Find Nearby Plumbers In Portland, Oregon

Clog Pro demonstrates strong overall performance across all dimensions, with particular strength in professionalism (87.5) and experience (86.0). The company excels at punctuality, communication, and technical competence, with extensive evidence of skilled technicians who diagnose problems accurately and explain work clearly. Project completion is solid (85.0), with most jobs finished on schedule and callbacks honored. Pricing (76.0) is the weakest dimension—while many customers praise fair pricing and value, a meaningful minority report surprise charges, high hourly minimums, truck fees, and bait-and-switch tactics that undermine trust. The company's responsiveness and weekend availability are standout strengths.

• PRICING INCONSISTENCY: Multiple reviews (2022, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017) report hidden charges, unexpected upsells, truck fees not disclosed upfront, and quoted prices that differ significantly from final bills. This pattern suggests inconsistent pricing communication or deliberate low-ball quoting followed by add-ons.
• NEGATIVE OUTLIERS: Four 1-star reviews (2022, 2019, 2018) describe serious service failures: toilet damage with refusal to honor warranty, dishwasher diagnosis failure leading to $930 loss, hydro-jet quote bait-and-switch, and faucet installation incomplete with unprofessional technician behavior. These are not minor complaints.
• EMPTY REVIEWS: 13 reviews contain no text (only ratings of 5.0 or 1.0), making them impossible to analyze. These appear to be placeholder or automated entries and reduce data quality.
• RECENCY BIAS: Approximately 60% of reviews are from 2024-2025 (past 12 months), with older reviews (2014-2019) showing more critical feedback. Recent reviews are overwhelmingly positive (5-star), which may reflect selection bias or improved operations.
• REPETITIVE PRAISE: Multiple reviews use nearly identical phrasing ('professional,' 'friendly,' 'efficient,' 'on time') with minimal specific detail, though this is common in plumbing reviews and does not necessarily indicate fake reviews.
• INCONSISTENT TECHNICIAN QUALITY: Reviews name 30+ different technicians with highly variable customer experiences. Some (Louis, Danny, Josh, Chris, Jesse) receive repeated praise; others receive single complaints. This suggests quality control variability.

This WW Score of 84.2 is reliable and well-supported by 176 reviews with high mention counts across all dimensions. However, the pricing dimension (76.0) should be treated with caution—while based on 48 mentions, the pattern of hidden charges and quote discrepancies suggests customers should request detailed, itemized quotes in writing before work begins. The company's professionalism and technical competence are genuinely strong, but pricing transparency remains a legitimate concern that is not fully reflected in the overall score.

Pro Drain & Rooter Service earns strong marks across all four dimensions, driven by an exceptionally large and detailed review base spanning several years. Professionalism is the standout dimension, with dozens of reviewers explicitly praising punctuality, courteous technicians, responsive phone staff, and clear communication throughout the service process. Pricing scores well due to consistent praise for flat-fee transparency, competitive rates versus competitors, and multiple accounts of technicians actively avoiding upsells — though a small number of negative reviews cite high show-up fees and one instance of a disputed return-visit charge. Project completion is solid but slightly tempered by a handful of credible negative reviews describing incomplete repairs, a job requiring multiple return visits, one instance where a technician arrived without necessary equipment, and a case where a pipe was damaged during snaking. Experience scores well overall, with many reviewers noting skilled diagnostics, thorough work, and creative problem-solving on difficult jobs, though a few reviews raise concerns about misdiagnosis or inadequate clearing of blockages.

• DUPLICATE REVIEW DETECTED: Two reviews with nearly identical text ('We had an issue with our main sewer line...') were posted two days apart (2025-05-25 and 2025-05-23) with the same 5-star rating. This is a likely duplicate or fake review and has been discounted in scoring.
• DUPLICATE REVIEW DETECTED: Two reviews describing the same detailed story about Kyle fixing drain issues for $265 versus a $35,000 competitor quote appear to be near-identical submissions posted on different dates (2024-10-09 and 2024-09-30). One appears to be a duplicate and has been discounted.
• DUPLICATE REVIEW DETECTED: Two reviews praising Thomas Patrick for storm drain root removal use nearly identical language and were posted on different dates (2022-06-07 and 2022-05-17). Likely a duplicate submission.
• DUPLICATE REVIEW DETECTED: Two reviews praising Austen as 'a breath of fresh air' use nearly identical language and were posted on different dates (2022-06-07 and 2022-02-09). Likely a duplicate submission.
• BLANK REVIEWS: Approximately 10 reviews contained no text and only a star rating (mostly 5-star). These were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable evidence per scoring rules.
• NEGATIVE REVIEW — INCOMPLETE WORK: One reviewer (1-star, 2023-07-23) reported a major underground leak that was not fixed after two visits, resulting in an extremely high water bill, with no return calls from the company. This is a serious project completion failure.
• NEGATIVE REVIEW — PIPE DAMAGE: One detailed 1-star review (2021-11-02) describes a technician breaking a pipe during snaking and the owner blaming the customer for old pipes without prior warning. This reflects both an experience and professionalism concern.
• NEGATIVE REVIEW — INCOMPLETE REPAIR: One 1-star review (2025-03-08) describes paying for a service where two of three issues were not resolved, and being charged an additional $195 for a return visit to fix the original problem.
• NEGATIVE REVIEW — EQUIPMENT FAILURE: One 2-star review (2022-06-07) describes a complex condominium job where the technician arrived without necessary equipment, causing significant disruption to 75 units and a 12-day delay.
• NEGATIVE REVIEW — DRAIN NOT PROPERLY CLEARED: One 1-star review (2022-08-05) reports a drain backing up again within 30 days of service, suggesting the blockage was not fully cleared, and notes the company does not guarantee work past 30 days.
• RECENCY NOTE: The vast majority of reviews are from 2021 through 2025, with strong recent representation. Reviews from 2018 and earlier are few and consistent with the overall pattern. Recency weighting does not significantly alter the score.
• POTENTIAL FAKE REVIEW: One 1-star review (2024-06-06) is from someone who explicitly states they have never used the service and is rating based on a traffic incident involving a company van. This review has been excluded from all dimension scoring as it contains no service-related evidence.
• POTENTIAL FAKE REVIEW: One 1-star review (2021-06-07) states only 'Never used them found a cheaper one' with no service experience. This has been excluded from all dimension scoring.

This WW Score is based on a very large review set (155 total, ~148 with usable data) spanning multiple years with strong recency, yielding HIGH confidence across all four dimensions; however, the score should be interpreted with awareness that several credible negative reviews document genuine service failures including incomplete repairs, property damage, and poor follow-through on complex jobs, which have been factored into the scoring and prevent a higher overall result.

Tualatin Valley Plumbing demonstrates strong overall performance across all dimensions. Professionalism is a clear strength, with 89 mentions highlighting punctuality, clear communication, politeness, and responsiveness from staff including owner Larry, receptionist Jasmine, and technicians like Weston, Joel, Race, and others. Project completion is consistently reliable with 78 mentions of jobs finished completely and on time. Experience and technical skill are well-documented across 62 mentions, with customers praising problem-solving ability and quality workmanship. Pricing is the relative weak point with 32 mentions; while many customers report fair and competitive rates, several reviews explicitly cite high quotes ($5,000 vs. $1,200 repair, $350 for simple advice, $300 for a $75 hose fix), creating pricing perception concerns despite the company's flat-rate model.

• PRICING INCONSISTENCY: Multiple reviews (2024-06-09, 2023-08-08, 2019-07-23) report significantly overpriced quotes or service charges relative to actual work complexity. One customer was quoted $5,000 for a leak fixed elsewhere for $1,200. Another paid $350 for diagnostic advice only. A third was quoted $300 for a $75 hose replacement. This pattern suggests potential pricing strategy issues or inconsistent technician judgment.
• EMPTY REVIEWS: Three reviews (2024-06-09, 2024-06-09, 2023-06-10) contain only ratings (5.0, 5.0, 1.0) with no text, making them unusable for dimension scoring. The 1.0 rating with no explanation cannot be analyzed.
• DUPLICATE REVIEWS: At least two reviews appear to be near-identical or substantially similar (e.g., the 'My daughter & family recommended...' review appears twice with minor wording variations on 2023-06-10 and 2023-05-24). This suggests possible review duplication.
• RECENCY BIAS: Majority of detailed reviews cluster around June 2023 and earlier. Only 2-3 reviews from 2025 and 2024 with substantive content. Most recent reviews are from 2024 or earlier, limiting assessment of current service quality.
• NEGATIVE REVIEW PATTERN: The 1-star and 2-star reviews (4 total) all relate to pricing concerns or communication mismatches, not technical incompetence. This suggests pricing transparency and expectation-setting may be systemic issues.
• POTENTIAL FAKE REVIEW MARKERS: While most reviews are detailed and specific, some show generic praise language ('Highly recommend,' 'Great service,' 'Professional') without specifics. However, the majority include specific technician names, job details, and concrete examples, reducing fake review likelihood overall.

This WW Score of 84.2 is reliable and should be trusted, supported by HIGH confidence across three of four dimensions based on 89+ mentions each. However, the pricing dimension (MODERATE confidence, 32 mentions) reveals a material weakness: multiple customers report significantly overpriced quotes or service charges, suggesting pricing inconsistency or poor expectation-setting. The company excels in professionalism, completion, and technical skill, but prospective customers should obtain detailed written quotes and compare with competitors before committing, particularly for complex or high-value work.

Terry Massey Plumbing demonstrates strong performance across all four dimensions, with particularly high marks for professionalism (87.5) driven by consistent praise for punctuality, friendliness, communication, and respectful conduct. Project completion scores (83.5) reflect reliable job finishing and follow-through, though a small number of reviews mention callbacks or rework. Pricing (82.0) is consistently described as fair and reasonable, with several reviews highlighting significant savings compared to competitor estimates. Experience (85.0) is well-documented through technical problem-solving, quality workmanship, and diagnostic expertise. The WW Score of 84.2 reflects a trustworthy, competent contractor with minor areas for improvement in consistency.

• One review (1-star, 2016-04-10) contains only the text 'I DID NOT ASK FOR A CONSULTATION' with no substantive detail—treated as unusable data.
• Three negative reviews (2-star and 1-star ratings from 2021, 2018, 2021) describe service failures: incomplete repairs requiring multiple callbacks, COVID protocol violations, and communication breakdowns. These are legitimate complaints that temper the otherwise very positive profile.
• One 4-star review (2021-10-23) mentions a one-month wait and scheduling bump due to emergency, suggesting potential capacity constraints during peak periods.
• One 4-star review (2011-10-14) notes property damage (plants damaged) during work, indicating occasional lack of care with customer property.
• The overwhelming majority of reviews (76 of 80) are 5-star ratings. While this is consistent with a high-quality business, the concentration is notable. No evidence of fake review patterns detected—reviews contain specific details, varied language, and legitimate complaints are present.
• Most reviews are from 2024 and 2023 (approximately 50%), with a long tail of reviews dating back to 2009, indicating sustained business reputation over 15+ years.

This WW Score of 84.2 is highly reliable, based on 79 usable reviews with strong mention counts across all dimensions (28–62 mentions per dimension). The score reflects genuine strengths in professionalism and fair pricing, tempered by documented instances of service failures and rework. The business demonstrates consistent quality and integrity over a 15-year period, but customers should be aware of occasional callback issues and potential scheduling delays during peak periods.

Clark County Plumbing demonstrates strong overall performance with a WW Score of 84.2. The company excels in professionalism (87.5) and project completion (88.0), with consistently praised punctuality, communication, and follow-through across 68 and 62 mentions respectively. Technical expertise is solid at 85.5 based on 45 mentions of skilled workmanship and problem-solving. Pricing is the weakest dimension at 76.0, with 18 mentions revealing concerns about high labor rates and occasional overcharging, though many customers still view pricing as fair relative to quality. Recent reviews (past 12 months) are predominantly 5-star with detailed positive feedback, while older negative reviews (2015-2017) cite specific pricing and service issues that appear to have been largely resolved.

• Multiple empty/blank reviews (5 instances with 5.0 rating but no text) suggest potential data quality issues but do not indicate fake reviews
• Three duplicate reviews detected (2016-09-02 bathroom faucet complaint appears twice with identical text)
• Pricing dimension has limited mentions (18) relative to other dimensions; confidence in pricing score is MODERATE rather than HIGH
• Two negative reviews from 2016-2017 cite specific issues with technician Patrick (upselling, poor follow-up, extended timelines); owner Mike appears to have addressed systemic issues since then based on recent positive feedback
• One 2017 review mentions employee misconduct (fence damage, defensive behavior) but notes owner Mike took corrective action and let the employee go
• Recency bias noted: 60+ reviews from 2020 onward are predominantly 5-star with detailed praise; older reviews (2009-2017) show more variance and specific complaints
• One review (2020-02-03) and one (2024-01-22) cite poor phone communication and refusal of business, suggesting occasional customer service gaps at intake level

This WW Score of 84.2 is highly reliable for professionalism and project completion dimensions (HIGH confidence based on 62-68 mentions each), moderately reliable for experience (HIGH confidence, 45 mentions), and moderately reliable for pricing (MODERATE confidence, 18 mentions). The company's recent track record (past 12 months) is exceptionally strong with consistent 5-star detailed reviews, while older negative reviews appear to reflect resolved operational issues. Recommend this score as trustworthy for customers prioritizing reliability and quality, with the caveat that pricing should be negotiated and compared given documented concerns about labor rates.

Dave (The Unplugger) demonstrates strong professionalism with excellent responsiveness, punctuality, and courteous communication across 48 reviews. His technical expertise and problem-solving ability are consistently praised, with 38 mentions of skilled workmanship. Project completion is solid at 82.1, though 5 reviews document significant follow-up issues (reclogging, no-shows, communication failures) that prevent a higher score. Pricing is competitive and fair overall (78.3), though 4 reviews cite unexpectedly high charges or price inconsistencies. The business shows strong performance but with notable reliability gaps in execution and follow-through on warranty work.

• RECENCY CONCERN: 39 of 56 reviews (70%) are from 2017 or earlier; only 17 reviews from 2018 onward. Most recent substantive review is from 2023. Older reviews may not reflect current operations.
• INCONSISTENT PRICING: Multiple reviews (2018-07-08, 2018-11-23) report unexpected price increases or charges significantly higher than quoted/expected. One customer reported $187 for 25 minutes vs. $105/hour industry standard.
• COMMUNICATION FAILURES: 3 reviews (2019-09-15, 2018-07-30, 2019-11-14) document poor communication, no-shows, unreturned calls/texts, and delayed responses (3+ days to respond in one case).
• RECURRING CLOGS: At least 4 reviews (2019-09-15, 2019-03-04, 2018-07-08, 2015-07-13) report work that failed to permanently resolve the issue, requiring callbacks or additional plumbers.
• QUALITY CONTROL ISSUE: One 2015 review documents a toilet left in worse condition than before service, with incorrect diagnosis and upselling of unnecessary replacement.
• PATTERN ANALYSIS: While 47 of 56 reviews are 5-star with enthusiastic language, the 9 lower-rated reviews (1-3 stars) cluster around specific failure modes: communication, pricing transparency, and permanent problem resolution. This suggests real operational issues rather than fake reviews.

This WW Score of 84.2 is reliable for assessing Dave's typical professionalism and attitude, but should be treated with caution regarding actual project outcomes and pricing consistency; the high volume of older reviews and documented communication/completion failures in recent years suggest current performance may be lower than the historical average.