Find Nearby Plumbers In Fort Worth, Texas

All three reviews explicitly praise punctuality, responsiveness, and timely completion of work, supporting strong scores in professionalism and project completion. Technical competence is evident across kitchen sink repair, water pump replacement, and general plumbing work. Pricing is mentioned positively in two reviews as fair and aligned with quotes, though limited explicit detail on pricing practices. The oldest review dates to 2020, with one from early 2023 and one from late 2023, providing reasonable recency. The small sample size (3 reviews) limits confidence despite consistent positive messaging.

• Sample size is very small (n=3); scores should be treated as preliminary and updated as more reviews accumulate
• One review is from 2020 (over 3 years old); more recent data would strengthen reliability
• All reviews are 5-star ratings with uniformly positive language; while not necessarily fake, the lack of any critical detail or minor complaints is atypical and should be noted

This WW Score of 88.3 is based on limited data and should be considered preliminary; it reflects strong performance across all dimensions but requires additional reviews (target: 10+ reviews) to establish high confidence in the overall rating.

All three reviews are recent (May–July 2024) and consistently positive. Professionalism is strongly evidenced across all reviews, with mentions of quick response, friendliness, responsiveness, and prompt service. Project completion is solid, with same-day resolution and thorough work noted. Pricing appears fair based on two mentions, including one no-charge service call. Experience is supported by quick diagnosis and skilled problem-solving. However, the small sample size (n=3) and uniformly high ratings warrant moderate overall confidence.

• Small sample size (only 3 reviews) limits statistical reliability
• All reviews are 5-star ratings with no critical feedback or complaints — while not necessarily fake, this uniformity should be noted
• Review 3 contains generic praise language ('Dynamite Plumbing of Texas provided exceptional service') that reads somewhat formulaic, though it does include specific details (diagnosis, explanation of work)
• No reviews older than 1 year; all data is recent and current

This WW Score of 88.3 is based on limited data (3 reviews) and should be treated as a preliminary indicator rather than a definitive assessment. Confidence would increase substantially with 5+ additional reviews.

All Complete Plumbing has a strong and well-documented track record across a large review base spanning over a decade, with the majority of customers praising professionalism, responsiveness, and quality of workmanship. Specific plumbers — particularly Travis, Otis/Odis, and Will — are repeatedly named and commended for courteous, skilled, and thorough service. However, several credible negative reviews meaningfully drag scores down: one customer reported a bait-and-switch pricing tactic with a lump-sum invoice and refusal to itemize charges; another described a no-show and complete communication breakdown; a third reported a failed emergency callback; and a fourth described a poor diagnostic evaluation. Pricing scores are tempered by one reviewer explicitly noting the company is not the cheapest option, and another flagging a $94 charge for 10 minutes of work as steep. Project completion scores are reduced by the documented no-show/abandonment incident and the failed emergency response. Overall, the company performs well but is not without meaningful service failures.

• 22 reviews contain no text at all (blank or 'unknown') and were excluded from dimension scoring — these inflate the raw review count and may represent incomplete or placeholder entries.
• Two reviews appear to be near-duplicate in phrasing and content (both dated 2021-06-10 and 2021-01-24, both describing hot water heater installation with nearly identical language) — possible duplicate submission by the same customer or a copied review.
• Several 5-star reviews are extremely brief and generic (e.g., 'The best source for all plumbing needs.', 'Great people. Very helpful.', 'Odis and his team are top quality professionals.') with no specific details — these carry low evidentiary weight and were treated conservatively.
• The majority of detailed, substantive reviews are from 2012–2019. Reviews from 2020 onward are fewer and less detailed, making recent performance harder to assess with full confidence.
• One 1-star review (dated 2022-02-21) specifically alleges deceptive billing practices — bidding low verbally then presenting a lump-sum invoice at triple the quoted amount and refusing to itemize. This is a serious flag and was weighted heavily in the pricing score.
• One 2-star review (dated 2018-04-20) describes a plumber who failed to show up twice and then stopped responding entirely — a significant project completion failure that was weighted in that dimension.
• One 1-star review (dated 2021-06-10) describes a failure to return emergency calls, which negatively impacts professionalism and project completion scores.
• Recency note: Most highly detailed positive reviews are older than 3 years. The most recent reviews (2024–2025) are either blank or very brief, limiting confidence in current service quality.

This WW Score is based on a large review set (109 total, 87 with usable data) spanning over 15 years, giving it HIGH statistical confidence in the overall trend, but the score should be interpreted with caution given that recent reviews lack detail, several credible negative experiences involve serious service failures, and a meaningful portion of reviews are blank or generic.

Benton Plumbing has a strong and consistent track record across professionalism and pricing, with the large majority of reviewers praising punctuality, friendliness, responsiveness, and fair or below-market pricing. However, several notable negative reviews meaningfully drag down the project completion and experience scores: one customer alleged a $15,000 overcharge for work done incorrectly including a water heater installed upside down; another described a technician arriving without proper equipment and using profanity; a third detailed a prolonged sump pump failure requiring four replacement attempts; and a fourth described a serious breakdown in communication, billing disputes, and alleged substandard workmanship. The responsiveness failure noted in the 2024 review — where Robert accepted a tankless water heater order and then went completely silent — is a recent and credible concern. While the overwhelming volume of positive reviews supports a generally reliable contractor, the severity and specificity of the negative reviews prevent a high score in project completion and experience.

• 17 reviews contain no text at all — only a star rating (including several marked 'unknown' or a single period). These were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable evidence.
• Two reviews appear to be for a medical practice or unrelated business ('Good doctor, but the wait time is horrendous' and 'Been here since 4:30. Still in waiting.'). These were excluded from scoring entirely.
• One review ('Don't Try To Call for Any reason...') also appears to reference a medical or unrelated office context and was excluded.
• A significant portion of older reviews (pre-2015) use very generic praise with no specifics, which slightly reduces confidence in those individual data points, though the volume is sufficient to maintain HIGH overall confidence.
• The most severe negative review (1-star, Dec 2024) alleges a $15,000 overcharge and technically incompetent work including installing a water heater upside down. This is recent, specific, and credible — it materially impacts project completion and experience scores.
• A 2015 negative review describes a serious billing dispute, alleged substandard workmanship, and threatening behavior by the owner. This is detailed and specific and was weighted accordingly.
• A 2024 review (3-star) describes a complete communication breakdown after a job was accepted — no response to multiple messages. This is a recent responsiveness failure and was factored into professionalism.
• The majority of reviews are older than 3 years. Only a handful are from 2024–2025. Recency weighting was applied, giving more influence to the 2024–2025 reviews including the negative ones.
• No clear fake review pattern detected, though the high volume of brief generic 5-star reviews from 2009–2016 warrants mild caution.

This WW Score is based on a large review set (95 total, 78 with usable data) spanning over 15 years, giving it HIGH statistical confidence, but consumers should weigh the recent and specific negative reviews heavily as they suggest potential quality and communication issues that may reflect the current state of the business.

CRC Plumbing has an overwhelmingly positive reputation across a large review base spanning roughly a decade, with the majority of customers praising Charles and Clete for punctuality, friendliness, responsiveness, and technical knowledge. Professionalism scores well but is tempered by a handful of serious complaints involving rude behavior, threatening language, and dismissive treatment of customers including elderly clients. Pricing is a notable mixed point: many reviewers call it fair and reasonable, but several credible negative reviews describe charges that felt excessive, surprise double service-call billing, and refusal to return to fix incomplete work without additional fees. Project completion is the most consequential drag on the score, with multiple reviewers reporting that work was left incomplete, problems were not resolved on the first visit, or that the wrong area was worked on entirely — and in some cases the contractor refused to return without charging again. Experience scores well overall given the breadth of work completed successfully across many years, but the failed diagnostic and wrong-location errors in negative reviews prevent a top-tier score.

• Several negative reviews describe serious conduct issues: one reviewer reports being told 'I know where you live' after disputing a bill (2016), and another describes Charles working in the wrong location for hours and charging over $600 for a failed attempt.
• One review (2013) alleges the contractor pushed a clog from a toilet to a tub, denied responsibility, and then returned to charge elderly grandparents for work that had already been fixed by another plumber — a potential elder exploitation concern.
• A 2019 review describes a $150 charge for a 15-minute job that did not fix the problem, with the contractor telling the customer's wife he would charge again if he had to return — no-guarantee policy is a significant red flag.
• A 2013 review alleges the contractor installed a garbage disposal incorrectly causing a leak, then demanded payment for a second visit to redo the same work.
• A 2015 review alleges a charge of nearly $100 for a five-minute estimate visit with no prior disclosure of a service call fee.
• A 2015 mixed review notes a mistake was made blocking a drain pipe during the job, though it was rectified promptly.
• A 2014 review reports paying $175 to clear a drain that backed up two hours later, with CRC refusing to return without an additional $200 charge and incorrectly diagnosing the main sewer line as bad — a competing plumber fixed it quickly for less.
• Some reviews reference two different first names (Charles and Clete) suggesting either multiple operators or a name discrepancy; this does not appear to be fake review activity but may reflect different technicians receiving reviews under the same business profile.
• The review set spans 2012–2024 with the majority of reviews predating 2022. Only a small number of reviews are from the past 12 months (2023–2024), meaning recent performance data is limited and the score is heavily weighted toward older reviews.
• No strong fake review patterns detected. Reviews contain specific job details, named individuals, varied writing styles, and include both positive and negative experiences — consistent with authentic reviews.

This WW Score is based on a large and diverse review set with HIGH confidence across all four dimensions, but consumers should weigh the recurring pattern of credible negative reviews describing incomplete work, disputed billing practices, and at least one report of threatening behavior before making a hiring decision.

Bravo's Plumbing receives strong and consistent praise across professionalism, punctuality, communication, and follow-through, with many reviewers specifically calling out responsiveness and on-time arrivals. Project completion scores well overall, with multiple reviews confirming jobs were finished as promised and on schedule, including a large sewer line replacement. Pricing is generally viewed favorably — several reviewers noted fair or reasonable rates and one described a competitor-beating quote — however two negative reviews raise meaningful concerns: one alleges overcharging by three times the fair rate and property damage, and another describes an incomplete repair setup that required additional payment to finish, with a rude response when challenged. These two negative reviews meaningfully temper the pricing and project completion scores. Experience is well-supported by specific mentions of skilled workmanship on complex jobs including foundation plumbing, gas line installation, and sewer replacement.

• 11 reviews contain no text at all — only a star rating. These were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable evidence.
• Several reviews from 2024-06-09 share the exact same date, which may indicate a batch submission. While the review content varies enough to suggest they are likely genuine, this pattern warrants mild caution.
• Two substantive negative reviews (1-star, dated 2022 and 2012) allege overcharging, property damage, incomplete work, and rude follow-up behavior. These are specific and credible and were weighted accordingly.
• A significant portion of reviews are older than 12 months, with many dated 2022 or earlier. Reviews from 2024–2025 are more limited in number. Recency weighting was applied conservatively.
• Multiple reviewers reference different lead plumbers by name (Lonnie, Josh, Ben, Ismael/Esmaeel), suggesting the business has operated under different personnel over time. Scores may reflect a composite of different individuals rather than a single consistent operator.

This WW Score is based on a reasonably large review set with high mention counts across all four dimensions, giving it HIGH overall confidence, but the presence of two detailed and credible negative reviews — particularly regarding pricing and incomplete work — means consumers should read those reviews directly before hiring.