Find Nearby Plumbers In Kenosha, Wisconsin

Only one review was provided, which is insufficient to calculate a reliable WW Score. The single review praises the contractor's technical ability (correctly diagnosed and fixed a plumbing problem that others missed), respectfulness, and professionalism. However, pricing is not mentioned, and all scores are based on extremely limited data from a single 2017 review with no recent validation.

• INSUFFICIENT DATA: Only 1 review provided. Minimum 3 reviews required for reliable scoring.
• RECENCY CONCERN: Review is from November 2017 (7+ years old). No recent performance data available.
• GENERIC PRAISE: Review contains enthusiastic language but lacks specific technical details about the work performed.
• NO PRICING DATA: Cannot assess price-friendliness dimension.

This score cannot be calculated reliably with only one review. At minimum, 3 recent reviews are needed to produce a trustworthy WW Score.

This single review describes an extremely serious failure: the contractor accepted a job and payment through Angi, never contacted the customer, never showed up, and then fraudulently marked the job as complete. Professionalism is scored near zero due to complete absence of communication and no-show behavior. Project completion is scored at zero because the work was never performed despite payment being collected. Pricing and experience cannot be assessed as neither was mentioned in the review.

• CRITICAL: Contractor allegedly accepted payment and marked job complete without performing any work — this constitutes potential fraud.
• Only 1 review available — WW Score cannot be calculated reliably per minimum threshold of 3 reviews.
• No positive reviews present to balance assessment; entire dataset is a single 1-star complaint.
• Pattern of fraudulent job completion reporting on platform (Angi) is a serious red flag for consumer safety.

This score is based on a single review and should be treated with extreme caution as a data point, though the nature of the complaint — payment taken with no work performed — is a severe and specific allegation that warrants serious concern.

Insufficient Data — cannot calculate WW Score reliably. Only 1 review was analyzed. This single review explicitly mentions professionalism (immediate response, punctuality, politeness, neatness), project completion (job finished quickly and completely), and experience (fixed multiple issues successfully). However, pricing is not addressed. A minimum of 3 reviews is required to produce a statistically meaningful WW Score.

• Only 1 review available — insufficient sample size for reliable scoring
• Review is from August 2021 — over 3 years old; recency is a concern
• No pricing information mentioned in the single review
• Cannot assess consistency or detect patterns with only one data point

This analysis cannot be trusted as a reliable indicator of contractor performance; a minimum of 3 reviews is required, and ideally reviews should be from the past 12 months.

Only one review was available for analysis, which is insufficient to calculate a reliable WW Score. The single review is positive and mentions all four dimensions: the owner Kyle Fortner is described as friendly and skilled (professionalism and experience), pricing is noted as reasonable (pricing), and two specific jobs were completed successfully (project completion). However, a single data point cannot establish reliable patterns or confidence in scoring.

• Insufficient review volume: only 1 review analyzed. Minimum 3 reviews required for reliable WW Score calculation.
• Review is from August 2023 (over 1 year old). Recency data is limited.
• Single positive review with generic praise language; cannot assess for fake review patterns without comparative data.

This analysis cannot produce a trustworthy WW Score with only one review. A minimum of 3 reviews is required to establish meaningful patterns and confidence levels.

Insufficient Data — cannot calculate WW Score reliably. Only 1 review was analyzed. While this single review is highly positive and mentions professionalism (punctuality, communication, respectfulness, cleanup), project completion (multiple tasks finished in one afternoon with warranty), and experience (quality workmanship), a single data point cannot support a reliable WW Score. Pricing was not mentioned in this review. A minimum of 3 reviews is required to produce a trustworthy composite score.

• Only 1 review available — below minimum threshold of 3 reviews required for reliable scoring
• All dimensions based on single mention carry LIMITED confidence
• No pricing data available to assess Price Friendly dimension
• Cannot assess recency patterns or detect fake reviews with single review

This analysis cannot be trusted as a reliable WW Score due to insufficient review volume; at least 3 reviews are needed to calculate a meaningful composite score.

Insufficient data to calculate a reliable WW Score. Only one review was provided, which falls below the minimum threshold of 3 reviews required for meaningful analysis. The single review is highly positive across professionalism, pricing, and experience dimensions, but lacks specific evidence of project completion or follow-through. The review also reads as potentially promotional in tone with generic praise language.

• INSUFFICIENT REVIEWS: Only 1 review provided; minimum 3 required for reliable WW Score calculation.
• POTENTIAL PROMOTIONAL BIAS: Review contains generic praise language ('can't recommend them highly enough', 'impeccably professional', 'true pleasure to work with') with limited specific examples or details.
• RECENCY CONCERN: Review is from July 2022, over 2 years old; no recent customer feedback available.
• NO PROJECT COMPLETION DATA: Review does not explicitly mention job completion, timeliness, or follow-through on callbacks.
• COMPANY AGE: Reviewer notes company is 'new' and 'still expanding,' which may affect reliability assessment.

This score cannot be calculated reliably due to insufficient review volume (n=1). Any scoring would be speculative and should not be used for decision-making. At least 3-5 recent, independent reviews are needed to establish trustworthy dimensions.