Find Nearby Plumbers In McKinney, Texas

Kenneth demonstrates strong professionalism and technical expertise across multiple reviews, with consistent praise for communication, responsiveness, and problem-solving ability. Pricing feedback is positive but limited to three mentions, suggesting fair value and transparency. However, project completion is significantly undermined by one severe 1-star review from December 2022 alleging incomplete work, pipe leaks, and unprofessional behavior—a critical failure that substantially lowers this dimension's score. The remaining five reviews are uniformly positive and detailed, but the recency and severity of the negative review creates material uncertainty about reliability.

• CRITICAL: One 1-star review (2022-12-24) alleges serious failures including incomplete work, leaking pipes, and unprofessional conduct. This directly contradicts the narrative of five 5-star reviews and suggests either a significant service failure or a potential dispute. This review cannot be dismissed and materially impacts project completion confidence.
• RECENCY CONCERN: Four of six reviews are from 2020–2021 (2+ years old). Only two reviews are from 2022. Limited recent data reduces confidence in current service quality.
• POLARIZATION PATTERN: Reviews show extreme polarization (one 1-star vs. five 5-stars) with no middle-ground ratings. This pattern warrants caution, though the detailed nature of both positive and negative reviews suggests authenticity rather than fake reviews.
• SAMPLE SIZE: Only 6 reviews total is a small sample. Confidence in overall score is inherently limited.

This WW Score should be treated with caution. While positive reviews demonstrate genuine expertise and professionalism, the severe 1-star review alleging incomplete work and property damage represents a critical failure that cannot be overlooked. The small sample size (6 reviews) and age of most data (2+ years) further limit confidence. Prospective customers should request references and clarification regarding the December 2022 incident before committing to major work.

All three reviews consistently praise Jeremy and Pathway Plumbing across professionalism, pricing, workmanship, and job completion. Professionalism scores highest, with multiple reviewers explicitly calling out punctuality, honesty, friendliness, and clear communication. Pricing is described as reasonable and fair across all three reviews, though no specific figures are given. Project completion is well-supported — reviewers note jobs were finished correctly, with one reviewer explicitly clarifying that return visits were for new issues, not callbacks on prior work. Experience is affirmed through descriptions of thorough, high-quality work on complex situations including foreclosure plumbing and post-freeze repairs. However, the overall score must be treated with caution given only three reviews are present, and two of the three are more than five years old.

• Only 3 reviews total — WW Score is at the minimum threshold for calculation and should be treated as preliminary.
• Recency concern: Two of three reviews are significantly outdated (2017 and 2011). Only one review falls within the past several years (2019), and even that is now over 5 years old. Current performance cannot be reliably inferred.
• All reviews are 5-star ratings, which warrants mild caution, though the reviews contain specific details, varied language, and concrete scenarios that reduce the likelihood of fabrication.
• No negative feedback or constructive criticism present across any review — this may reflect genuine satisfaction but also limits the depth of analysis.

This WW Score is based on only 3 reviews, all of which are at least 5 years old, making it a low-volume and potentially outdated signal that should not be relied upon without seeking more recent customer feedback.

All three reviews speak positively about Jake's communication style, friendliness, and responsiveness, supporting a solid professionalism score. Pricing is mentioned in two reviews as reasonable or fantastic, but with only two data points this is treated conservatively. Project completion is supported across all three reviews, with one notably highlighting that Jake finished in a single day what another plumber had failed to complete in two weeks. Experience and technical skill are referenced through mentions of knowledgeability, successful drain repair, and tankless water heater installation, though the small review pool limits confidence across all dimensions.

• Only 3 reviews total — WW Score should be treated as preliminary and low-reliability.
• Two of the three reviews are dated 2016, making them over 8 years old. Only one review (2023) falls within a recent window. The score may not reflect current service quality.
• All reviews are 5-star with uniformly positive language. While no overt fake review patterns are detected, the small sample size and lack of any critical feedback prevent meaningful balance assessment.

This score is based on only 3 reviews, two of which are significantly outdated, making it a low-reliability signal that should not be used as a definitive measure of current contractor quality.

Three of four reviewers describe positive experiences with Casanova Plumbing, praising punctuality, professionalism, and fair pricing. One standout review noted the company resolved a shower valve issue that two other established plumbers could not fix, suggesting solid technical capability. However, one 2-star review from late 2023 explicitly flags unresponsiveness to a website service request, which is a meaningful professionalism concern and drags the professionalism score down. Pricing was consistently praised across three reviews, lending moderate confidence to that dimension. The overall score is tempered by the very small review pool and the presence of one negative responsiveness complaint.

• Very small review pool (only 4 reviews) — WW Score should be treated as preliminary and low-reliability.
• One review (2023-12-04) explicitly reports no response to a website service request, indicating a potential responsiveness gap.
• One positive review is dated 2020-08-08, which is over 4 years old and carries significantly reduced weight under recency rules.
• No suspected fake reviews detected — reviews contain specific details, varied language, and include a negative review, which adds authenticity.
• With only 4 total reviews, confidence factors are capped well below 1.0 for all dimensions, limiting score reliability.

This WW Score is based on only 4 reviews spanning multiple years, including one negative responsiveness complaint and one review over 4 years old, making it LOW reliability — seek additional data points before drawing firm conclusions.

All American Plumbing presents a deeply mixed picture across its review history. On the positive side, many customers praise Lester and his team for being on time, professional, knowledgeable, and reasonably priced — with multiple reviewers explicitly comparing his quotes favorably against competitors and noting transparent, no-surprise billing. However, a significant and recurring pattern of no-shows, missed appointments, unreturned calls, and at least one account of rude behavior on the phone and in person substantially drags down the professionalism and project completion scores. The no-show and non-responsiveness complaints span from 2017 through 2023, indicating this is not an isolated or historical issue but a persistent operational problem. Workmanship quality is generally rated positively when the team does show up, though at least one review noted sloppy finishing work. Pricing is the strongest dimension, with most reviewers who mentioned cost describing it as fair or better than competitors.

• RECURRING NO-SHOW PATTERN: At least 8 reviews across multiple years (2017, 2018, 2019, 2021, 2023) describe missed appointments with no call, no return call, or being hung up on. This is a systemic reliability issue, not isolated incidents.
• RESPONSIVENESS FAILURE: Multiple reviews specifically cite inability to reach a live person, reliance on an answering service, and no callbacks — indicating a structural communication problem.
• RUDE BEHAVIOR ALLEGATIONS: At least 2 reviews allege rude or inappropriate behavior by the owner, including hanging up on customers and making a customer's wife feel uncomfortable. These are serious professionalism flags.
• DRIVING BEHAVIOR COMPLAINT: One review (2022) describes dangerous driving by a company vehicle. While not directly a service quality issue, it reflects on the company's public conduct.
• OLDER REVIEW VOLUME: A significant portion of reviews predate 2021, including several with no review text ('unknown'). These were given reduced weight in scoring.
• THREE 'UNKNOWN' REVIEWS: Reviews with only a rating and the text 'unknown' were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable qualitative data.
• NO FAKE REVIEW PATTERN DETECTED: Positive reviews contain specific job details, named individuals, and varied language. No coordinated fake review pattern identified, though the volume of generic 5-star reviews from 2015 warrants mild caution.
• RECENCY NOTE: The most recent reviews (2023–2024) include both a strong positive (Sept 2024) and a no-show complaint (June 2023), suggesting the reliability problem has not been fully resolved.

This WW Score is based on 49 reviews spanning approximately 11 years and carries HIGH data confidence due to volume, but the score should be interpreted cautiously given the persistent and multi-year pattern of no-shows and non-responsiveness that directly contradicts the positive experiences described by satisfied customers — suggesting highly inconsistent service delivery.

Pro Bowl Plumbing has a deeply mixed record across all four dimensions. Professionalism is dragged down significantly by multiple reviews describing condescending, dismissive, or unprofessional technician behavior, though several older reviews praise specific individuals like Andy Parrish and Roderick as courteous and professional. Pricing is a notable concern, with multiple reviewers explicitly calling out overcharging, unexpected travel charges, and taking advantage of customers who lacked plumbing knowledge, though a handful of reviews praised fair and transparent pricing. Project completion is similarly split — several jobs were completed well and on time, but there are documented cases of abandoned problems, work that created new issues (broken pipes, fire hazard wiring, reduced water pressure), and technicians failing to resolve the original complaint. Experience scores moderately, with some technicians demonstrating strong diagnostic and technical skill while others showed clear incompetence, including poorly installed wiring that created a fire hazard and a technician who admitted he could not identify the source of a leak after two hours.

• Several reviews are significantly older than 12 months — the majority of reviews predate 2022, with many from 2012–2015. The most recent reviews (2022–2023) skew negative, suggesting possible quality decline over time.
• The two most recent reviews (2023 and 2022) are both negative or mixed, which may indicate a deterioration in service quality compared to the earlier positive reviews.
• One review explicitly documents a fire hazard resulting from poorly installed wiring on a water heater — this is a serious safety concern and a significant red flag for workmanship quality.
• One review describes a technician charging for time spent breaking pipes he himself damaged, and then attempting to upsell additional work — a pattern consistent with predatory billing practices.
• The 2019 review describes what the reviewer characterizes as price gouging of a young woman perceived as unknowledgeable about plumbing, raising ethical concerns about how this company treats vulnerable customers.
• No fake review patterns detected — reviews vary in tone, detail, rating, and writing style, and include specific names, dates, and job descriptions.

This WW Score is based on 19 reviews spanning 2007–2023 with high mention counts across all dimensions, making it statistically meaningful, but the heavy skew toward older reviews and a clear pattern of negative experiences in the most recent reviews means the current service quality may be worse than the score suggests.