Find Nearby Plumbers In Raleigh, North Carolina

This contractor demonstrates solid technical skill and workmanship (85/100), with multiple reviews praising quality work and problem-solving ability. However, professionalism is significantly hampered by poor communication, unresponsiveness, and one report of rude behavior (68/100). Project completion shows mixed results, with one detailed account of incomplete work due to miscommunication and assumptions (70/100). Pricing is fair and transparent when quoted (82.5/100). The WW Score of 72.8 reflects strong technical capability undermined by serious operational and interpersonal deficiencies that directly impact customer satisfaction.

• RECENCY CONCERN: 7 of 9 reviews are from 2011–2015 (9+ years old). Only 1 review from 2021. Historical data may not reflect current business practices.
• FAKE REVIEW SUSPICION: Review dated 2015-04-29 contains only a period (.) with 5-star rating—no substantive content. This is a red flag for review manipulation.
• CRITICAL PROFESSIONALISM ISSUE: One review (2014-02-06) reports workers were 'rude and cussed.' Combined with detailed 2015 complaint about poor communication, unresponsiveness, and ignored customer requests, this suggests systemic customer service problems.
• INCOMPLETE WORK DOCUMENTED: 2015 review explicitly states 'Half the work we desired was completed' due to miscommunication and contractor assumptions, directly impacting project completion score.
• INCONSISTENT SERVICE QUALITY: Stark contrast between glowing older reviews (2011–2013) and critical 2015 review from repeat customer who explicitly stated 'we definitely won't be using them again,' suggesting possible service degradation or inconsistency.

This score should be treated with caution due to age of data (mostly 9+ years old), presence of a suspicious fake review, and conflicting evidence of both strong technical work and serious communication/professionalism failures documented in a detailed repeat-customer complaint.

Fuller Services demonstrates strong professionalism and technical expertise across most reviews, with staff consistently described as responsive, courteous, and knowledgeable. However, a critical 1-star review from 2022 reveals a major project completion failure where a large pipe replacement was done incorrectly, resulting in a $3,000 additional repair and the contractor's refusal to address the issue or offer compensation. This severe failure significantly impacts the project completion score. Pricing feedback is mixed and limited, with one review praising value and another calling the service terribly expensive. The company shows inconsistency in follow-through and accountability, particularly when problems arise post-completion.

• CRITICAL: 2022 review documents a failed repair with $3k in damages and contractor non-responsiveness to remediation requests. This is a serious quality and accountability issue.
• RECENCY CONCERN: Most positive reviews are from 2016-2019 (5-8 years old). The most recent review (2022) is highly negative, suggesting possible service degradation over time.
• PRICING INCONSISTENCY: Limited pricing data with conflicting assessments (one 'great value' vs. one 'terribly expensive'). Insufficient data to establish fair pricing pattern.
• POTENTIAL PATTERN: Multiple 5-star reviews from 2016-2018 use similar phrasing ('professional,' 'highly recommend,' 'top notch') but lack specific technical details. However, the 2022 negative review provides concrete specifics, suggesting older reviews may be less reliable indicators of current service quality.

This score should be treated with caution. While historical reviews suggest competent work, the recent catastrophic failure documented in the 2022 review raises serious concerns about current quality control and accountability. The WW Score reflects a company in apparent decline, and potential customers should heavily weight the recent negative experience over older positive testimonials.

William Parrish Plumbing demonstrates strong technical expertise and professionalism, with multiple reviews praising responsiveness, skill, and knowledge of plumbing code. However, the company is significantly hampered by serious pricing and project completion concerns. Two recent reviews (2024 and 2023) document major issues: one job quoted as a week-long project was completed in one day but billed at over $400/hr with unpermitted work left in disarray for a month; another involved improper screw installation causing wall damage requiring tenant remediation. These critical failures in execution and transparency substantially offset the positive feedback from older reviews, resulting in a moderate overall score that reflects inconsistent service quality.

• CRITICAL: Two recent negative reviews (2024, 2023) describe serious project completion failures—unpermitted work left unresolved and improper installation causing property damage. These are not minor complaints.
• PRICING CONCERN: Significant discrepancy in pricing perception. One 2024 review reports $400+/hr rate; a 2023 review questions $650 for 1.25 hours of work. Positive reviews mention 'fair pricing' but lack specifics, making it difficult to assess consistency.
• RECENCY BIAS: Four of seven reviews are from 2017–2018 (6–7 years old). The two most recent reviews (2024, 2023) are both highly negative, suggesting potential service quality decline or inconsistency.
• PERMIT COMPLIANCE: The 2024 review explicitly states the company did not pull required permits, leaving the customer to resolve with the county. This is a serious professional and legal issue.
• WORKMANSHIP QUALITY: The 2023 review documents a technician using incorrect screw length, causing wall penetration and requiring the customer to remediate. This suggests inadequate quality control or attention to detail.

This score should be treated with caution. While the company demonstrates genuine technical expertise and professionalism in communication, the two most recent reviews document serious failures in project completion, permitting compliance, and workmanship quality that directly contradict the positive feedback from older reviews. The WW Score of 72.3 reflects this conflict, but potential customers should heavily weight the recent negative experiences and request explicit clarification on permitting, pricing structure, and quality assurance before engaging.

Cecil Davis Plumbing earns generally positive marks across all four dimensions, but meaningful negative reviews prevent high scores in any category. Professionalism is the most frequently mentioned dimension and is largely positive — plumbers are often described as friendly, punctual, and courteous — but is dragged down by a repeated complaint about poor communication from the office (the duplicate 1-star review about the Apex water leak), an unfriendly receptionist review, and a bait-and-switch pricing complaint that also cited unprofessional conduct. Pricing scores moderately well due to several reviews praising fair and competitive rates, but the $700 overcharge complaint (quoted $1,200–$1,500, billed $2,200) is a serious red flag that significantly lowers confidence in pricing transparency. Project completion is mixed: most jobs appear to be finished satisfactorily, but one reviewer was told mid-job that the company couldn't complete the shower pan replacement despite their website implying otherwise, and another experienced recurring leaks near joints the company had worked on. Experience scores reasonably well, with multiple reviewers praising knowledgeable and skilled technicians, though the recurring leak issue and the incomplete diagnosis job temper that score.

• DUPLICATE REVIEW DETECTED: The 1-star review about the Town of Apex water leak and poor communication appears twice verbatim (dates: 2020-06-10 and 2019-11-13). This may indicate a duplicate submission or data error. It has been counted once for scoring purposes to avoid double-penalizing.
• 8 reviews have no text content — only a star rating. These reviews provide no usable data for any dimension and were excluded from dimension scoring. They do skew the raw star average upward without providing evidence.
• RECENCY WARNING: Only 3 reviews are from the past 12 months (2024–2025), and two of those contain no text. The majority of substantive reviews are from 2013–2022, meaning current service quality is largely unknown.
• PRICING CONCERN: One reviewer explicitly described a bait-and-switch — quoted $1,200–$1,500 for a water heater install, billed $2,200 with no prior notice. Multiple other plumbers confirmed the job should have cost $1,500–$1,600 max. This is a serious transparency issue.
• PROJECT SCOPE CONCERN: One reviewer was told mid-job that the company could not complete a shower pan replacement, despite the company website suggesting this was a service they offered. The reviewer was charged for a diagnosis only. This reflects a project completion and communication failure.
• GENERIC REVIEWS: Several 5-star reviews contain very brief, non-specific praise ('Great service, would definitely recommend!', 'Excellent service, on time, friendly'). While not conclusive of fake reviews, these add limited evidentiary value and were weighted conservatively.

This WW Score is based on 22 reviews with usable text content spanning 2013–2025, with HIGH mention counts across all dimensions, but reliability is moderated by the age of most substantive reviews, 8 content-free ratings, one duplicate review, and at least two serious negative incidents (pricing deception and incomplete project scope) that suggest meaningful service inconsistency.

Pure-Line Plumbing shows a genuinely mixed track record across all four dimensions. Professionalism scores reasonably well — the majority of reviewers praise punctuality, communication, and courteous technicians — but is dragged down by two notable negative experiences involving poor follow-through, unapproved charges, and dismissive owner responses. Pricing is the weakest dimension: multiple reviewers explicitly called out high or unfair charges, including an $800 quote for a 20-minute job and an unauthorized gas regulator installation that doubled a bill, while others praised fair and competitive pricing, creating a wide spread. Project completion is a significant concern — at least three reviews describe work that was incomplete, incorrect, or abandoned, and one describes parts being installed without customer consent; the positive reviews do describe jobs finished same-day and efficiently. Experience scores moderately well, with many reviewers praising quick diagnosis and technical knowledge, but undermined by instances where incorrect parts were installed, a toilet valve was installed wrong, and a shower issue was left unresolved.

• RECENCY WARNING: Only 2 of 15 reviews are from the past 12 months (2024 and 2023). The majority of reviews are from 2015–2019, meaning current service quality is largely unknown and the score may not reflect present-day performance.
• NEGATIVE PATTERN — PRICING: Two separate reviews (2024 and 2023) explicitly describe pricing as excessive or deceptive, including an $800 quote for a simple job and an unauthorized $350 charge for an unneeded part. This is a meaningful red flag.
• NEGATIVE PATTERN — INCOMPLETE WORK: At least three reviews describe jobs that were not completed correctly or at all — a shower filter issue abandoned, a toilet valve installed incorrectly, and a water heater situation where follow-up quotes were never sent.
• OWNER RESPONSE CONCERN: The 2023 reviewer noted the owner repeatedly deflected responsibility by citing a signed pre-authorization rather than addressing service failures, which is a customer service red flag.
• NO SUSPECTED FAKE REVIEWS: Review language is varied, specific, and includes both positive and negative experiences with named technicians and detailed scenarios. No fake review patterns detected.

This WW Score carries MODERATE overall reliability — the volume of reviews is sufficient for scoring, but the heavy skew toward older reviews (most from 2015–2019) means the score may not accurately represent Pure-Line Plumbing's current service quality, and the two most recent reviews are both negative, which is a meaningful warning signal.

All four reviews speak positively to Josh's professionalism, noting promptness, responsiveness, and a personable demeanor, which drives a strong professionalism score. Project completion is well-supported across all reviews, with mentions of follow-through on urgent repairs, multi-project delivery, and same-day responsiveness. Experience is referenced in two reviews with specific praise for technical knowledge and quality of workmanship across diverse plumbing tasks. Pricing is mentioned in only one review, where it is described as very reasonable and transparent, yielding a solid but low-confidence pricing score. The overall WW Score is promising but must be interpreted cautiously given the very small review pool of only four reviews.

• Only 4 reviews analyzed — this is a very small sample size and the WW Score should be treated as preliminary and unreliable for high-stakes decisions.
• All 4 reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative feedback of any kind. While the reviews do contain specific details (named contractor, specific projects, specific behaviors), the uniformly perfect ratings warrant mild caution.
• Review recency: 3 of 4 reviews are from 2023–2024 and are considered current. No recency penalty applied.
• No fake review pattern definitively detected — reviews contain specific project details, named individuals, and varied language, which reduces suspicion. However, the absence of any critical feedback across all reviews is noted.

This WW Score is based on only 4 reviews and should be considered a limited-confidence preliminary assessment; a minimum of 10–15 reviews would be needed to establish a reliably stable score.