Find Nearby Plumbers In North Richland Hills, Texas

Security Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism with consistent praise for punctuality, courtesy, and communication across 89 reviews. Technical expertise is well-documented with 56 mentions of skilled workmanship and problem-solving. However, project completion reliability is tempered by multiple reports of no-shows, abandoned jobs, delayed follow-ups, and unresolved callbacks, lowering that dimension to 75.5. Pricing receives moderate support (76.0) with complaints about hidden travel fees, inflated parts markups, and inconsistent transparency, though many customers praise fair rates. The company shows significant operational inconsistency—excellent service from named technicians (Omed, Ali, Matin, Jose) contrasts sharply with documented failures in scheduling, accountability, and follow-through.

• OPERATIONAL INCONSISTENCY: Multiple 1-star reviews document no-shows, abandoned jobs mid-work, and failure to return after cancellations (2020-11-30, 2020-11-10, 2019-03-05). This suggests systemic scheduling or accountability issues despite strong individual technician performance.
• HIDDEN FEES PATTERN: At least 3 detailed complaints (2022-03-09, 2021-10-04) describe undisclosed travel time charges and parts marked up 100% above retail cost. One customer explicitly noted GPS-based billing disputes and lack of transparency on time charges.
• FOLLOW-UP FAILURES: Multiple reviews (2022-06-10 grab bars review, 2019-12-02) describe lack of proactive communication when running behind schedule, missed callbacks, and unresolved follow-up commitments despite promises.
• DAMAGE LIABILITY DISPUTES: Two reviews (2024-08-13, 2019-08-03) describe property damage (broken window, stained carpet, knocked-over shelf) with company refusing responsibility or failing to follow up after admitting fault.
• QUALITY INCONSISTENCY: One long-term customer (2022-06-10) downgraded from 5-star to 3-star due to recent service degradation, suggesting possible decline in standards over time.
• RUDE STAFF INCIDENT: One 2020-10-19 review documents abusive language from scheduling staff ('shut the fuck up'), though this appears isolated.
• FAKE REVIEW RISK - MODERATE: Approximately 15-20 reviews contain only 1-3 words ('Good', 'Nice job', 'unknown', '.') with 5-star ratings and no dates or minimal dates (2022-06-10, 2023-06-10 clusters). These provide no usable data and suggest possible review padding. However, the majority of reviews are detailed and credible.
• RECENCY NOTE: Most detailed negative reviews cluster in 2019-2022. Recent reviews (2025, 2024) show mixed quality—some excellent, some critical of professionalism and follow-through, suggesting ongoing operational challenges.

This WW Score of 78.2 should be trusted with HIGH confidence due to large sample size (161 reviews) and consistent patterns across dimensions, but customers should be aware that Security Plumbing exhibits significant operational inconsistency: individual technicians (particularly Omed, Ali, Matin) deliver excellent service, but scheduling reliability, follow-up accountability, and transparent pricing are documented weak points that warrant direct clarification before booking.

Howze Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism with consistent praise for punctuality, communication, and courteous technicians across 28 reviews. Project completion is solid with most jobs finished successfully and on-time, though one significant failure (unclogged drain that remained clogged) was noted. Technical expertise is evident through diagnostic problem-solving and knowledge demonstrated across 18 mentions. However, pricing is a critical weakness: 8 reviews explicitly mention excessive costs, with complaints of $500+/hour rates, $1,150+ bills for incomplete work, and $1,494.94 quotes for simple installations. This pricing concern significantly impacts overall trustworthiness despite strong execution quality.

• PRICING PATTERN: Multiple reviews (2024-2025 and older) consistently cite excessive pricing and 'flat rate' billing concerns. This is not isolated—it appears systemic. Four separate 1-2 star reviews specifically cite price gouging and overcharging.
• INCOMPLETE PROJECT: One 2020 review reports drain clearing that failed to resolve the issue, requiring a second plumber and double payment. Customer was denied credit for the failed service.
• RECENCY BIAS POSSIBLE: Most recent reviews (June 2025, May 2025, April 2025) are uniformly 5-star with detailed praise. Older reviews (2020-2023) show more critical pricing feedback. Recent reviews may reflect improved service or selection bias.
• GENERIC PRAISE PATTERN: Several very recent reviews use similar phrasing ('highly recommend,' 'great job,' 'professional') with minimal specifics, though not enough to flag as fake. However, combined with uniformly high ratings in recent months, warrants caution.
• ONE SUSPICIOUS REVIEW: The May 19, 2025 review about Daniel and the outdoor leak reads as pre-written/polished ('Here's a polished review you can use') and may not be authentic customer feedback.

This score should be trusted with caution. While professionalism and project completion are well-supported by HIGH confidence data, the pricing dimension reveals a serious and recurring concern that directly contradicts the overwhelmingly positive recent reviews. The company appears to deliver quality work but at premium rates that customers consistently perceive as excessive or unfair. Recent 5-star reviews may not fully represent the pricing reality that affected earlier customers. Recommend requesting detailed quotes in writing before engaging services.

Dr. Plumber demonstrates strong professionalism (82.5) with consistent praise for punctuality, friendliness, and responsiveness across 89 reviews. Project completion scores well at 81.0 based on 76 mentions, with most jobs finished on time and follow-through honored. Experience is solid at 84.0 from 58 mentions, reflecting skilled technicians and quality workmanship. However, pricing emerges as a significant weakness at 65.0 from 42 mentions, with recurring complaints about high costs, lack of transparency, and perceived overcharging. The WW Score of 76.8 reflects a competent, reliable contractor hampered by pricing concerns that create customer dissatisfaction despite strong technical execution.

• PRICING PATTERN: Multiple reviews (at least 15+) explicitly criticize pricing as excessive, with specific complaints about $300-$480 for 15-20 minute jobs, lack of itemized quotes, and refusal to provide cost breakdowns. This is the most consistent negative theme.
• EMPLOYEE CONDUCT ISSUES: Several reviews (at least 8) describe unprofessional behavior by specific employees (Drew Hessil, unnamed technicians), including condescension, rudeness, yelling profanity, disrespect of property, and aggressive attitudes. Pattern suggests inconsistent quality control.
• FOLLOW-UP SERVICE FAILURES: At least 5 reviews document failure to return calls, no-shows without notification, and refusal to honor callbacks or warranty work, contradicting the company's stated responsiveness.
• QUALITY INCONSISTENCY: Some reviews report incomplete work, work that failed shortly after completion, or damage caused during service (broken utility tub, ceiling hole, leaks after installation) with defensive responses from ownership.
• POTENTIAL FAKE REVIEW CLUSTER: Approximately 30-40 reviews from 2024-06-09 are extremely brief, generic, and highly positive (mostly 5-star with minimal detail). Many lack substantive information and use identical phrasing ('great job,' 'highly recommend,' 'professional'). This cluster warrants skepticism.
• OWNERSHIP ACCOUNTABILITY: Multiple reviews describe the owner (Steve Hessil) as defensive, argumentative, and unwilling to stand behind work. One detailed review documents the owner denying responsibility and calling a customer a liar.
• RECENCY NOTE: Most recent reviews (past 12 months) show mixed sentiment with pricing complaints continuing. Older reviews (2010-2018) tend to be more positive, suggesting possible service degradation or increased pricing over time.

This WW Score of 76.8 should be treated with MODERATE-TO-HIGH caution: while the company demonstrates genuine technical competence and responsiveness (supported by extensive evidence), the consistent and detailed pricing complaints, documented employee conduct issues, and follow-up service failures significantly undermine trust. The suspicious cluster of generic 5-star reviews from June 2024 further reduces confidence in the overall rating. Customers should expect competent work but should obtain detailed, itemized quotes upfront and be prepared for potential cost disputes and variable service quality depending on which technician is assigned.

Henry's Service All demonstrates strong professionalism and technical expertise across plumbing, electrical, and HVAC services, with many long-term customers praising responsiveness and quality workmanship. However, pricing transparency and fairness emerge as a significant weakness, with multiple customers reporting unexpected charges, budget overruns, and complaints about inflated labor rates and material costs. Project completion is generally solid with good follow-through, though some older reviews cite delays and unresolved issues. The company's 40+ year reputation is undermined by recent negative experiences (2024-2025) involving poor communication, unauthorized work, and refusal to correct defects.

• PRICING CONCERNS: Multiple detailed complaints about overcharging, hidden fees, and lack of transparency (2024, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2013). At least 6 reviews explicitly cite pricing issues or budget overruns without prior communication.
• QUALITY CONTROL INCONSISTENCY: Several reviews describe defective workmanship (crooked shower installation 2025, backwards shower faucets 2020, damaged AC blower fin 2019, leaking pipes after service 2019) suggesting quality varies significantly by technician.
• COMMUNICATION FAILURES: Multiple complaints about lack of communication during service, unauthorized work, and failure to notify customers of cost overruns (2024, 2024, 2020).
• RECENT NEGATIVE TREND: The most detailed and serious complaints cluster in 2024-2025, including a major complaint about a defective shower installation with refusal to correct (Jan 2025), dishonesty allegations (June 2024), and emergency service failure (Sept 2023).
• EMPTY/MINIMAL REVIEWS: 8 reviews contain no text or minimal text (blank or single word ratings), reducing data quality slightly.
• LONG-TERM CUSTOMER LOYALTY vs. RECENT DISSATISFACTION: Stark contrast between 20-40 year customers praising reliability and recent customers (past 2 years) reporting serious issues, suggesting possible decline in service standards or management changes.

This WW Score of 76.8 is reliable but reflects a company in transition: strong historical reputation and technical competence are offset by documented pricing transparency issues and recent quality/communication failures. The HIGH confidence is justified by 35+ mentions per dimension, but the score should be interpreted cautiously for new customers, as recent reviews (2024-2025) suggest deteriorating service standards and customer satisfaction.

Rush Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism and technical expertise across most reviews, with consistent praise for punctuality, communication, and skilled workmanship. However, pricing emerges as a significant concern, with multiple detailed complaints about markups exceeding 300%, inflated quotes, and charges that appear disconnected from actual work performed. Project completion is generally solid, though several no-show and callback issues are documented. The company shows polarized performance: many long-term customers report excellent value and reliability, while newer or one-time customers frequently report overcharging and dishonest pricing practices. Recent reviews (2025) are predominantly positive, but historical patterns suggest systemic pricing concerns that warrant caution.

• PRICING PATTERN ALERT: Multiple detailed reviews (2014-2016) document excessive markups on parts (300%+), inflated labor quotes, and pricing that appears designed to exploit customer ignorance. At least 8 reviews explicitly cite overcharging or dishonest pricing.
• INTEGRITY CONCERNS: Several reviews allege dishonest practices including falsified paperwork, threats/legal intimidation, signature misuse, and removal of customer property (contractor points sticker). One review alleges theft of antique fixtures from customer's basement.
• NO-SHOW PATTERN: At least 3 reviews document missed appointments with no call or inadequate communication, contradicting claims of responsiveness.
• INCONSISTENT QUALITY: Stark contrast between glowing 5-star reviews and detailed 1-star reviews describing poor diagnosis, unprofessional behavior, and combative interactions with customers.
• RECENCY BIAS: Most recent reviews (2025, 2024) are uniformly 5-star with minimal detail. Older reviews (2010-2016) contain more specific, critical detail. This pattern may suggest fake or incentivized recent reviews, though not conclusive.
• WATER HEATER DIAGNOSTICS: Multiple reviews (2014-2016) describe incorrect or incomplete water heater diagnostics, suggesting either knowledge gaps or intentional upselling.
• OWNER BEHAVIOR: Several reviews describe Robert (owner) as combative, dismissive of customer questions, or unwilling to explain pricing—behavior inconsistent with professional service standards.

This WW Score of 72.8 should be treated with caution: while recent reviews are uniformly positive and suggest improved service, the extensive historical documentation of pricing fraud, dishonest practices, and integrity violations creates significant trust concerns. The company may deliver competent technical work, but customers should obtain multiple bids, verify all pricing in writing, and be extremely cautious about any verbal agreements. The polarized review pattern (glowing vs. detailed critical accounts) suggests this company's reliability depends heavily on customer vigilance and willingness to challenge quotes.

Oscar Deaton Plumbing has a strong base of loyal, long-term customers who consistently praise the company's professionalism, courteous technicians, and responsiveness — including same-day service in multiple cases. However, the review set contains several serious negative accounts involving pricing transparency failures, alleged overquoting, incomplete or ineffective work, and at least one report of poor office staff conduct. Pricing is a notable split dimension: many reviewers call it fair and competitive, while multiple 1-star reviewers describe unexpected bills, inflated quotes, and a lack of upfront estimates. Project completion is similarly mixed, with a handful of reviews describing jobs that were not resolved correctly on the first visit or required a competitor to finish the work. The score reflects genuine quality tempered by recurring and credible complaints that cannot be dismissed.

• Two reviews (2024-08-13 and 2024-07-26) are nearly identical in wording — both describe Chris repairing a Moen kitchen faucet rather than selling a new one, with nearly the same phrasing. These appear to be duplicate or potentially fake reviews from the same person or a planted review. One has been discounted in scoring.
• Three reviews contain no text at all (blank body, ratings only: 2.0, 5.0, 5.0). These were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable data.
• A 1-star reviewer (2019-01-04) explicitly alleges that a previous 1-star review they left was removed from the platform. This is a serious flag regarding review integrity and cannot be verified but warrants caution.
• Several older negative reviews (2013, 2017, 2019) describe a pattern of overquoting, upselling unnecessary work, and billing disputes. While recency weighting reduces their impact, the pattern across multiple independent reviewers adds credibility to the complaints.
• Most reviews with high detail and strong praise are from 2022–2025, which is a positive recency signal. However, the negative reviews are also distributed across multiple years, suggesting the issues are not isolated incidents.
• The 1-star review from 2017 alleges pricing discrepancies and quote changes mid-job totaling nearly $800. Combined with the 2023 no-estimate complaint and the 2019 $8,000 overquote allegation, there is a recurring pattern of pricing transparency concerns that meaningfully suppresses the pricing score.

This WW Score is based on 43 reviews with usable content spanning 2013–2025 and carries HIGH overall confidence due to review volume, but consumers should weigh the recurring and independently corroborated complaints about pricing transparency and inconsistent workmanship quality before hiring.