Find Nearby Plumbers In Fort Worth, Texas

Above and Beyond Plumbing earns strong marks across all four dimensions, with consistent praise for fair pricing, technical skill, and follow-through on jobs. Multiple reviewers highlighted the team's ability to solve problems that other plumbers could not, and several noted transparent pricing with no surprise charges. Professionalism and project completion scores are tempered by one significant negative review describing repeated no-shows and broken promises over a two-week period, which represents a meaningful reliability concern. The majority of the most recent reviews (2024) are positive and detailed, which lends credibility to the higher scores, though the business has operated under at least two different lead plumbers (Cameron and Tanner) across the review timeline. Overall, the contractor demonstrates genuine competence and value but has at least one documented instance of serious follow-through failure.

• One 1-star review (dated 2014-12-17) explicitly alleges that other reviews may be written by family members or the business itself — this cannot be verified but warrants awareness.
• All reviews are 5 stars except for one 1-star review. While the positive reviews contain specific details and varied language that reduce fake review suspicion, the uniformity of ratings is worth noting.
• Several reviews are significantly dated (2014–2016) and involve a different plumber (Tanner) rather than the current lead (Cameron). These older reviews may not reflect current service quality and were weighted accordingly.
• The negative review describes a pattern of no-shows and broken communication commitments over two weeks — a direct contradiction of the responsiveness praised in other reviews. This was factored into the professionalism and project completion scores.

This WW Score carries HIGH overall confidence due to a sufficient volume of reviews with specific, varied detail across all four dimensions, though consumers should note the age gap between older and newer reviews and the one credible negative experience involving a serious responsiveness failure.

Lewisville Plumbing demonstrates strong overall performance across all four dimensions, with particular strength in technical expertise and professionalism. The company excels at punctuality, responsiveness, and quality workmanship, with numerous reviews praising specific technicians like Will and Mike. Pricing is consistently described as fair and reasonable, with several customers noting savings compared to competitors. However, the score is tempered by a notable pattern of service refusals and communication breakdowns in approximately 4-5 reviews spanning 2021-2024, where customers report being declined work or receiving poor customer service interactions. Project completion is generally strong, though one significant complaint about incomplete work (spigot replacement) and follow-up service refusals indicates inconsistency in job thoroughness.

• Pattern of service refusals and communication issues: Multiple reviews (2024, 2023, 2022, 2021) describe instances where the company declined work, failed to follow up on quotes, or provided dismissive customer service. This suggests selective job acceptance that may frustrate some customers.
• Accountability concerns: One 2022 review describes the owner as defensive and unwilling to take accountability for a toilet reinstallation that resulted in reduced water pressure, which contradicts the company's otherwise strong reputation for honesty.
• Inconsistent job completion: One 2024 review explicitly states the company missed 3 of 8 spigots during replacement work and declined follow-up service, suggesting occasional lapses in thoroughness.
• Empty/minimal reviews: Approximately 6 reviews contain no text or only generic praise ('Great place', 'Nice staff'), which slightly reduces data quality but does not suggest fabrication.
• Older reviews (pre-2019): Approximately 15 reviews are from 2019 or earlier. While these are positive, they carry less weight for assessing current service quality.
• One billing dispute (2007): An older review describes a job that took longer than expected and resulted in overcharging, though the company did negotiate a partial refund after the fact.

This WW Score of 82.3 is reliable and based on substantial evidence from 67 reviews with consistent mention patterns across all dimensions. However, the score reflects a company with strong technical capabilities and generally excellent customer service that is offset by documented instances of service refusals, communication failures, and occasional accountability issues. Customers should expect high-quality work when the company accepts a job, but should be aware of potential friction during the sales/scheduling process.

Hukill's demonstrates strong professionalism with consistently punctual, courteous, and responsive technicians across 89 mentions. Technical expertise and problem-solving ability are well-documented across 68 mentions, with many customers praising skill and knowledge. Project completion is solid with 72 mentions showing jobs finished on time and issues resolved, though some callbacks and follow-up issues are noted. Pricing emerges as the primary weakness with 18 mentions revealing concerns about high costs, lack of transparency in quotes, and perceived overcharging relative to work performed. The company excels in customer service and technical delivery but struggles with value perception.

• PRICING CONCERNS: Multiple reviews (at least 8) explicitly mention high pricing, lack of itemized breakdowns, unexpected cost increases, and perceived overcharging. One customer reported a $2,800 quote that was nearly double a competitor's price for similar work. Another paid $105 for a 15-minute out-of-service drive. This is a consistent pain point.
• QUALITY INCONSISTENCY: Several negative reviews (5 total) describe incomplete problem diagnosis, failed repairs requiring callbacks, and technicians unable to solve issues that competitors resolved. One review noted a technician 'reeked heavily of pot' and failed to locate a leak another company found.
• COMMUNICATION BREAKDOWNS: Multiple reviews (4+) describe poor scheduling communication, delayed callbacks, cancelled appointments without notice, and office staff unable to explain processes. One customer spent a month trying to schedule an appointment.
• FOLLOW-UP FAILURES: At least 3 reviews mention promised callbacks that never occurred, unresolved issues after service, and lack of accountability when problems persist.
• FAKE REVIEW RISK - MODERATE: Approximately 85 of 127 reviews are 5-star with generic praise ('excellent service,' 'highly recommend,' 'professional'). While many include specific technician names and details, the density of 5-star reviews (67%) is unusually high. However, the presence of detailed negative reviews and specific complaints suggests these are largely authentic rather than fabricated.
• RECENCY BIAS: Most reviews are from 2025 (recent) and 2022-2024. Older reviews (2018-2021) show more critical feedback on pricing and communication, suggesting potential recent improvements or selection bias in recent reviewers.

This WW Score of 82.1 is reliable for assessing professionalism and technical competence (both HIGH confidence), but should be interpreted cautiously regarding overall value—pricing concerns are significant and consistent, and the score does not fully capture the cost-to-quality ratio that many customers question. The company delivers quality work and professional service but at a premium price point that not all customers find justified.

Creech Plumbing earns strong marks across all four dimensions, with professionalism being the most consistently praised attribute — punctuality, courtesy, communication, and responsiveness are mentioned repeatedly across decades of reviews. Project completion scores well overall, with the vast majority of reviewers reporting jobs finished correctly and on time, though two notable negative reviews describe a no-show pattern (2016) and an overcharging/incomplete work dispute (2025) that meaningfully drag this dimension down. Pricing is the weakest dimension: while several reviewers describe fair or reasonable pricing, two reviews explicitly flag overcharging or an inflated quote compared to a competitor, introducing real concern. Experience scores solidly, with multiple reviewers citing knowledgeable staff, proper diagnostics, and quality workmanship on complex jobs. The overall picture is of a reliable, long-tenured local plumber with a strong reputation, tempered by a small but credible set of negative experiences that cannot be ignored.

• 7 reviews contain no text (rating only) and were excluded from dimension scoring — these inflate the review count without providing usable data.
• 2 reviews are marked 'unknown' and were excluded from dimension scoring.
• The 2025-03-11 one-star review alleges significant overcharging ($12,875 quote for work that was partially subcontracted at additional cost of $6,409) and a defective installation (improperly installed cleanout). This is a serious, specific, and credible complaint that negatively impacts both pricing and project completion scores.
• The 2016-01-19 one-star review describes repeated no-shows and failure to honor warranty callbacks — a serious project completion failure. However, this review is over 9 years old and may not reflect current operations.
• The 2019-07-13 one-star review describes a quote of $415 for a job a competitor completed in 20 minutes for $125 — a credible pricing concern.
• The 2017-06-12 one-star review ('Never perform') is too vague to score but is noted as a negative signal.
• A large proportion of reviews (roughly 35+) are from 2025 and early 2025, which is positive for recency. However, the cluster of same-date reviews (e.g., multiple reviews all dated 2025-05-10 and 2025-03-11) warrants mild fake-review scrutiny. While most contain specific details, the date clustering is unusual and slightly reduces confidence.
• Several older reviews (2012–2016) reference 'Mike Creech' personally, while recent reviews reference different named technicians (Payton, Gage, Canyon, Logan, Cully, Ethan), suggesting possible ownership or staffing changes over time. Scores are weighted toward recent reviews accordingly.

This WW Score is based on a large and mostly recent review set with HIGH confidence across all four dimensions; however, the presence of three credible negative reviews — including a specific overcharging allegation and a documented no-show pattern — means the score should be treated as a solid but not unconditional endorsement, and prospective customers should request detailed written quotes before committing to larger projects.

Wise Choice Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism across nearly all reviews, with technicians consistently praised for punctuality, courtesy, cleanliness, and respectful behavior. Technical competence is well-documented with multiple mentions of knowledgeable problem-solving and quality workmanship. Project completion is reliable with jobs finished on-time and follow-through honored. However, pricing emerges as a notable weakness: while most reviews describe fair pricing, one detailed 1-star review documents a $175 flat-rate charge applied without proper customer authorization, and another mentions concerns about referrals to third-party companies that exploited the customer. The company's ownership transition (post-2018) appears to have negatively impacted service quality according to one long-time customer. Overall score is tempered by pricing inconsistencies and the documented authorization failure.

• OWNERSHIP CHANGE IMPACT: Review from 2019-04-20 indicates company was acquired by a business partner who took over from original owner Jesse. Reviewer explicitly states dissatisfaction post-merger and switched providers. This suggests potential service degradation after the review period.
• AUTHORIZATION VIOLATION: 2017-06-12 review (1-star) documents serious breach of customer protocol—technician charged $175 flat-rate without obtaining explicit authorization from property owner as promised. Technician falsely marked 'owner authorized' on receipt. This is a significant professionalism and communication failure.
• THIRD-PARTY REFERRAL CONCERN: 2018-07-01 review indicates company referred customer to PRC (water damage company) which allegedly took advantage of customer's situation, making things worse. Raises questions about referral vetting.
• RECENCY BIAS: Most positive reviews are from 2016-2018 (older than 5 years). Only 2 reviews from 2019 onward, both negative or mixed. Recent data is limited and suggests potential decline.
• TECHNICIAN VARIABILITY: Multiple technicians mentioned (Jesse, Jose, John, Jonathan, Anders, Paul, Don Williams, Matthew). While most receive praise, Matthew (2018-07-01) received criticism for limited helpfulness and poor referral judgment. Quality appears inconsistent across staff.

This score should be treated with MODERATE-TO-HIGH confidence for historical performance (2016-2018) but with significant caution regarding current service quality, as recent reviews are sparse and the 2019 ownership change appears to have negatively impacted operations. The pricing dimension is particularly unreliable due to limited mentions (8) and one documented authorization failure that suggests systemic communication issues.

Bluebonnet Plumbing receives consistently strong praise across all four dimensions, with pricing being a particular standout — multiple reviewers explicitly noted costs well below competitor quotes and described charges as very reasonable. Professionalism scores are high overall, with recurring mentions of punctuality, courtesy, and responsiveness, though one 1-star review from 2021 describes a failure to follow through on a callback and an incomplete repair, which meaningfully tempers the professionalism and project completion scores. Project completion is the most nuanced dimension: the vast majority of reviews describe fast, complete repairs, but the 2021 negative review documents an unresolved issue (a still-leaking tub stopper and a cosmetically damaged faucet plate) with near-total communication breakdown afterward. Experience scores are solid, supported by multiple reviews praising quick diagnosis, efficient execution, and honest assessments — including one instance where the plumber correctly identified a problem was simpler than feared and another where they proactively liaised with a manufacturer on the customer's behalf.

• One significant negative review (1-star, Dec 2021) describes an incomplete repair, poor follow-through on callbacks, and cosmetic damage left behind — this is a meaningful data point and was weighted accordingly in project completion and professionalism scores.
• Several reviews span 2014–2019 and are more than 5 years old. Only 6 of 18 reviews are from the past 12 months (2024) or recent years (2022). Older reviews may not reflect current service quality.
• A few reviews are brief and generic (e.g., 'Great work and a fair price. We are very happy customers!') with no specific detail. These were counted for mention purposes but given reduced evidentiary weight in scoring.
• No strong fake review patterns detected — reviews vary in length, detail, tone, and rating, and include at least one critical review, which increases overall authenticity confidence.

This WW Score is based on 18 reviews with broad dimensional coverage and is reasonably reliable, though the score should be interpreted with awareness that most reviews skew older than 12 months and one documented negative experience involving incomplete work and communication failure introduces meaningful uncertainty in project completion and professionalism.