished correctly and on time, but one detailed 1-star review describes a materially incorrect installation of an expansion tank on the wrong side of the pipe, which Chris reportedly refused to acknowledge, resulting in significant financial loss for the customer. Experience scores are tempered by that same negative review, which documents a clear technical error and a pattern of deflection rather than correction, offsetting the many positive accounts of skilled, knowledgeable workmanship.

• One detailed 1-star review (2014-10-21) describes a confirmed incorrect installation of an expansion tank on the hot water side instead of the cold water side, validated by the manufacturer's warranty documentation. Chris reportedly denied the error and continued to misdiagnose the problem, causing the customer approximately $471.89 in unnecessary costs. This is a significant technical and professional failure that materially impacts the experience and project completion scores.
• The majority of reviews are older than 3 years relative to a 2025 evaluation date, with only one review from 2022 and none from 2023 or 2024. Recency of data is low, reducing confidence in whether current performance matches historical patterns.
• One review (2015-11-07) contains only the text 'unknown' and was excluded from scoring as it provides no usable data.
• One review (2013-11-04) contains only the word 'Good' with a 4-star rating and provides minimal usable data; it was counted only as a weak positive signal.
• Several older reviews (2011-2013) use somewhat generic praise, though most include specific details that suggest authenticity. No strong fake review pattern detected, but the volume of older 5-star reviews with limited specifics warrants mild caution.

This WW Score is based on 23 usable reviews spanning 2008 to 2022, with HIGH mention counts across all four dimensions, but reliability is meaningfully reduced by the age of most reviews and one well-documented case of incorrect workmanship that the contractor reportedly refused to correct.

Flotechs demonstrates strong professionalism with responsive communication, punctual service, and courteous staff consistently praised across 35 reviews. Technical expertise and workmanship quality are solid, supported by 26 mentions of skilled technicians and effective problem-solving. However, project completion reliability is undermined by multiple documented failures to follow through on callbacks, warranty work, and incomplete repairs, with 28 mentions showing both excellent completions and serious abandonment issues. Pricing feedback is mixed: while many customers report fair value, several complaints about high charges and refusal to adjust bills for unauthorized work lower this dimension to 72. The company's inconsistency—delivering excellent service in some cases while ghosting customers in others—creates meaningful risk.

• CRITICAL: Multiple documented cases of non-responsiveness and ghosting customers after initial service (reviews from 2024-06-09, 2023-06-10). One customer provided phone records showing 7 outgoing calls with 0 incoming responses, contradicting company's public response.
• CRITICAL: Repeated failure to honor callbacks and warranty work. Customer paid $3K+ for 'permanent' pipe replacement but problem recurred within 3 months; owner refused to stand behind work and was verbally dismissive.
• CRITICAL: Unauthorized work billing dispute—customer charged $299 for drain clearing they never approved or authorized; company refused partial refund despite customer request.
• CRITICAL: Work quality failures documented: HVAC repair that disabled furnace heat control; boiler service that 'made things infinitely worse'; stove damaged during gas line service with inadequate follow-up repairs.
• Pattern of extreme negative reviews (1-star) with specific, detailed complaints suggesting legitimate service failures rather than fake reviews. These are concentrated in 2024 and 2023, indicating recent deterioration.
• Positive reviews are predominantly older (2019-2022) or very recent (2025-05-10). Recent 2024 reviews show sharp quality decline with multiple serious complaints.
• One review (2024-09-12) explicitly states customer abandoned Flotechs due to inability to reach them during business hours; competitor (Roto Rooter) answered at 8pm same night.
• Tone inconsistency in negative reviews suggests real customer frustration: one owner described as 'rude,' 'only interested in fleecing,' and 'total jerk' who talked over customers.
• Empty/minimal reviews (2 instances with no text, rating only) reduce data quality slightly but do not invalidate analysis.

This WW Score of 76.8 should be treated with CAUTION despite HIGH overall confidence. While the score reflects genuine strengths in professionalism and experience, the company exhibits a critical pattern of service inconsistency and failure to honor commitments, particularly evident in 2024 reviews. The recent deterioration in responsiveness and follow-through, combined with documented ghosting and warranty refusals, suggests the company's current reliability is significantly lower than historical performance. Customers should expect strong initial service but face substantial risk of non-responsiveness if issues arise post-completion.