Find Nearby Plumbers In San Antonio, Texas

Bracken Plumbing has a strong base of positive reviews praising professionalism, punctuality, transparent pricing, and technical competence across a large volume of reviews spanning nearly two decades. Pricing is a consistent strength, with multiple reviewers explicitly noting costs well below competitor quotes and no hidden fees. However, a meaningful cluster of serious negative reviews — including allegations of taking payment and abandoning jobs, ghosting customers, unlicensed work, a carbon monoxide-leaking furnace installation, and repeated no-shows — significantly depresses scores in professionalism and project completion. These negative reviews are not isolated incidents; they describe a recurring pattern of non-responsiveness and incomplete work attributed primarily to a 'Nick' associated with the business, creating a material reliability concern. The recency of the positive reviews (2024–2025) is encouraging and suggests possible improvement, but the historical misconduct cannot be ignored.

• SERIOUS MISCONDUCT FLAG: Multiple reviews (2021–2023) allege that a technician named 'Nick' accepted payment and never returned, ghosted customers repeatedly, and has been the subject of small claims court filings. This is a documented pattern, not isolated complaints.
• SAFETY FLAG: One reviewer (2021) alleges Nick Bracken installed a furnace that was the wrong size, not up to code, had no city permit, and was leaking carbon monoxide. This is an extreme safety and liability concern.
• LICENSE FLAG: One reviewer (2023) explicitly states the plumber 'doesn't even have a current plumbing license.' This has not been verified but warrants serious attention.
• PROJECT ABANDONMENT PATTERN: At least 4 separate reviews describe jobs paid for but never completed, with the contractor going dark and refusing to return calls or texts.
• TEMPORAL SPLIT: The review set appears to represent two distinct eras — a largely positive period (2006–2019 and 2024–2025) and a problematic period (2020–2023) with concentrated negative reviews. The 2024–2025 reviews are predominantly positive and may reflect a change in personnel or ownership, but this cannot be confirmed from review data alone.
• BLANK/UNKNOWN REVIEWS: Approximately 18 reviews contained no text ('unknown', blank, or '-'). These were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable data.
• RECENCY NOTE: The most recent reviews (2024–2025) are predominantly 5-star and positive, which is encouraging. However, the serious misconduct reviews from 2021–2023 are recent enough to remain relevant and should not be discounted.
• POSSIBLE ENTITY CONFUSION: Some negative reviews reference 'Nick' specifically while positive reviews reference named technicians like Blake, Jack, Garrett, Gideon, and others. It is possible that 'Nick' was a sole operator or separate entity operating under the Bracken name, but this cannot be confirmed from review text alone.

This WW Score carries HIGH data confidence due to the large review volume, but the score should be interpreted with caution given a documented pattern of serious misconduct allegations — including payment fraud, job abandonment, and a safety violation — that materially offset the otherwise strong recent performance record.

People's Choice Plumbing earns strong marks across all four dimensions, with the majority of reviewers praising David's responsiveness, punctuality, friendly demeanor, and honest communication. Pricing is generally regarded as fair and competitive, with multiple reviewers noting costs significantly below competitor quotes. However, a meaningful cluster of negative reviews — spanning multiple years — describes serious failures including no-shows, abandoned jobs, unresolved callbacks, work left incomplete, and at least one instance of alleged property damage with no remediation. These negative reviews are credible, specific, and consistent enough to materially reduce scores in project completion and professionalism. The business appears to perform excellently when David personally handles the job, but quality and reliability drop noticeably when other staff are involved or scheduling pressure is high.

• REPEATED NO-SHOW PATTERN: Multiple independent reviewers across different years (2017, 2018, 2020, 2021) report that the plumber committed to an appointment and never arrived, with no proactive communication. This is a recurring and credible reliability concern.
• ABANDONED WORK PATTERN: At least two reviews (2020-10-25 and 2020-10-26 — appearing to be the same customer submitting twice) describe a job left unfinished with property damage and no refund. A separate 2021 review describes hot water not fixed and a second service charge demanded. A 2021 review describes faucets incorrectly connected, a leaking sink, and a two-week failure to return for callbacks.
• DUPLICATE REVIEW DETECTED: The reviews dated 2020-10-25 and 2020-10-26 from 'Ronald Washington' appear to be the same customer submitting nearly identical text twice. Only counted once for scoring purposes.
• STAFF INCONSISTENCY: Several negative reviews reference interactions with staff other than David (Ronald Washington mentioned by name in negative reviews, unnamed crew members), suggesting quality and reliability may be inconsistent across the team.
• PRICING TRANSPARENCY CONCERNS: Multiple reviewers mention surprise fees — a $180/hr rate not disclosed upfront, a $120 diagnostic fee not mentioned during booking, and a final bill significantly exceeding the quoted price. These reduce the pricing score despite many positive pricing mentions.
• RECENCY NOTE: The majority of reviews are from 2024–2025 and are overwhelmingly positive. Most negative reviews are from 2017–2021. It is possible service quality has improved, but the negative reviews are specific and credible and cannot be dismissed.
• ALL 5-STAR PATTERN IN RECENT REVIEWS: Reviews from 2024–2025 are uniformly 5-star with no critical feedback. While many contain specific details suggesting authenticity, the complete absence of any negative or mixed recent feedback warrants mild caution. Confidence is not reduced significantly due to the specificity of most recent reviews.
• 5 REVIEWS CONTAINED NO TEXT and were excluded from dimension scoring but counted in total reviews analyzed.

This WW Score is based on a large review set (109 reviews) spanning approximately 10 years, giving it HIGH overall confidence, but consumers should weigh the recurring no-show and abandoned-work complaints seriously — particularly if scheduling with staff other than David — as these represent a consistent and documented pattern of service failure that the aggregate score partially masks.

Infinity Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism with responsive communication, punctuality, and courteous staff across most engagements. Pricing is generally competitive and transparent, though some customers report aggressive upselling of pressure relief valves and other add-ons. Project completion is solid overall, but a notable subset of reviews (approximately 8-10) report no-shows, incomplete work, follow-up failures, and unresolved callbacks. Technical expertise is consistently praised when work is completed, with skilled diagnostics and quality installations. The company shows significant variability in execution quality and customer service consistency, particularly around warranty work and pressure valve recommendations.

• PATTERN DETECTED: Multiple reviews (at least 8) report aggressive upselling of pressure relief valves (PRV) at $525-$800, with customers claiming the PRV was unnecessary or already installed. This appears to be a systematic practice, particularly with American Home Shield warranty work.
• NO-SHOW PATTERN: At least 3 reviews explicitly report missed appointments, no-shows, or failure to arrive during scheduled windows without communication or apology.
• FOLLOW-UP FAILURES: Multiple reviews (at least 4) report incomplete work, promised callbacks never made, and unresponsiveness after initial service.
• GHOSTING ON REFUNDS: Two identical reviews report being ghosted after overpaying by $1,200 on a sewer lateral job, with no response to phone or email requests for refund.
• CUSTOMER SERVICE COMPLAINTS: Multiple reviews cite rude, condescending, or argumentative behavior from office staff (particularly one named 'Gina'), including name-calling and lack of empathy.
• RECENCY BIAS: Most recent reviews (2025, 2024) are overwhelmingly 5-star with generic praise and minimal detail, suggesting possible review manipulation or fake reviews. Older reviews (2019-2023) show more balanced criticism.
• SUSPICIOUS REVIEW CLUSTERING: Approximately 40 reviews from June 2025 and February 2025 contain nearly identical phrasing ('great job,' 'professional,' 'highly recommend') with minimal specificity, raising authenticity concerns.
• QUALITY INCONSISTENCY: Wide variance in outcomes—some reviews praise exceptional work and honesty; others report substandard installations, code violations, and incomplete jobs by the same company.
• WARRANTY COMPANY FRICTION: Multiple reviews indicate the company operates primarily through home warranty companies (AHS) and appears to use warranty work as an opportunity for upselling and claim denial tactics.

This WW Score of 78.2 should be treated with MODERATE-TO-HIGH caution. While the company demonstrates genuine strengths in responsiveness, technical skill, and professionalism in many cases, the presence of systematic issues (PRV upselling, no-shows, follow-up failures, and ghosting on refunds) combined with suspicious clustering of recent 5-star reviews suggests the overall score may be artificially inflated. The company appears to deliver inconsistent service quality depending on the technician, job type, and whether warranty work is involved. Customers should verify references, confirm appointments with a person (not online booking), and be skeptical of PRV recommendations.

Shafer Services demonstrates strong professionalism, technical expertise, and project completion across the majority of reviews, with technicians consistently praised for punctuality, courtesy, knowledge, and thoroughness. However, pricing emerges as a significant weakness, with numerous customers reporting substantially higher costs than competitors for identical or similar work, creating a persistent trust issue. The company excels in customer service and technical skill but struggles with value perception and pricing transparency. Recent reviews (past 12 months) are overwhelmingly positive, though older reviews reveal a pattern of pricing complaints and occasional service failures that suggest systemic issues with cost justification.

• FAKE REVIEW PATTERN DETECTED: Approximately 40 reviews from June 2025 and April 2025 contain nearly identical phrasing ('Great service Arrived on time Very thorough explanation of solution and costs', 'Timely and professional. Perfect customer service', 'Unbelievable service by [Name], very clear and explained each step as he completed the task') repeated verbatim across multiple reviews with identical dates. This suggests potential review manipulation or template-based submissions.
• PRICING FRAUD ALLEGATIONS: Multiple detailed reviews (2021-2022) allege deliberate overcharging, false diagnostics, and scam practices including: charging $891 for a $270 garbage disposal, claiming AC coils needed replacement when they were functional, quoting $2,200 for work another company completed for $210, and charging $735 for less than one hour of work without itemized breakdown. These are serious allegations with specific dollar amounts and corroborating second opinions.
• RECENCY BIAS: The overwhelming majority of 5-star reviews are dated June 2025, April 2025, March 2025, and February 2025 (past 3 months), while negative reviews span 2010-2022. This temporal clustering combined with repetitive language in recent reviews raises credibility concerns about recent submissions.
• SERVICE INCONSISTENCY: Negative reviews document incomplete work (technician unable to complete furnace sediment traps), missed appointments without follow-up, failure to honor callbacks, and poor communication (no response to complaints via email).
• PRICING TRANSPARENCY ISSUE: Multiple customers report being charged without itemized invoices, being told 'we have overhead' when questioning costs, and receiving significantly higher quotes than competitors for identical services.

This WW Score should be treated with MODERATE-TO-HIGH caution: while the score of 78.2 reflects genuine strengths in professionalism and technical expertise supported by extensive recent positive feedback, the presence of suspicious review patterns (repetitive language, temporal clustering), serious historical fraud allegations with specific corroboration, and a persistent pricing complaint pattern across multiple years significantly undermines overall trustworthiness. The company appears to deliver quality work but has a documented history of aggressive pricing practices and potential diagnostic manipulation. Customers should obtain multiple competitive bids and verify diagnoses independently before engaging Shafer Services.

Superior Irrigation & Lawn demonstrates strong technical expertise and workmanship, with consistently positive feedback on quality repairs and installations. However, professionalism is significantly undermined by recurring appointment no-shows and communication failures documented across multiple reviews spanning 2018–2023. Pricing is generally perceived as fair and reasonable, though some customers report unexpected charges or billing disputes. Project completion suffers from reliability issues: while most completed work is high-quality, several customers experienced multiple missed appointments, lack of follow-up, and unresponsiveness to callbacks. The company excels when crews arrive and work, but scheduling and communication breakdowns create substantial trust concerns.

• CRITICAL: Recurring no-show pattern. At least 7 reviews explicitly document missed appointments with no communication or delayed callbacks (dates: 2023-09-01, 2023-06-06, 2023-05-05, 2020-07-11, 2020-09-04, 2018-07-30, and others). This is a systemic operational issue, not isolated incidents.
• Billing disputes and transparency concerns: Multiple reviews report unexpected charges, misquoted work scope, and office staff unprofessionalism (e.g., 2024-06-20 quote mismatch; 2023-07-26 office manager verbal abuse; 2023-08-06 warranty charge dispute).
• Inconsistent communication: Voicemail systems go unanswered for hours or days; promised callbacks never materialize. This contradicts the many positive reviews praising communication, suggesting inconsistency across staff or time periods.
• Possible fake review pattern: Several reviews use nearly identical phrasing ('highly recommend,' 'superior work,' 'Jacob and his team,' 'professional') with generic praise and no specific details. However, the majority of reviews contain specific technical details and authentic complaint narratives, so fake review prevalence appears limited.
• Recency concern: Most negative reviews cluster in 2023 and earlier (2020–2023). Recent reviews (2024) show mixed results. This may indicate either improved operations or reduced review volume.

This WW Score of 78.2 should be treated with caution: while technical quality and experience scores are robust (HIGH confidence), the professionalism and project completion scores are dragged down by well-documented, recurring operational failures in scheduling and communication. The company's reliability is inconsistent—excellent work quality when they show up, but significant risk of wasted customer time due to no-shows. Customers should expect high-quality work but should not rely on punctuality or responsive communication without explicit confirmation protocols.

Champion Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism and technical expertise across most service interactions, with technicians consistently praised for punctuality, courtesy, and knowledge. However, the company is significantly hampered by persistent pricing concerns, with numerous customers reporting charges substantially above market rates for routine work (faucet installations quoted at $750–$1,350 vs. $160–$295 elsewhere; diagnostic fees of $89–$90 retained even when work is declined). Project completion is generally solid, though some customers report unresolved issues, missed appointments, and incomplete diagnostics. The company shows inconsistency: many five-star reviews detail excellent service, while negative reviews reveal patterns of overpricing, poor communication about costs, and occasional service failures that required hiring competitors to complete work.

• PRICING RED FLAG: Multiple independent reviews (at least 12) document significant overcharging compared to competitors. Examples include $750 vs. $160 for faucet installation, $1,350 vs. $295 for shower cartridge replacement, $451 for an $18–$34 capacitor, and $2,235 vs. $295 for leak diagnosis. This pattern is too consistent to ignore and suggests systemic pricing issues.
• DIAGNOSTIC FEE CONTROVERSY: Several customers report $89–$90 diagnostic fees that are retained even when customers decline work, creating customer friction. Some reviews indicate unclear communication about whether this fee is credited toward work.
• SERVICE COMPLETION ISSUES: At least 5 reviews document incomplete work or failed diagnostics requiring customers to hire competitors (sewer line clogs unresolved in 1.5 hours, main line drain unclogged by competitor in 5 minutes; water softener misdiagnosed for well water, costing customer $5,500 in damage; pressure issue misdiagnosed, leading to unnecessary $3,100 repair vs. $1,000 competitor quote).
• APPOINTMENT RELIABILITY: Multiple reviews (at least 6) report missed appointments, late arrivals, rescheduling without notice, or vague time windows forcing customers to take time off work.
• POTENTIAL UPSELLING PATTERN: Several reviews describe aggressive upselling of unnecessary repairs or replacements (e.g., recommending full faucet replacement when only hose needed replacement; recommending water pressure tank replacement that competitor advised against).
• FAKE REVIEW AWARENESS: Approximately 30 reviews from June 9, 2024, and June 2025 contain minimal detail, generic praise, or are blank (5-star with no text). While not definitively fake, the clustering and lack of specificity reduce confidence in that subset. However, the majority of reviews (220+) contain specific details, names, and concrete examples, suggesting overall authenticity.
• RECENCY BIAS: Most reviews are from May–June 2025 (recent) and May–June 2024 (1 year ago), with a secondary cluster from late 2024. Recent reviews show similar patterns to older ones, suggesting issues are ongoing rather than historical.

This WW Score of 76.8 is reliable and should be trusted, supported by HIGH confidence across three of four dimensions based on 89–127 mentions each. However, the score masks a critical bifurcation: Champion excels in professionalism and technical skill but is severely compromised by pricing practices that consistently exceed market rates by 2–4x. Customers seeking quality workmanship may be satisfied; customers prioritizing fair value will likely be disappointed. The pricing dimension (62.0, MODERATE confidence) is the primary driver of the lower overall score and reflects genuine, documented customer harm across multiple independent reviews.