Find Nearby Plumbers In El Paso, Texas

Planet Plumbing has a deeply mixed record across its review history. The majority of positive reviews are older (2006–2021), describing prompt, courteous, and skilled technicians — particularly Todd, Nick, Blake, Dylan, and Jack — with multiple mentions of fair pricing, clean workmanship, and responsive communication. However, the two most recent substantive reviews (2022) describe serious failures: a no-show with a fraudulent cancellation claim billed to a credit card, and a multi-month saga of botched installation, repeated no-shows, and complete communication breakdown. These recent negative reviews significantly drag down professionalism and project completion scores. Pricing scores are moderate — most reviewers found costs fair or lower than expected, but one 2008 review flagged a $2,400 quote that was beaten elsewhere for $1,800. The overall picture is of a company that may have performed well historically but shows alarming recent reliability and accountability failures.

• RECENCY CONCERN: The two most recent reviews (May 2022 and February 2022) are both 1-star and describe severe failures including no-shows, fraudulent billing, botched installations, and complete lack of communication. These are the most relevant reviews for current service quality.
• REVIEW AGE SKEW: A significant portion of positive reviews date from 2006–2016, making them 8–18 years old. These reviews carry reduced weight for assessing current performance.
• POSSIBLE ENTITY CONFUSION: The February 2022 negative review references 'Ramos Plumbing' and 'Felipe Ramos' as a DBA of Planet Plumbing. The 2013 positive review references 'Joe Ramos' in what appears to be an El Paso-area business. It is unclear whether all reviews refer to the same business entity, which may inflate or conflate the review pool.
• GENERIC/THIN REVIEWS: Several reviews ('It went great amazing service as usual :)', 'unknown', 'Not completed yet', 'Individual arrived looked at it decided it was a quick replacement job, replaced an left') provide little to no usable detail and were given minimal scoring weight.
• FAKE REVIEW SUSPICION — LOW-MODERATE: Three reviews posted on the same date (2020-11-20) with similarly vague, enthusiastic language and no specific details raise mild concern about authenticity. Confidence is slightly reduced for those data points.
• OPERATOR IDENTITY INCONSISTENCY: Reviews reference multiple owner/operator names (Jack Reed, Joe Ramos, Felipe Ramos), suggesting possible ownership changes, franchise relationships, or multiple entities operating under the Planet Plumbing name. This undermines score reliability across the full review period.

This WW Score should be treated with caution — while the volume of reviews is sufficient for calculation, the extreme age gap between positive and negative reviews, possible entity confusion between multiple operators, and two serious recent failures suggest the current service quality may be substantially lower than the blended score implies.

Oasis Plumbing has a clearly split reputation across its review history. The majority of positive reviews praise timely service, fair pricing, and solid workmanship — with one detailed 2022 review standing out as a strong indicator of genuine quality and responsiveness. However, three negative reviews — spanning 2013 to 2016 — describe serious professionalism failures including rudeness, leaving messes, missed appointments, and a documented case of faulty installation (broken pump, unchanged moldy pads) that required a costly third-party repair. Pricing scores well among those who mentioned it, with multiple reviewers noting competitive or below-market quotes. Project completion is dragged down by the 2013 review where work was left incomplete and defective. Because the negative reviews are older (2013–2016) and the more recent reviews (2020–2024) trend positive, the score reflects cautious optimism tempered by a meaningful negative history.

• Three negative reviews (2013, 2015, 2016) describe serious professionalism and workmanship failures — including a confirmed faulty installation that required a paid third-party correction. These are not minor complaints.
• The negative reviews are all older than 7 years. Per recency rules, they carry reduced weight, but they are specific and credible enough to meaningfully suppress scores — particularly in professionalism and project completion.
• Several positive reviews are brief and generic (e.g., 'Excellent work and reasonable prices,' 'on time and good price') with little specific detail. While not conclusively fake, these low-detail reviews were treated with reduced evidentiary weight.
• The 2024 and 2022 reviews are the most detailed and credible positive signals. The business may have improved significantly since the 2013–2016 period, but there is insufficient recent negative data to confirm this with certainty.
• No reviews mention warranty, callbacks, or post-job follow-up explicitly, limiting full assessment of long-term project completion reliability.

This WW Score carries MODERATE overall reliability — the review base is small (9 reviews), spans a wide date range (2013–2024), and includes credible negative reviews that meaningfully offset the positive trend seen in more recent years.

MJB Services receives consistently strong praise across all four dimensions from a small but coherent set of reviews. Professionalism is the most frequently and enthusiastically cited strength, with multiple reviewers highlighting prompt responses, friendly communication, and punctual arrivals. Pricing is noted favorably in three of four reviews, with one reviewer explicitly stating it was the best price found. Project completion is well-supported, with reviewers describing jobs finished on time, on budget, and with follow-through such as sending completion photos. Experience and workmanship are referenced positively but with less specific technical detail, keeping that score conservative.

• Only 4 reviews total — sample size is too small to draw reliable conclusions; scores should be treated as preliminary.
• All 4 reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative feedback of any kind, which warrants mild caution, though the reviews do contain specific details (gas stove leak, water heater replacement, remodeling work, photo follow-up) that reduce the likelihood of fabrication.
• Two reviews use nearly identical opening phrases ('I cannot say enough good things') — this is a minor flag worth noting, though the body content of each review is sufficiently distinct to not indicate clear fabrication.
• Review dates span from December 2023 to June 2024 — all reviews are within the past 12–18 months, which is a positive recency signal, but the volume remains too low for high confidence.

This WW Score is based on only 4 reviews and should be considered a preliminary indicator only — the score may shift significantly as more reviews are collected.

Cesar and Pro Plumbers consistently received strong praise across all four dimensions from the reviews that contained usable data. Professionalism was the most frequently mentioned dimension, with multiple reviewers highlighting responsiveness, friendly attitude, clear communication, and reliability in calling back — including one reviewer who specifically contrasted this with poor experiences from other local contractors. Pricing was repeatedly described as reasonable or very reasonable, with military and first-responder discounts noted in multiple reviews, lending credibility to the value-for-money scores. Project completion was well-supported, with reviewers describing jobs finished promptly including emergency weekend and after-hours calls, multi-day leak investigations, and same-day or next-morning responses. Experience was evidenced by reviewers noting that Cesar quickly diagnosed problems, explained issues clearly, and handled a range of plumbing tasks competently. However, all reviews are from 2015–2019 (with one 2021 obituary-style review), meaning no recent performance data exists and the business appears to be permanently closed.

• BUSINESS APPEARS CLOSED: One reviewer (August 2021) reports the owner, Cesar, passed away in January 2021. The business is likely no longer operating. This score is therefore of historical value only and should NOT be used to hire this contractor.
• RECENCY WARNING: All substantive reviews are dated between 2015 and 2019 — the most recent is over 5 years old as of 2024. No reviews from the past 12 months exist.
• LOW REVIEW VOLUME: Only 6 total reviews were analyzed, with only 5 containing usable performance data. This is a very small sample and limits statistical reliability.
• ALL 5-STAR RATINGS: Every review carries a 5-star rating, which warrants mild fake-review scrutiny. However, the reviews contain specific details, named individuals, dollar amounts, and varied scenarios, which reduces the likelihood of fabrication. No significant fake review pattern detected.
• ONE REVIEW NON-SCORABLE: The 2021 review was excluded from dimension scoring as it contains no performance data — only a notice that the business appears closed.

This WW Score reflects a historically positive but small and entirely outdated review set for a business that is almost certainly permanently closed due to the owner's passing in January 2021 — it should not be used as a basis for hiring decisions.

Amador & Sons Plumbing receives consistently positive feedback across all four scored dimensions from the available reviews. Professionalism is a clear strength, with multiple reviewers explicitly citing promptness, honesty, responsiveness, and great customer service. Project completion is also well-supported, with reviewers noting timely work, thorough leak verification, and successful repairs on complex jobs including a broken cast iron pipe. Experience is reflected in specific mentions of quality workmanship on a broken kitchen water line and multiple leaks. Pricing is mentioned positively in two reviews as reasonable and fair, though the limited mentions reduce confidence in that dimension.

• Only 4 reviews total — WW Score should be treated as preliminary and not fully reliable.
• All 4 reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative feedback whatsoever; while reviews contain specific details that reduce fake review suspicion, the uniformly perfect ratings warrant mild caution.
• Two of the four reviews are dated 2022, making them over 2 years old as of 2024; recency weighting slightly reduces confidence in the overall picture.
• One review (2024-01-22) is very brief and lacks specific detail, limiting its scoring utility beyond professionalism and project completion.
• One review includes a direct phone number referral solicitation, which is atypical and may suggest a personally motivated reviewer rather than an organic customer.

This WW Score is based on only 4 reviews, two of which are over two years old, making it a low-volume preliminary assessment that should not be treated as a definitive measure of contractor quality.

Richy Rooter shows consistently positive signals across all four dimensions based on a small but meaningful set of reviews. Professionalism stands out most strongly, with all three reviewers explicitly noting punctuality, politeness, responsiveness, and follow-through — including a reviewer who contrasted Richy's reliability against a no-show competitor. Project completion is also well-supported, with jobs described as finished promptly, correctly, and to the customer's satisfaction, including a follow-up call after service. Pricing received a favorable mention in one review, where the customer noted a 'very reasonable quote' after receiving multiple high quotes elsewhere, though this is based on a single mention and should be treated cautiously. Workmanship quality was referenced in two reviews, with results described as working better than before and appearing seamless, suggesting solid technical ability. Overall, the scores are encouraging but must be interpreted conservatively given the very small review sample.

• Only 3 reviews analyzed — this is the minimum threshold for a WW Score calculation. Results should be treated as preliminary and not fully representative.
• All 3 reviews are 5-star ratings. While the reviews contain specific details and varied narratives that reduce fake review suspicion, the absence of any critical feedback limits the ability to identify weaknesses.
• No reviews older than 12 months were detected — all reviews fall within the 2024 calendar year, which is a positive recency signal.
• Review 1 is notably brief and generic ('fixed my restroom really well', 'hospitable') with limited specifics. While not conclusively fake, it contributes less evidentiary weight than the other two reviews.

This WW Score is based on only 3 reviews and should be considered a preliminary indicator only — significantly more reviews are needed before this score can be trusted as a reliable representation of the contractor's overall performance.