Find Nearby Plumbers In Portland, Oregon

Craig's Plumbing has a strong base of loyal, repeat customers who consistently praise their workmanship, reliability, and fair pricing. However, communication is a recurring and significant weakness — multiple independent reviewers across different years cite poor responsiveness, failure to return calls, no pre-job explanations, and no post-job follow-up, which meaningfully drags down the professionalism score. Project completion is generally solid, with most jobs described as finished correctly and on time, though one review raised a serious concern about a potential safety issue (sewer fumes) and the owner's defensive, unprofessional response to the complaint. Pricing feedback is mostly positive, with reviewers noting fair and transparent billing, though one reviewer found the $200 assessment fee unreasonable for a simple job. The recency of negative reviews (2024 and 2023) is notable and suggests communication issues may be ongoing rather than resolved.

• COMMUNICATION PATTERN WARNING: At least 4 independent reviews (2024, 2023, 2019, 2019) explicitly cite poor communication, failure to return calls, and lack of responsiveness. This is a consistent and recurring issue across multiple years and is not an isolated incident.
• RECENCY CONCERN: The two most recent reviews (2024-03-23 and 2024-02-17) are mixed — one positive, one strongly negative (1-star). The 1-star review from February 2024 raises serious concerns about communication failures and a referral to a BBB F-rated restoration company.
• SAFETY FLAG: One review (2019-03-12, 3-star) describes a potential sewer fume emergency possibly linked to Craig's work, and the owner's response was described as unprofessional and defensive. While the company ultimately cleared their name, the handling of the situation was flagged as problematic.
• REVIEW AGE: A significant portion of positive reviews (roughly 14 of 27) are from 2017–2021, making them 3–7 years old. These are given reduced weight relative to more recent reviews.
• GENERIC REVIEWS: Several reviews (e.g., 'Very efficiently!', 'unknown', 'great work and customer service') contain little to no specific detail. These were counted but treated as low-information data points and did not heavily influence dimension scores.
• NO FAKE REVIEW PATTERN DETECTED: While some reviews are brief, the overall set shows sufficient variation in language, specificity, and sentiment (including multiple 1-star reviews) to suggest the review pool is authentic.

This WW Score is based on 27 reviews spanning 2017–2024 with sufficient volume for moderate-to-high reliability, but the score should be interpreted cautiously given the persistent communication complaints across multiple years and the recency of the most critical negative feedback.

Mike Patterson Plumbing has a strong base of loyal, satisfied customers who consistently praise punctuality, friendly technicians, and professional scheduling practices. However, pricing transparency is a recurring and serious concern — multiple reviewers across different years report being surprised by hidden fees including drive time charges, truck fees, and full-hour minimums that were not disclosed upfront, which significantly drags down the pricing score. Project completion is generally solid, with most jobs finished cleanly and thoroughly, but there are notable failures including one case where a plumber could not fix a faucet after multiple trips and still charged for all time, and another where the company never followed up with an estimate as promised. Experience scores are mixed — many reviewers praise knowledgeable and skilled plumbers by name, but at least two reviews describe technicians who lacked parts, used wrong parts, or demonstrated limited diagnostic ability. The overall picture is a company with genuine strengths in service delivery but persistent, documented weaknesses in pricing honesty and consistency of technical skill.

• Hidden fee pattern confirmed across multiple independent reviews spanning 2014 to 2024: drive time charges, truck fees, and full-hour minimums were not disclosed upfront. This is a systemic business practice, not isolated incidents.
• One review (2024-03-01) explicitly states the company has been bought out and that pricing and honesty have declined since the ownership change. Scores from reviews prior to this buyout may not reflect current business practices.
• Most reviews are older than 12 months. Only 3 reviews are dated within the past 12 months (relative to mid-2025), reducing recency confidence. The majority of positive reviews are from 2019 and earlier.
• No strong fake review patterns detected. Reviews vary in detail, tone, rating, and specificity. Named plumbers (Jake, Bob, David, Scott, Jack) appear across multiple reviews, adding authenticity.
• One review (2015-08-03) describes the company failing to follow up on an estimate entirely, which is a project completion and professionalism failure worth noting independently.

This WW Score is based on 20 reviews with broad dimensional coverage and HIGH confidence across all four dimensions, but should be interpreted cautiously given that the most recent reviews suggest a business ownership change and that the majority of positive reviews are more than 3 years old, meaning current service quality may differ materially from the historical average reflected here.

This contractor demonstrates strong technical expertise and consistent project follow-through, with multiple reviewers across many years praising deep plumbing knowledge, accurate diagnosis, and completed work. Professionalism is generally positive — punctuality and communication are frequently praised — but is meaningfully dragged down by one detailed 1-star review describing rude, accusatory behavior from an owner toward a prospective customer. Pricing is the weakest dimension: multiple reviewers independently flagged unexpected fees including truck charges, travel time billing, and parts charges for standard tools, with one reviewer feeling 'taken advantage of' and another noting the toilet price was higher than expected due to added fees. Project completion scores well, as most reviewers report problems being resolved effectively and follow-through being honored, including one instance where the plumber declined to charge because he wasn't confident the fix would hold.

• One review (2014-03-31) contains only a period '.' with no text — this review was excluded from scoring as it contains no usable data.
• The majority of reviews are older than 1 year relative to a current date; most reviews date from 2006–2022, with the most recent being from March 2022. Recency is a concern — business practices or personnel may have changed.
• No fake review patterns detected. Reviews vary in tone, detail level, and rating (1–5 stars), and include specific names, charges, and situations. This is consistent with authentic reviews.
• Pricing complaints are independently corroborated across at least 3 separate reviews spanning different years (2006, 2010, 2012), suggesting a systemic billing transparency issue rather than isolated incidents.
• One 1-star review (2007) describes a highly unprofessional interaction with the owner involving accusations and hostility toward a prospective customer. This is a significant professionalism flag even though it is an isolated incident.

The WW Score carries HIGH overall confidence due to a sufficient volume of detailed, varied, and independently corroborated reviews, though the age of most reviews (many over 10 years old) means current business quality cannot be fully guaranteed.

Nathan receives consistently strong marks for responsiveness, communication, and punctuality across the majority of reviews, which drives the professionalism score upward. Pricing is generally described as fair and reasonable by multiple reviewers, though one reviewer noted the $180 call-out fee was not the cheapest available. Project completion and experience scores are meaningfully dragged down by a detailed 1-star review describing serious workmanship failures on a large restoration project — including drilling into a self-installed gas line, an incorrectly installed soaking tub, and an unleveled shower pan — resulting in over $10,000 paid with additional costs to fix his mistakes. A separate 3-star review also flags a knowledge gap with American Standard fixtures, where Nathan declined to work on the product despite being informed of the brand in advance. The combination of these two substantive negative reviews introduces real doubt about technical reliability on complex or unfamiliar jobs, warranting conservative scores in experience and project completion.

• One highly detailed 1-star review (2015) describes serious workmanship failures including drilling into a self-installed gas line, incorrect high-end fixture installation, and an unleveled cemented shower pan on a $10,000+ project. This is a significant red flag for complex or large-scale work.
• One 3-star review (2020) flags a knowledge gap: Nathan declined to work on American Standard fixtures despite being informed of the brand twice before arrival, resulting in a wasted call-out fee and scheduling delays for the customer.
• The majority of reviews are older than 3 years, with most clustering between 2011 and 2021. Only two reviews are from 2020 or later. Recency is low and the score may not reflect current performance.
• Several positive reviews are brief and lack specific detail (e.g., 'great work,' 'very professional'), which slightly reduces their evidentiary weight. However, enough reviews contain specific details to avoid a fake review flag.
• The single general contractor endorsement (2014) may reflect a professional relationship bias and was weighted conservatively.

This WW Score carries HIGH confidence in terms of review volume and dimension coverage, but should be interpreted cautiously given the age of most reviews and the presence of one serious, detailed negative review describing dangerous and costly workmanship failures on a large project.

David and Northwest Plumbing & Drain receive consistently strong praise across all four dimensions, with professionalism being the most frequently and explicitly mentioned quality — reviewers repeatedly highlight punctuality, friendliness, responsiveness, and clean job sites. Pricing is called out as reasonable or very reasonable across five reviews, lending solid confidence to the pricing score. Project completion is supported by multiple reviewers noting reliable follow-through, prompt service, and successful resolution of varied plumbing issues including pipe restoration and water heater installation. Experience scores well based on specific technical mentions such as diagnosing pipe serviceability, clearing internal pipe deposits, and providing preventative maintenance advice. However, the overall score is tempered by the small total review count of 7 and the fact that five of the seven reviews are more than four years old, with only two falling within the past 12 months.

• RECENCY WARNING: Only 2 of 7 reviews are from the past 12 months (2024). Five reviews date from 2011 to 2020, with two from 2011 and 2013 being over a decade old. Recent performance may differ from historical record.
• REVIEW VOLUME: Only 7 total reviews analyzed. Scores carry moderate reliability at best due to small sample size.
• MILD PATTERN NOTICE: All 7 reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative or mixed feedback. While the reviews do contain specific details and varied language, the uniformity warrants slight caution. No strong evidence of fake reviews, but the absence of any critical feedback is noted.

This WW Score carries moderate reliability — the reviews are specific and credible in language, but the very small sample size of 7 reviews and the heavy skew toward older reviews (5 of 7 are from 2013–2020) mean this score should be treated as a promising but incomplete picture of current contractor performance.

All 7 reviews consistently praise professionalism, with explicit mentions of punctuality, responsiveness, communication, friendliness, and going beyond scope — driving a high confidence score in that dimension. Project completion is also strongly supported, with multiple reviewers describing issues fully resolved quickly, often on short notice, and with follow-through. Experience is backed by references to technical knowledge, diagnosing multiple issues in a single visit, and effective problem-solving. Pricing is mentioned positively in 3 reviews using terms like 'fair' and 'reasonable,' yielding a moderate-confidence score. The overall picture is of a reliable, skilled, and customer-focused plumbing operation.

• All 7 reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative feedback of any kind — this warrants mild caution, though most reviews contain specific details that reduce fake review suspicion.
• 3 of the 7 reviews are older than 3 years (2018, 2019, 2021), and only 2 reviews fall within the past 12 months (2024). Recency of the data set is limited; recent performance may differ from older reviews.
• Review volume is low (7 total). Scores should be treated as directionally useful but not statistically robust.

This WW Score is moderately reliable given the small but specific review set; the high consistency and detail across reviews lend credibility, but the low total volume and skew toward older reviews mean the score should be interpreted with appropriate caution.