Find Nearby Plumbers In Pasadena, Texas

Britton Waterworks has a large and generally positive review base, with many customers praising responsive scheduling, courteous technicians, clean work areas, and solid technical outcomes across a wide range of plumbing jobs. However, a meaningful cluster of detailed 1-star reviews — spanning multiple years — describes a recurring pattern of owner/supervisor rudeness and belligerence during disputes, pricing surprises or bait-and-switch concerns, non-refundable deposits used as leverage, and in several cases work left incomplete or problems made worse. Professionalism scores are pulled down significantly by multiple credible accounts of the owner (David) arguing with, talking over, or insulting customers when complaints arose. Pricing scores reflect a split picture: many customers found prices fair and transparent, while others reported unexpected charges, deposit disputes, and a 4% surcharge for non-Venmo payment. Project completion is moderately strong but is tempered by a few notable cases of misdiagnosis, incomplete work, and one instance of an abandoned job mid-project. Experience scores are generally positive, with most technicians described as skilled and knowledgeable, though a handful of reviews cite misdiagnosis or incorrect assessments.

• Several reviews from 2018–2025 describe a consistent pattern of the owner (David) becoming argumentative, belligerent, or dismissive when customers raised complaints — this is a systemic professionalism concern, not isolated incidents.
• Multiple reviews flag non-refundable deposit practices and pricing surprises (e.g., charges higher than quoted, 4% surcharge for non-Venmo payment, labor-only deposits before work begins) — these represent a recurring pricing transparency issue.
• Two reviews appear to be near-identical duplicates (2018-07-05 and 2018-04-04 pairs, and the 2018-03-27/2018-03-28 pair) — possible duplicate submissions rather than fake reviews, but noted for integrity.
• One review (2020-11-22) is from a self-identified employee of Britton Waterworks — this review was excluded from scoring as it represents a conflict of interest.
• Four reviews contain no text (only a star rating) and were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable data.
• The review dated 2025-05-26 with a 1-star rating references a service from 6/22/2022 — the reviewer explicitly notes this in response to what appears to be a company challenge of its authenticity. This review was treated as credible.
• Recency note: The majority of positive reviews are concentrated in 2024–2025, while many of the most detailed negative reviews are from 2018–2021. This may reflect genuine improvement over time, but the negative patterns (owner disputes, deposit issues) still appear in reviews as recent as 2025.
• No strong evidence of coordinated fake reviews detected, though the volume of brief, generic 5-star reviews (e.g., 'Great job!', 'They did a great job') with no specifics is noted — these were scored conservatively.

This WW Score is based on a large review set (109 reviews) spanning approximately 10 years, giving it HIGH statistical confidence in direction, but consumers should weigh the recurring owner-conduct complaints and deposit/pricing concerns heavily, as these represent a documented and multi-year pattern rather than outlier incidents.

Modern Plumbing has a large and long-standing review base that generally reflects a capable and responsive company, with many customers praising professionalism, fair pricing, and quality workmanship across plumbing, gas, and HVAC services. However, a meaningful cluster of negative reviews — spanning multiple years and covering billing disputes, incomplete or botched work, poor communication, rude office staff, and at least one case where a company error caused significant property damage — prevents any dimension from scoring in the high range. Pricing received mixed signals: many reviewers praised fair rates, but others described being charged for no work done, double-billed for return visits, or given wildly inflated estimates. Project completion is similarly mixed, with strong examples of efficient same-day service alongside cases of abandoned work, unresolved callbacks, and a year-long unresolved water heater installation. Professionalism scores were dragged down by recurring complaints about rude office staff, a no-show technician, and poor internal communication.

• 18 reviews contain no text — only a star rating. These were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable evidence.
• Several reviews appear to be duplicates or near-duplicates: the 1-star review dated 2019-06-11 and 2019-04-29 are word-for-word identical, suggesting either a duplicate submission or a copied review. This was counted only once for scoring purposes.
• A significant number of 5-star reviews are very brief and generic (e.g., 'My go-to for plumbing needs.', 'Great place!', 'Very well.', 'Good work, easy to work with.') with no specific detail. While not conclusive of fake reviews, this pattern warrants caution and reduces confidence in the upper end of scores.
• Review date range spans from 2005 to 2025 — approximately 20 years. Reviews older than 3 years were given reduced weight. The majority of detailed, substantive reviews are from 2018 onward.
• Negative reviews are spread across multiple years and cover distinct, specific incidents (billing disputes, property damage, rude staff, incomplete work), suggesting these are genuine complaints rather than coordinated attacks.
• One review (2024-06-09, 3-star) describes a company-admitted error that caused a home flood, with the company only partially compensating the customer and not covering their $2,200 insurance deductible. This is a significant project completion and professionalism concern.
• The company appears to operate across plumbing, HVAC, and gas services. Some reviews reference AC repair and generator installation. Scores reflect the full scope of services reviewed.

This WW Score is based on a large and diverse review set spanning 20 years, giving it HIGH statistical confidence in direction, but the score should be interpreted as reflecting a company with genuinely inconsistent service quality rather than a uniformly strong or weak performer — the 72 score reflects real variance, not a data gap.

Absolute Plumbing receives overwhelmingly positive feedback on professionalism, with dozens of reviewers praising technicians for communication, punctuality, friendliness, and explaining work before proceeding. However, several serious negative reviews significantly drag down all dimensions: two detailed 1-star reviews allege predatory sales tactics, scare tactics targeting vulnerable customers, grossly inflated pricing (one citing $13,000 for work estimated far lower), incomplete work, and aggressive pressure to sign loan documents. Pricing is the weakest dimension, with multiple reviewers citing charges of $250–$2,000 for simple repairs, one financing partner flagged for near-50% effective interest, and one reviewer resolving a leak themselves for $4 after being charged $150 with no fix. Project completion is also materially impacted by reviews describing work left incomplete, a toilet repair that failed twice, a leak that was never corrected, and a no-show appointment with no communication. Experience scores moderately well overall due to many positive mentions of knowledgeable technicians, but is tempered by instances of misdiagnosis and poor workmanship on simpler jobs.

• FAKE REVIEW CONCERN: A large cluster of reviews from 2025-06-02 through 2025-06-06 are suspiciously concentrated in a very short window, many featuring nearly identical structure (technician name + brief praise), minimal detail, and all rated 5 stars. This pattern is consistent with solicited or incentivized reviews and should be treated with reduced confidence.
• DUPLICATE REVIEW DETECTED: The 1-star review alleging scam tactics and $13,000 fraud appears to be posted twice with identical text — once dated 2024-12-11 and once dated 2024-10-24. This has been counted as a single unique reviewer complaint to avoid double-weighting.
• SERIOUS MISCONDUCT ALLEGATIONS: At least two distinct reviewers (not the duplicate) allege predatory sales behavior, scare tactics targeting vulnerable customers, aggressive loan pressure, incomplete work, and refusal to take ownership of complaints. These are substantive and specific claims that materially affect trustworthiness.
• RECENCY NOTE: The majority of detailed negative reviews fall within the past 12 months (2024), while many positive reviews are either very recent short-form entries (June 2025 cluster) or older than 2 years. The most credible and detailed recent reviews present a mixed picture.
• FINANCING WARNING: One reviewer explicitly flagged the company's financing partner (Service Finance) as charging an effective interest rate far exceeding the advertised 9.99%, which reflects on the company's financial transparency even if the partner is third-party.
• NO-SHOW INCIDENT: One reviewer reported a scheduled appointment where no technician arrived and no call was made to cancel or reschedule, indicating a breakdown in reliability and communication.

This WW Score carries HIGH data confidence due to review volume, but the score itself should be interpreted cautiously given credible, detailed allegations of predatory pricing, incomplete work, and aggressive sales tactics that suggest meaningful operational risk for prospective customers.

Furuta Plumbing and Protech Plumbing (reviews appear to be commingled for what may be related or co-branded entities) show a strong base of positive feedback around responsiveness, professionalism, and technical skill, with many reviewers praising fast scheduling, courteous technicians, and quality workmanship. However, a meaningful cluster of negative reviews — including allegations of price gouging, inflated labor hours, a failed leak inspection that was charged despite not resolving the issue, and a refusal to take responsibility for pipe damage caused during service — significantly tempers the overall score. Pricing is the weakest dimension, with multiple reviewers explicitly calling out excessive charges, rates described as three times competitors, and one detailed account of a disputed $1,200 bill for a minor installation. Project completion also carries notable risk, as at least two reviews describe jobs that were left incomplete or caused downstream damage without accountability.

• MIXED ENTITY CONCERN: Reviews appear to cover at least two distinct businesses — Furuta Plumbing and Protech Plumbing. These may be related companies or a data aggregation error, but scoring them together reduces reliability. Scores should be interpreted with caution until reviews are separated by entity.
• RECENCY NOTE: Several positive reviews date back to 2009, 2015, 2016, 2021, and 2022. While recent reviews (2024–2025) are present, a significant portion of the positive review base is older than 12 months and some are many years old. More weight was given to 2024–2025 reviews.
• POTENTIAL FAKE OR LOW-EFFORT REVIEWS: Multiple reviews contain no substantive detail — 'Stand up guys.', blank text with a 5-star rating, 'unknown', 'Excellent service and quick. Recommended', and 'Fast. Professional. Reliable.' These provide no verifiable evidence and were excluded from dimension scoring.
• NEGATIVE PATTERN — PRICING: At least 4 separate reviews explicitly cite overcharging, inflated hours, or rates significantly above competitors. One reviewer described a disputed bill of $1,200 for a minor water purifier line connection, ultimately settled at $989 after dispute. Another cited $700 for a 2-hour shower faucet replacement. Another stated costs were three times other companies.
• NEGATIVE PATTERN — ACCOUNTABILITY: One review describes Furuta causing pipe damage that led to thousands of dollars in restoration costs across multiple apartment units, with the company refusing to guarantee their work or accept responsibility. A separate review describes a failed leak inspection that was charged despite not identifying the actual leak, with the company later screening the customer's calls.
• UNPROFESSIONAL CONDUCT FLAG: One review describes a Furuta company vehicle driver cutting off a family on the freeway and mocking them — a reputational concern for professionalism beyond the job site.
• RESPONSIVENESS FAILURES: Multiple reviews cite being ignored, not called back, or having calls screened — including one reviewer who confirmed call screening by calling from a different number and receiving an immediate answer.

This WW Score carries moderate-to-high statistical reliability due to the volume of reviews, but its trustworthiness is meaningfully reduced by the commingling of two business entities, a pattern of credible and detailed negative reviews across pricing and project completion, and a non-trivial number of low-effort reviews that could not be scored.

PJ Plumbing receives consistently positive feedback across all four dimensions, with professionalism being the most frequently and specifically praised attribute — reviewers highlight prompt responses, polite communication, and accessible service. Pricing is explicitly called out as reasonable or fair in multiple reviews, lending solid confidence to that dimension. Project completion is supported by detailed accounts of jobs being seen through to inspection and sign-off, including handling unexpected complications mid-job. Experience is well-evidenced, particularly in the detailed sewer lateral replacement review and the PSL review, where technical knowledge and problem-solving are specifically noted. The overall score is tempered slightly by the small total review count and the presence of a few generic, low-detail reviews.

• Two reviews ('Great plumbers, honest and fast. Highly recommended!' and the Mr Fix It Right Plumbing owner review) are notably generic with no specific job details, which is a mild flag for authenticity or usefulness.
• One reviewer identifies themselves as a competing plumbing company owner referring overflow work — this is an unusual reviewer profile and may reflect a business relationship rather than a standard customer experience.
• Several reviews are older than 12 months (2019–2022), with only 2 reviews from the past 12 months (2023–2024). Recency weighting reduces confidence in the overall picture of current performance.
• All 8 reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative or mixed feedback, which warrants mild caution, though most reviews do include specific details that reduce the likelihood of coordinated fake reviews.

This WW Score carries moderate-to-high reliability for the dimensions scored, supported by several detailed and specific reviews, but the small total review pool, age of many reviews, and universal 5-star ratings mean the score should be treated as a promising but not fully validated indicator of current contractor quality.

Emet's Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism across multiple reviews, with consistent praise for punctuality, communication, politeness, and responsiveness (7 mentions). Pricing is generally perceived as fair and transparent, though one 2016 review raised concerns about unnecessary upselling on a water heater replacement (5 mentions). Project completion is solid with most jobs finished correctly and on time, though one callback was required in 2018 (6 mentions). Technical skill and workmanship are well-documented across multiple service types (5 mentions). The company shows particular strength in emergency response and customer education. However, the 2016 one-star review alleging diagnostic dishonesty creates a material concern that moderates overall confidence.

• One significant negative review from 2016 alleging misdiagnosis and unnecessary upselling on water heater replacement—claims company tried to replace entire unit when only control needed repair. This contradicts the overwhelmingly positive pattern and suggests either a genuine service failure or a dissatisfied customer. Recommend treating with caution.
• Seven of eight reviews are 5-star ratings with generic praise language ('best plumbing company out there,' 'HIGHLY RECOMMEND,' 'thorough and professional job'). While not definitively fake, the uniformity and lack of specific technical detail in most reviews is notable. However, the 2024 reviews contain more specific details (water supply line rerouting, drainage system education, same-day water heater replacement) which adds credibility.
• Review date range spans 2016–2024 (8 years). Most recent reviews (2024, 2023) are positive and detailed. The single negative review is from 2016, suggesting possible service improvement over time or a one-off incident.

This score should be treated with moderate caution. While 7 of 8 reviews are strongly positive and recent reviews contain specific details suggesting authenticity, the 2016 allegation of diagnostic dishonesty and the uniformly high ratings across older reviews create some uncertainty. The WW Score of 82.3 is conservative and reflects this mixed signal; the company appears genuinely strong in professionalism and responsiveness, but the pricing concern and historical complaint warrant verification before high-stakes decisions.