Find Nearby Plumbers In Dallas, Texas

CTX Plumbing & Electrical has a strong base of satisfied customers who frequently praise punctuality, friendliness, and professional conduct, driving solid professionalism and experience scores. However, pricing is a recurring and significant concern across multiple reviews spanning several years, with multiple customers explicitly stating they were overcharged, shocked by bills, or found cheaper alternatives — this materially suppresses the pricing score. Project completion is generally positive, with most jobs described as finished promptly and correctly, but two notable negative reviews describe billing for incomplete or ineffective work and a return visit that created an additional leak, preventing a higher score. The experience dimension scores well overall due to specific praise for technical problem-solving and knowledgeable technicians, though a few reviews hint at inconsistent quality. The combination of strong service delivery in most cases but persistent pricing complaints and a few serious service failures results in a moderate WW Score rather than a high one.

• PRICING CONCERN: At least 6 reviews explicitly mention high or unreasonable prices, including one customer paying $2,400 total for a single leak repair, another receiving a $472 bill for a 30-minute visit, and multiple reviewers noting CTX was the most expensive option by a significant margin.
• SERIOUS CONDUCT ALLEGATION: One reviewer (1-star, 2023-03-14) alleges the owner sent a threatening letter and describes the company as unethical. This is a significant flag that could not be verified but warrants caution.
• BILLING DISPUTE: The 2023-08-23 review describes being billed 1.5 hours for approximately 30 minutes of ineffective work, with the company's response being dismissive rather than remedial — a notable customer service failure.
• CREATED DAMAGE: The 2019-08-02 review alleges CTX created an additional leak during a repair and then charged the customer to fix it, which is a serious workmanship and ethics concern.
• RECENCY NOTE: Several of the most positive reviews are from 2016–2019 (more than 5 years old). More recent reviews (2022–2024) are fewer in number and include a higher proportion of negative experiences, suggesting possible service quality decline over time.
• GENERIC PRAISE FLAG: The 2023-08-30 review reads as unusually generic with no specific details about the job, technician, or outcome — possible fake or templated review. Confidence slightly reduced for that data point.
• ONE-STAR VAGUE REVIEW: The 2019-06-19 review ('Guy showed up, I hope is not represent the company anymore') provides almost no usable detail and was excluded from dimension scoring.

This WW Score is based on 30 reviews spanning 2016–2024 with sufficient volume for HIGH overall confidence, but the score should be interpreted cautiously given credible and specific allegations of overbilling, a conduct complaint against the owner, and signs of declining service quality in more recent reviews.

Military Plumbing receives strong praise for responsiveness, courtesy, and willingness to go above and beyond — including emergency Sunday calls, helping clean up flood water, and not charging for visits where no work was needed. However, pricing is a significant and recurring concern, with multiple reviewers describing charges as exorbitant or bordering on exploitative, including a $650 charge for a 20-minute job and a $700 quote to dig a one-foot hole. Project completion is mixed: several reviews praise thorough, complete work, but at least two reviews document jobs that were not fixed correctly on the first attempt, a warranty dispute, and work alleged to be not up to code. A deeply concerning safety flag exists in one review describing a technician making inappropriate and threatening personal inquiries to a woman alone at home. The overall picture is a company with genuine strengths in responsiveness and honesty in some interactions, but with meaningful and documented weaknesses in pricing consistency, job quality control, and at least one serious conduct incident.

• SERIOUS SAFETY FLAG: One reviewer (June 2024) reported a technician repeatedly asking when her husband would be home, his work hours, and making the comment 'what is a pretty lady like you doing all alone out here?' — this constitutes predatory and threatening behavior and is a significant red flag for sending this company to solo female customers.
• PRICING COMPLAINTS: At least 4 reviews explicitly describe pricing as excessive, unreasonable, or exploitative. A $650 charge for a 20-minute drain unclog, a $700 charge to dig a 1-foot hole, and a $700 charge for a repair that failed and was disputed under warranty were all called out by name.
• WARRANTY/COMPLETION FAILURE: One detailed review (April 2022) documents a job that failed twice, a disputed warranty denial, and a final resolution that required hiring a different plumber for $200 after paying Military Plumbing $700 for the same unresolved issue.
• CODE COMPLIANCE CONCERN: One reviewer (May 2022) stated that work performed was 'incorrect and not to code' according to a third party — this is a serious workmanship flag.
• RECENCY NOTE: The most recent reviews (2024) include both a positive experience and the serious safety complaint. The bulk of positive reviews are from 2014–2021, meaning the company's current performance may differ from its historical reputation.
• NO FAKE REVIEW PATTERNS DETECTED: Reviews vary meaningfully in length, detail, tone, and rating. No suspicious repetition of phrasing or coordinated praise patterns were identified.

This WW Score is based on 26 reviews spanning 10 years with high mention counts across all four dimensions, giving the score mathematical reliability — however, the presence of serious conduct, pricing, and workmanship complaints means the score should be interpreted cautiously, and prospective customers should weigh the specific flags above before hiring.

Nikki's Plumbing has a strong base of positive reviews praising communication, punctuality, honesty, and fair pricing, particularly from Nikki herself performing the work directly. However, several negative reviews introduce meaningful concerns: one review describes a plumber arriving late, leaving a mess, and failing to fix the issue durably; another describes a subcontracted plumber causing carpet damage and repeated failed repair attempts; a third describes a job being abandoned after an estimate was agreed upon; and a fourth describes a failure to diagnose, an overcharge, and a promised refund that was never issued. These negative experiences are specific, credible, and recent (2023–2024), which under recency weighting carry significant influence. The contrast between reviews where Nikki personally performed the work versus reviews involving subcontractors or other staff is a notable pattern that depresses scores across all dimensions.

• RECENCY CONCERN: The four most recent reviews (2024) include three negative reviews with specific, credible complaints about subcontracted labor, abandoned jobs, and unresolved billing disputes. These are weighted more heavily than older positive reviews.
• SUBCONTRACTOR INCONSISTENCY: Multiple negative reviews explicitly note that Nikki did not personally perform the work and that subcontracted plumbers delivered poor results. This suggests quality is inconsistent when Nikki is not personally on-site.
• REFUND/BILLING ISSUE: One reviewer (2023) reports being promised a $125 refund that was never delivered, which is a direct integrity concern affecting both professionalism and pricing scores.
• JOB ABANDONMENT: One reviewer (2024) reports that the company agreed to a job, accepted the scope, and then refused to complete it after the customer had already purchased materials. This is a significant project completion failure.
• OLDER REVIEWS SKEW POSITIVE: The majority of 5-star reviews are from 2020 and earlier, with several from 2014. While positive, these are given reduced weight relative to the more recent mixed-to-negative reviews.
• NO SUSPECTED FAKE REVIEWS: Review language is varied, specific, and includes named individuals and detailed scenarios. No fake review pattern detected.

This WW Score is based on 17 reviews with usable data across all four dimensions and carries HIGH overall confidence in its accuracy; however, the score reflects a business with genuinely inconsistent quality — strong when Nikki personally performs work, but with documented failures involving subcontractors and unresolved customer complaints in the most recent review period.

CW Service Pros demonstrates consistently strong professionalism across a very large review base, with the vast majority of customers praising punctuality, communication, courtesy, and technician demeanor. However, pricing is the company's most significant and recurring weakness — a substantial number of reviewers across multiple years explicitly describe charges as excessive, non-transparent, or inconsistent with quotes, including several accounts of bait-and-switch pricing, undisclosed fees, and estimates far above competitors. Project completion is generally solid, with most jobs finished same-day and follow-through honored, but a meaningful minority of reviews describe incomplete work, misdiagnosis leading to unnecessary repairs, warranty disputes, and jobs abandoned or rescheduled without notice. Technical experience scores moderately well, with many reviewers praising knowledgeable technicians, though several credible negative reviews describe serious diagnostic failures where technicians recommended costly unnecessary repairs that second-opinion plumbers disproved.

• DUPLICATE REVIEWS DETECTED: The reviews dated 2025-06-09, 2025-06-08, 2025-06-07 appear to be exact duplicates of reviews dated 2025-06-06, 2025-06-05, and 2025-06-04 respectively (same text, same rating, consecutive dates). This is a strong indicator of review manipulation or padding. Confidence in the most recent review cluster has been reduced accordingly.
• BLANK REVIEWS: Approximately 26 reviews contain no text — only a star rating (mostly 5 stars). These provide no usable qualitative data and inflate the apparent rating average without substantive evidence. They were excluded from dimension scoring.
• PRICING PATTERN — SYSTEMIC CONCERN: At least 20+ distinct reviews across the full date range (2016–2025) explicitly describe overcharging, hidden fees, prices double or triple competitor quotes, and non-disclosure of itemized costs. This is not isolated to a few bad experiences but represents a consistent pattern over many years.
• MISDIAGNOSIS PATTERN: Multiple credible, detailed negative reviews (2023, 2024, 2025) describe technicians recommending expensive repairs (ranging from $6,000 to $13,000) that second-opinion plumbers confirmed were unnecessary. This pattern affects both the Experience and Project Completion scores.
• WARRANTY/CALLBACK FAILURES: At least 3 reviews describe the company failing to honor warranty work or refusing to return to fix problems caused by their own technicians without additional charges.
• RECENCY NOTE: The majority of reviews are from 2024–2025 and are within the past 12 months, which is positive for recency weighting. However, the pricing and misdiagnosis complaints are consistent across the full 2016–2025 date range, suggesting these are structural issues rather than isolated incidents.
• HARASSMENT ALLEGATION: One undated review alleges that two technicians surrounded and harassed a woman with young children for payment and remained outside the home in vehicles. This is a serious conduct allegation that, if accurate, would significantly impact the professionalism score. It was treated as a single data point given it is undated and uncorroborated.
• UPSELLING CONCERN: One review explicitly quotes a manager saying 'if you can get $1600 out of her rather than $600 that's better' — overheard on speakerphone. This corroborates the broader pattern of aggressive upselling noted across multiple reviews.

This WW Score is based on a very large review set (248 total, 222 with usable data) spanning over a decade, giving HIGH statistical confidence in the dimensions scored; however, the score should be interpreted cautiously given confirmed duplicate reviews inflating recent ratings, a large number of blank reviews, and a well-documented systemic pattern of pricing complaints and occasional serious misdiagnosis that meaningfully drags down the overall trustworthiness of the company's value proposition.

F6 Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism and technical expertise, with technicians consistently praised for punctuality, communication, and skill. However, the company is significantly undermined by serious pricing concerns, with multiple customers reporting overcharges of 300-400% above market rates and aggressive upselling tactics. Project completion is generally solid but marred by instances of incomplete work and follow-up failures. The stark contrast between positive service experiences and negative pricing/billing practices creates a company that excels operationally but fails on value proposition and transparency.

• CRITICAL PRICING PATTERN: At least 12 reviews explicitly cite overcharging, price gouging, or inflated quotes (300-400% markups documented). This is the single largest complaint category and suggests systemic pricing issues rather than isolated incidents.
• WARRANTY COMPANY DYNAMICS: Multiple reviews indicate F6 may be incentivized to recommend expensive solutions when dealing with home warranty claims, with customers reporting unnecessary upsells and high quotes that competitors undercut by 50-70%.
• INCOMPLETE WORK & FOLLOW-UP FAILURES: Several reviews document unfinished jobs, missed callbacks, and lack of accountability (e.g., garbage disposal installation without hose connection, drain work requiring multiple visits with additional charges).
• PROFESSIONALISM OUTLIERS: 3 reviews report serious professionalism issues including poor hygiene (body odor), rudeness, unresponsiveness, and one instance of technician not showing up after arrival notification.
• INVOICE ALTERATION ALLEGATION: One detailed 2022 review alleges the company alters signed invoices to satisfy warranty company claims, raising ethical concerns about business practices.
• RECENCY NOTE: Most negative reviews cluster in 2020-2023; recent reviews (2024) are predominantly 5-star with fewer pricing complaints, though this may reflect selection bias or review platform changes.
• FAKE REVIEW RISK - MODERATE: Several 5-star reviews use generic praise with minimal specifics (e.g., 'great service,' 'highly recommend'). However, most positive reviews include specific technician names, problem descriptions, and concrete details, reducing fake review likelihood. The 1-star reviews are highly detailed and credible.

This WW Score of 71.2 is reliable and should be trusted, supported by 100 reviews with HIGH confidence across three dimensions. However, the score masks a critical bifurcation: F6 excels at service delivery and professionalism (82.5) but fails significantly on pricing integrity (58.0), making this company suitable only for customers who can verify quotes independently or negotiate aggressively. The pricing dimension alone disqualifies F6 from higher overall scores despite operational competence.

Dyson Plumbing shows strong technical expertise and generally positive professionalism, with many recent reviews praising knowledgeable staff, friendly service, and quick response times. However, the score is significantly dampened by a pattern of serious project completion failures spanning multiple years—including missed appointments, abandoned jobs, and communication breakdowns—plus two pricing complaints alleging overcharging. While the majority of recent reviews (2024–2025) are highly positive, older reviews reveal systemic reliability issues that cannot be ignored. The company appears to have improved recently but carries substantial historical risk.

• FAKE REVIEW PATTERN DETECTED: Approximately 30 reviews from May–June 2025 use nearly identical phrasing ('Great service,' 'Highly recommend,' 'Professional,' 'Friendly'), lack specific details, and cluster suspiciously around the same dates. Several reviews mention sponsorship of 'Blue Sharks' soccer team with generic praise unrelated to plumbing work. This suggests potential review manipulation or incentivized generic submissions.
• CRITICAL PROJECT COMPLETION FAILURES: Four 1-star reviews document serious issues: (1) missed emergency appointment with no follow-up (2021); (2) technician collected payment, worked 30 minutes, never returned to complete job (2020); (3) missed scheduled appointment with poor communication (2018); (4) technician caused property damage (ceiling hole), owner received no apology, and Mr. Dyson allegedly yelled at customer (2015). These span 10 years and suggest systemic accountability problems.
• PRICING CONCERNS: Two reviews allege overcharging—one quoted $500+ for expansion tank installation when competitors quoted $275 (2024), and another mentions 'cheap' pricing positively but is vague. Pricing dimension has limited mention count and mixed signals.
• RECENCY BIAS: The overwhelming majority of usable positive reviews are from May–June 2025 (30+ reviews), which inflates recent perception. Older reviews (2015–2021) reveal serious failures. Recent improvement is possible but cannot fully offset documented pattern of abandonment and poor communication.
• COMMUNICATION FAILURES: Multiple reviews document unresponsiveness, missed courtesy calls, and failure to follow up on scheduled appointments, indicating systemic communication issues despite recent positive feedback.

This score should be treated with CAUTION. While recent reviews (2024–2025) are predominantly positive and suggest possible improvement, the company has a documented 10-year history of serious project completion failures, missed appointments, and poor communication. The suspicious clustering of nearly identical 5-star reviews in May–June 2025 raises credibility concerns. The WW Score of 78.2 reflects the positive recent trend but is artificially elevated by potential review manipulation; actual reliability is likely lower. Customers should verify references and clarify completion guarantees before hiring.