Find Nearby Plumbers In Kent, Washington

Maple Valley Plumbing demonstrates strong overall performance with a WW Score of 82.1, driven primarily by exceptional professionalism and reliable project completion. The company excels at responsiveness, punctuality, and customer service, with numerous reviews highlighting same-day or next-day service and friendly, courteous interactions. Technical competence and workmanship quality are consistently praised across reviews. However, pricing emerges as a relative weakness, with several customers noting higher-than-expected quotes or feeling overcharged, though most still rate the service favorably. A small but notable cluster of negative reviews (approximately 8 one-star ratings) reveals serious interpersonal issues with the owner Dave in specific situations, including dismissive communication, profanity, and blocking clients—these incidents significantly impact overall trustworthiness despite the predominance of positive feedback.

• CRITICAL: Eight 1-star reviews and three 2-4 star reviews reveal serious behavioral red flags with owner Dave Sipila, including: telling a client to 'move on' after declining a quote, using profanity and insulting language toward clients, hanging up and blocking a property manager, ghosting clients, and dismissive responses to legitimate service requests. These incidents suggest inconsistent customer treatment and potential anger management issues.
• PRICING CONCERNS: Multiple reviews mention unexpectedly high quotes (e.g., $650 for garbage disposal vs. competitor's $450; $250/hr labor rate perceived as excessive). While most customers still rate work favorably, pricing transparency and consistency appear problematic.
• RECENCY BIAS: Approximately 60% of reviews are from the past 12 months (2024-2025), showing recent strong performance. However, negative behavioral incidents span 2018-2024, suggesting ongoing interpersonal issues rather than isolated past problems.
• POTENTIAL FAKE REVIEW PATTERN: The overwhelming concentration of 5-star reviews (approximately 70 of 81 total) with highly similar positive language ('highly recommend,' 'amazing,' 'professional,' 'quick response') and lack of specific technical detail in many reviews raises minor concerns about review authenticity. However, the presence of credible negative reviews and specific project details in positive reviews mitigates this concern.
• INCONSISTENT SERVICE QUALITY: The stark contrast between glowing testimonials and serious complaints suggests service quality and owner behavior are highly variable depending on circumstances and client interaction style.

This WW Score of 82.1 should be treated with MODERATE-TO-HIGH caution: while the company demonstrates genuine technical competence and strong operational responsiveness in most situations, the documented pattern of unprofessional and hostile owner behavior toward specific clients introduces significant reliability risk for customers who may encounter similar interpersonal friction, particularly around pricing disputes or administrative issues. The score reflects average performance across a large dataset, but individual customer experience may vary substantially.

Global Plumbing demonstrates strong overall performance across all dimensions, with particular strength in professionalism and pricing fairness. The company excels at responsive communication, punctuality, and honest dealings with customers. Technical expertise is consistently praised, with multiple reviews highlighting problem-solving ability and quality workmanship. However, project completion shows slightly lower confidence due to a small number of negative reviews citing incomplete work, warranty issues, and follow-up failures. The presence of 4 one-star reviews (approximately 5% of total) indicates occasional service failures that prevent a higher score despite overwhelming positive feedback.

• Four 1-star reviews (2023-05-31, 2021-10-08, 2020-05-02, 2019-09-24, 2014-05-01, 2012-01-13) indicate legitimate service failures: incomplete work requiring rework, unprofessional behavior (cursing at customer), unresponsiveness to phone calls, poor warranty handling, and billing disputes. These are not isolated complaints and suggest systemic issues with consistency.
• Review from 2023-05-31 explicitly states customer paid in full, same problem recurred months later, and company demanded full payment again instead of honoring warranty—this is a significant project completion failure.
• Review from 2021-10-08 documents unprofessional conduct (technician cursing) and poor complaint handling by management (denying incident without investigation).
• Review from 2020-05-02 indicates unresponsiveness—customer called back and company would not answer phone.
• Review from 2019-09-24 describes poor workmanship on repiping job requiring two separate corrections by another plumber, and inspector compliance issues.
• Older reviews (pre-2018) show some billing disputes and reliability issues, though these may reflect historical problems.
• Majority of reviews are 5-star with enthusiastic language, but this is balanced by credible negative reviews with specific details, suggesting genuine mixed performance rather than fake reviews.

This WW Score of 82.1 is reliable and based on substantial data (80 reviews with HIGH confidence across all dimensions), but the score masks meaningful variability: approximately 95% of reviews are 5-star with strong praise, while 5% report serious failures in project completion and professionalism. The company appears to deliver excellent service most of the time but has documented issues with warranty follow-up, consistency, and complaint resolution that warrant caution. Prospective customers should expect high-quality work in most cases but should clarify warranty terms and follow-up procedures in writing before engaging.

King County Sewer Drain & Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism, technical expertise, and project completion across a large sample of reviews. The company excels in responsiveness, punctuality, and workmanship quality, with Mike and his team consistently praised for friendliness and knowledge. However, pricing emerges as a notable weakness, with frequent complaints about unexpected upsells, hidden charges, and costs significantly exceeding initial quotes—particularly on Angie's List deals. While the majority of reviews are positive, the pricing concerns and several instances of poor follow-up or no-shows prevent a higher overall score.

• PRICING PATTERN: Systematic complaints about bait-and-switch pricing on Angie's List deals. Multiple reviews report $99 deals escalating to $300+ with undisclosed additional charges for frost-free faucets, materials, or labor. This pattern suggests either unclear pricing communication or intentional upselling.
• FOLLOW-UP FAILURES: Several reviews (2015-07-09, 2016-02-05, 2015-01-06) report lack of callback or follow-up after initial consultation or quote promise. One reviewer explicitly questioned if reviews were paid.
• NO-SHOW INCIDENTS: At least 3 reviews document complete no-shows without communication (2015-08-22, 2015-02-20, 2015-11-14), indicating reliability gaps despite overall positive reputation.
• RECENCY BIAS: Majority of reviews are from 2014-2015 (older than 9 years). Only 7 reviews from 2024 and 2023. Recent reviews are uniformly 5-star with minimal detail, while older reviews contain more critical nuance. This temporal distribution may inflate current reliability assessment.
• REVIEW QUALITY VARIANCE: Empty review texts with 5-star ratings (approximately 12 reviews with no text) suggest potential review manipulation or incomplete data entry. Combined with uniformly positive older reviews lacking specifics, confidence in overall score should be tempered.
• TECHNICAL COMPETENCY QUESTIONS: Two reviews (2017-02-04, 2017-03-25) mention city code violations requiring rework, suggesting occasional gaps in code knowledge despite general praise for expertise.

This WW Score of 81.2 is based on a large sample (161 reviews) with HIGH confidence across all dimensions, but should be interpreted cautiously: the company excels in professionalism and technical work, yet systematic pricing complaints and several documented no-shows represent genuine service failures. The heavy weighting of older reviews (2014-2015) and presence of empty/generic recent reviews suggest the current service experience may differ from the historical average. Prospective customers should prioritize obtaining detailed written quotes upfront and clarifying all costs before committing, particularly for Angie's List deals.

Precision Plumbing & Heating earns strong marks for professionalism and experience across a large volume of reviews spanning over a decade, with consistent praise for punctuality, communication, courteous technicians, and technical competence on complex systems like tankless water heaters and boilers. However, a meaningful cluster of negative reviews — roughly 12 to 14 out of 125 — raises legitimate concerns across all dimensions. Pricing is the weakest dimension, with multiple reviewers citing unexpected charges, undisclosed trip fees, camera fees, and bills significantly exceeding estimates, pulling the score down considerably from what the majority of positive reviews would otherwise suggest. Project completion also carries a notable penalty due to several credible accounts of incomplete or substandard work, a no-show appointment, a multi-day job that dragged on incorrectly, and at least one instance where the company refused to return to address a warranty issue. The experience dimension is solid overall but is tempered by a handful of reviews describing technicians who lacked knowledge for specific jobs or performed work that failed inspection.

• 7 reviews contain no text at all (only a star rating), including 6 five-star and 1 four-star blank entries — these were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable data.
• 3 reviews are labeled 'unknown' with no text content and were excluded from scoring.
• Two reviews (2024-09-12 and 2024-08-13) appear to be near-identical duplicates: 'We love Precision Plumbing and have been using them for years! Mark, Trish, Brandon, and the whole team are excellent. They are responsive, reliable, and reasonable. Never an upsell, always quality work. Highly recommended!' — possible duplicate submission or fake review; treated as a single data point.
• A significant number of reviews (approximately 40+) are dated prior to 2022, meaning they are more than 3 years old. The business may have changed ownership, staff, or service quality over time. Recent reviews (2024–2025) are more heavily weighted.
• Negative reviews show a recurring pattern of billing disputes, unexpected charges, and poor responsiveness to complaints — this is a consistent theme across multiple independent reviewers spanning different years, lending credibility to these concerns.
• One negative review (2023-09-26) describes a detailed and specific billing and service dispute with Rinnai warranty work, corroborated by a similar complaint (2023-09-25) from a different reviewer in the same time period — this pattern warrants attention.
• Some reviews reference different geographic locations (Carson City, Reno, Sparks) suggesting this aggregated review set may span multiple franchise or affiliated locations, which could affect score reliability for any single location.

This WW Score is based on a large review set (125 reviews) with HIGH mention counts across all four dimensions, making the score statistically robust; however, the presence of credible negative reviews describing billing disputes, incomplete work, and no-shows — combined with possible geographic mixing of locations and a significant portion of reviews older than 3 years — means prospective customers should treat this score as a moderate-confidence indicator and carefully review recent negative feedback before hiring.

Drain Away Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism and technical expertise, with consistently positive feedback on punctuality, friendliness, and skilled workmanship. However, the company shows significant vulnerabilities in project completion and follow-through, with multiple documented instances of missed appointments, failure to return calls, and unresponsiveness to callbacks. Pricing feedback is mixed—many customers praise fair rates, but several report unexpectedly high charges and difficulty obtaining timely quotes. The company's performance is inconsistent across different technicians and time periods, with notably more responsiveness issues in 2015-2016 and earlier years.

• CRITICAL: Multiple reviews (at least 8) document serious responsiveness failures including no-shows without notification, failure to return calls despite multiple attempts, and missed appointment windows. These incidents span 2009-2017, suggesting systemic operational issues.
• RECENCY CONCERN: Most reviews are from 2013-2019. Only 2 reviews from 2025 and 1 from 2024 are present. Recent data is extremely limited, making current performance assessment unreliable.
• INCONSISTENCY PATTERN: Early reviews (2007-2012) show strong performance. Reviews from 2015-2017 show marked deterioration in responsiveness and follow-through. Recent reviews (2023-2025) show improvement but sample size is too small to confirm trend.
• CALLBACK FAILURES: At least 6 reviews explicitly mention failure to return calls or follow up on promised quotes, with some customers waiting weeks without response.
• PRICING TRANSPARENCY: Several customers report being quoted high prices or receiving unexpectedly high bills despite initial fair estimates. One customer reported $244 for 30 minutes of labor (faucet install) and felt overcharged.
• FIRST VISIT ISSUES: One review documents incomplete diagnosis—customer had sewer backup 4-5 days after inspection that inspection failed to detect.
• FAKE REVIEW RISK - MODERATE: Multiple empty reviews with only 5-star ratings and no text (at least 8 instances) suggest possible review padding. However, detailed negative reviews are also present, reducing likelihood of systematic fake review campaign.

This WW Score of 78.2 should be treated with CAUTION due to severe recency bias—only 3 reviews from the past 12 months provide current performance data, while the bulk of the dataset is 5-10+ years old. The company's documented responsiveness failures in 2015-2017 are concerning, but insufficient recent data prevents assessment of whether these issues persist. The score reflects historical performance more than current capability. Prospective customers should request recent references and clarify communication protocols before engaging.

McLendon Home Services demonstrates strong execution on project completion and technical expertise, with most installation work completed on time and to customer satisfaction. Professionalism scores are solid but tempered by recurring complaints about inconsistent customer service, communication gaps between departments, and occasional staff rudeness in the retail environment. Pricing is generally competitive for home services work, though some customers report unexpected add-on charges. The company shows particular strength in skilled trades (plumbing, window installation, HVAC) with named technicians like Jesse, Terry, and Trevor receiving consistent praise for punctuality, knowledge, and craftsmanship.

• MIXED BUSINESS MODEL: Reviews conflate retail hardware store experiences with home services. Retail reviews (2025-2024) show significant customer service issues: long wait times, unresponsive staff, poor phone communication. Home services reviews (2022-2014) are overwhelmingly positive. These are distinct operations with different quality standards.
• RECENCY CONCERN: Most recent reviews (June 2025 onward) are predominantly negative retail complaints. Home services reviews are older (2014-2022), suggesting potential quality decline or review platform shift. Only 3 home services reviews from 2022 or later.
• FAKE REVIEW PATTERN DETECTED: Multiple empty reviews with 5-star ratings on 2024-06-09 and 2025-05-26 (at least 7 instances). These provide no usable data and suggest possible review manipulation.
• COMMUNICATION BREAKDOWN: Multiple reviews cite conflicting information between departments, staff not following up on promises, and poor phone responsiveness. This is a systemic issue, not isolated incidents.
• INCONSISTENT QUALITY: One review (2016-08-17) documents a 4-month project with defective windows installed despite canceling first appointment for defects. Another (2017-06-05) reports poor handrail work requiring contractor to fix.
• RETAIL VS. HOME SERVICES DIVERGENCE: Retail store reviews emphasize unavailable staff, long checkout times, and poor customer service. Home services reviews emphasize professionalism, punctuality, and quality work. These appear to be different operational standards.
• PRICING TRANSPARENCY ISSUES: Multiple reviews mention unexpected charges (expansion tank, paint, sales tax not disclosed upfront, add-on services). Customers report being surprised by final bills despite prior quotes.

This WW Score of 78.2 is reliable for McLendon Home Services specifically, but should NOT be applied to the retail hardware store. The score reflects strong home services performance (installation, plumbing, HVAC) with experienced technicians and good project completion rates, offset by documented professionalism gaps in customer communication and occasional quality control issues. Recent retail reviews suggest the hardware store operation has deteriorated significantly and operates under different standards. Recommend treating home services and retail as separate entities for evaluation purposes.