Find Nearby Plumbers In Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Drainmen Plumbing demonstrates strong overall performance across all four dimensions, with particularly high marks for professionalism (87.5) driven by consistent praise for punctuality, communication, and courteous technicians across 52 reviews. Experience scores (86.0) reflect frequent mentions of technical knowledge and skilled problem-solving. Project completion (81.5) and pricing (82.0) are solid but slightly lower, with some negative reviews citing incomplete work, communication failures, and unresolved issues. The company shows strong recent performance (2024-2025) but has three significant negative reviews from 2019-2023 describing incomplete jobs, poor follow-up, and unmet promises, which moderately temper the otherwise excellent rating profile.

• Three substantive negative reviews (1-star ratings from 2019, 2021, 2023) describe serious issues: incomplete work, poor communication, unmet promises, and lack of follow-up. These are not generic complaints and represent genuine service failures.
• Two reviews (2 of 67) are blank/empty text with 5-star ratings, suggesting possible data entry errors or fake reviews.
• Recency bias present: 48 of 67 reviews (72%) are from May 2024 onward, with only 3 reviews from 2019-2021. Recent reviews are overwhelmingly positive (5-star), while older reviews contain more critical feedback.
• The negative reviews specifically mention owner Mike's failure to follow through on promises and poor communication, suggesting potential systemic issues with accountability despite strong technician-level performance.

This WW Score of 84.2 is reliable for recent service expectations (2024-2025) but should be interpreted with caution: the company demonstrates excellent professionalism and technical skill in the majority of recent engagements, but the presence of three serious negative reviews documenting incomplete work and broken promises indicates that service quality is inconsistent and may depend heavily on which technician is assigned and whether follow-up work is required.

Zip to Zip Plumbing demonstrates strong performance across all four dimensions, with particularly high marks for professionalism and project completion. The company excels at responsiveness, punctuality, and communication—mentioned positively in 48 reviews. Project completion is consistently reliable with 51 mentions of timely, thorough work and follow-through on callbacks. Pricing is fair and transparent, with 32 explicit mentions of reasonable rates and honest quotes. Technical skill and problem-solving ability are evident across 28 reviews. However, two negative reviews (ratings 1.0 and 2.0) document serious failures: one involved no-show/no-communication on a scheduled appointment, and another involved making a toilet worse and charging extra for corrections. These outliers prevent a higher score despite the overwhelming positive majority.

• Two significant negative reviews (2023-09-12 and 2021-11-19) document serious service failures: one involved damage to a toilet and refusal to correct it without additional charges; the other involved a no-show and lack of communication on a scheduled appointment. These are not isolated complaints but documented failures that materially impact reliability.
• The review corpus is heavily skewed toward 5-star ratings (52 of 56 reviews are 5.0 stars). While this may reflect genuine quality, the concentration is notable. However, the two 1-star and one 4-star reviews appear authentic with specific, detailed complaints, suggesting the positive reviews are not fabricated.
• Most reviews are from 2022-2024 (recent), with a smaller cluster from 2020-2021. Recency is generally favorable for assessing current performance.
• Review language occasionally repeats certain phrases ('highly recommend,' 'on time,' 'reasonable price') but this is consistent with genuine customer satisfaction rather than fake review patterns. Specific details (pipe replacements, garbage disposals, faucet installations, emergency calls) vary across reviews.

This WW Score of 84.2 is reliable and should be trusted, supported by 56 reviews with HIGH confidence across all dimensions. However, the score reflects a company with strong baseline performance undermined by documented serious failures in reliability and customer service recovery—customers should be aware that while Zip to Zip typically delivers excellent work, occasional critical failures do occur and the company's response to mistakes has been inadequate in at least one documented case.

Dixon Plumbing demonstrates strong overall performance driven primarily by exceptional professionalism (87.5/100 across 48 mentions), with Ken and his team consistently praised for responsiveness, punctuality, courtesy, and communication. Project completion scores (81.0/100 across 35 mentions) are solid but reveal some vulnerabilities: while most jobs are completed successfully and on time, there are notable failures including a missed appointment with no explanation and lack of follow-up on a quoted job. Experience and technical skill are well-documented (86.0/100 across 28 mentions), with customers consistently noting quality workmanship and problem-solving ability. Pricing is reasonable and transparent in most cases (82.0/100 across 16 mentions), though one customer criticized lack of upfront pricing discussion. The company excels in emergency response and customer care but shows inconsistency in appointment reliability and follow-through communication.

• Two significant negative reviews (1-star and 3-star) reveal critical service failures: one customer was left without explanation after a missed appointment on a scheduled Friday morning, causing substantial personal disruption; another customer reported being abruptly dismissed from a job without clear explanation. These incidents suggest potential communication and professionalism gaps despite overwhelmingly positive reviews.
• One customer reported lack of pricing transparency—no discussion of costs or itemization before work began, raising concerns about business practices in some interactions.
• Heavy concentration of 5-star reviews (47 out of 56 reviews are 5-star) with relatively few 3-4 star reviews. While this may reflect genuine quality, the distribution is notably skewed and warrants noting that negative experiences may be underrepresented.
• Review recency: Most reviews are from 2019-2024, with strong representation in past 12 months (approximately 15 reviews from 2024 and 2023). However, several older reviews (2018-2020) dominate the dataset. Recent negative reviews (August 2024, August 2019) suggest issues persist despite overall positive trajectory.
• No evidence of fake reviews detected. Reviews contain specific details, varied language, and realistic problem descriptions. Negative reviews are substantive and credible.

This WW Score of 84.2 is reliable and should be trusted, supported by HIGH overall confidence based on 56 usable reviews with strong mention counts across all dimensions. However, the score masks meaningful inconsistency: while professionalism and experience are genuinely strong, project completion reliability is compromised by documented failures in appointment-keeping and follow-up communication. Customers seeking emergency response and technical quality will likely be satisfied; those requiring strict appointment reliability should be cautious.

S&J Plumbing demonstrates strong overall performance across all four dimensions, with particular strength in professionalism (87.5) driven by consistent praise for responsiveness, punctuality, and courteous behavior across 42 reviews. Pricing scores well at 82.0 based on 28 mentions highlighting fair quotes and competitive rates. Project completion (81.0, 35 mentions) shows solid follow-through, though three significant negative reviews document serious failures including no-shows, missed appointments, and incomplete work. Experience scores 85.0 across 26 mentions reflecting skilled workmanship and technical knowledge. The WW Score of 84.2 reflects a reliable contractor with strong customer service, though the presence of critical failures on major projects (tankless water heater installation, emergency no-show) prevents a higher rating.

• Three 1-star reviews (2019-11-15, 2019-02-24, 2017-12-22) document serious failures: no-shows on multiple occasions, hours-late arrivals, incomplete work requiring third-party completion, and customer service breakdowns. These are not isolated complaints but represent genuine project failures.
• Review from 2019-11-15 describes a 9-day tankless water heater installation requiring rework twice, with crew no-shows on 3 separate occasions and arrival 5+ hours late. Job was never completed by S&J.
• Review from 2019-02-24 documents a complete no-show with no communication despite owner's assurance of service, leaving customer without water for an entire day.
• Review from 2017-12-22 alleges disrespect toward customer, disregarded requests, missing service invoice, and excessive pricing—suggesting potential interpersonal or professionalism issues.
• Most reviews are from 2017-2019 (older than 5 years). Only 2 reviews from 2024 and 1 from 2020. Recent data is extremely limited, making current reliability assessment difficult.
• The overwhelming majority of reviews (47 of 51) are 5-star ratings with highly positive language. While many include specific details (job type, timeline, pricing comparison), the concentration of perfect ratings combined with sparse recent reviews warrants caution about recency bias.

This WW Score of 84.2 should be treated with MODERATE-to-HIGH confidence for historical performance, but CAUTION is advised regarding current reliability due to: (1) critical project failures documented in 2019 suggesting systemic issues with complex jobs and communication, (2) extreme recency gap with only 2 reviews from 2024 and none from 2023, and (3) inability to determine if past failures have been corrected. The score reflects strong average performance but masks significant outlier failures that could recur. Recommend requesting recent references and clarifying communication protocols before engaging for major projects.

Palmerio Plumbing earns strong marks across all four dimensions, with professionalism being the most consistently praised attribute across the entire review history — punctuality, courtesy, communication, and responsiveness are cited repeatedly by dozens of customers. Pricing is generally viewed as fair and competitive, though two reviews note costs came in higher than expected, and one negative review alleged a grossly inflated quote compared to a second opinion. Project completion is the most nuanced dimension: the overwhelming majority of reviews describe completed, satisfactory work, but there are notable exceptions — one review describes two of four issues left unresolved for $500, one describes a promised quote never delivered, one describes a job started but not finished, and a detailed 1-star review describes repeated missed appointments and an incorrectly installed part that caused ongoing problems. Experience scores well overall, with multiple reviewers citing skilled diagnostics, problem-solving on complex jobs, and technical knowledge, though the 1-star barn incident and the 1-star over-quoted drain cleaning represent meaningful counterpoints. The score reflects a contractor with a strong track record but a non-trivial pattern of follow-through failures in a minority of cases.

• DUPLICATE REVIEW DETECTED: Two reviews dated 2024-07-25 are word-for-word identical (laundry room relocation review). One appears to be a duplicate submission and was counted only once for scoring purposes.
• DUPLICATE REVIEW DETECTED: Two reviews dated 2016-04-17 and 2016-03-16 share identical text ('Awesome company. Great service. They showed up ready to work and didn't leave until it was done and done right.'). Likely a duplicate submission; counted once.
• FAKE REVIEW RISK — MODERATE: A cluster of reviews dated exactly 2024-06-09 (approximately 12 reviews) share the same date with no timestamps, many are very short and generic (e.g., 'George is awesome', 'Great company use these guys', 'These guys aren't afraid to get their hands dirty'). This pattern warrants caution. Confidence is not reduced to LOW given the volume of detailed legitimate reviews, but these generic entries were weighted conservatively.
• NEGATIVE PATTERN — PROJECT COMPLETION: At least 4 reviews explicitly describe incomplete work, missed appointments, or unresolved issues: (1) 2024-06-09 3-star review — two of four issues unresolved, $500 spent; (2) 2018-11-19 1-star review — repeated missed appointments, incorrect part installed, refund promised but not delivered; (3) 2018-10-17 2-star review — multiple missed appointments, poor communication; (4) 2016-03-01 4-star review — quote promised but never received; (5) 2018-12-06 3-star review — job started but not finished.
• NEGATIVE PATTERN — PRICING: One 1-star review (2019-10-27) alleges a quote of over $1,500 for a job that cost $85 elsewhere, and claims the owner dismissed the complaint. This is a significant outlier and was factored into the pricing score.
• RECENCY NOTE: The majority of reviews span 2015–2025. Reviews from 2015–2018 are older than 6 years and were given reduced weight. The most recent reviews (2024–2025) are predominantly positive, suggesting the business may have improved over time, but the negative completion-related reviews from 2018 are still relevant to pattern assessment.
• THREE REVIEWS CONTAINED NO TEXT — only a star rating. These were excluded from dimensional scoring but counted in total reviews analyzed.

This WW Score is based on a large review set (125 reviews) with HIGH overall confidence, but should be interpreted with awareness that a consistent minority pattern of project completion failures and at least one credible pricing integrity complaint meaningfully tempers what would otherwise be a near-excellent score.

Mr. Rooter of Glenside earns strong marks across all four dimensions, with professionalism being the most consistently praised attribute — punctuality, communication, cleanliness, and courteous demeanor are mentioned repeatedly across dozens of reviews spanning multiple years. Project completion scores well overall, with most jobs described as fully resolved, though two notable negative reviews (a disputed $800 charge for incomplete sewer jetting and a $20,000 excavation aftermath) pull the score down meaningfully. Pricing is the weakest dimension: while many reviewers call prices fair or reasonable, one reviewer documented a 300% markup on a faucet unit and another felt charged $800 for work they did not authorize or benefit from — these are significant red flags that temper an otherwise positive pricing picture. Experience scores highly, with multiple reviewers citing technicians' ability to diagnose complex problems, use camera equipment effectively, and solve issues that other plumbers could not. The overall WW Score of 83.1 reflects a genuinely capable and professional operation with isolated but serious concerns around pricing transparency and scope-of-work communication.

• 9 reviews contain no text whatsoever — only a star rating. These were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable evidence.
• PRICING CONCERN: One reviewer (2023-08-22) documented a faucet unit marked up approximately 300% above retail price, with labor quoted at a rate far exceeding comparable services. This is a concrete pricing transparency issue.
• BILLING DISPUTE: One reviewer (2025-06-02, 1-star) describes being charged $800 for a service (root clearing) they did not authorize as the primary job, and allege the company refused a partial refund. This is a serious project scope and billing integrity concern.
• PROPERTY DAMAGE: One reviewer (2024-11-11, 1-star) reports $20,000 in additional repair costs due to poor excavation and infill work after a water main repair. While the reviewer credits professionalism, the outcome represents a significant workmanship failure in a specific trade area.
• INCOMPLETE SERVICE: One reviewer (2020-02-15, 2-star) notes that Mr. Rooter's technician failed to partially clear a sewer line that a competing company later cleared without issue, suggesting a possible missed diagnostic or effort gap.
• MINOR FOLLOW-THROUGH ISSUE: One reviewer (2019-01-31) noted old piping was left on their lawn for several days despite being told it would be picked up the next day — a minor but real project completion gap.
• RECENCY NOTE: The review set spans 2018–2025. The majority of substantive reviews are from 2021 onward, with a strong cluster in 2024–2025, lending good recency weight to the score.
• NO FAKE REVIEW PATTERN DETECTED: Reviews vary in length, detail, tone, and named technicians (Mike, Tyler, Curtis, Kevin, PJ, Joe, Lenny, Scott). Negative reviews are present. No suspicious uniformity detected.

This WW Score of 83.1 is based on a large, diverse, and mostly recent review set with HIGH confidence across all four dimensions; however, consumers should weigh the documented billing dispute, significant pricing markup, and excavation damage complaint seriously before engaging for large or invasive plumbing projects.