Find Nearby Plumbers In La Crosse, Wisconsin

AAA Drain Cleaning earns a strong WW Score driven by consistently high marks across all four dimensions, with professionalism and experience being the most frequently praised attributes across dozens of reviews spanning nearly a decade. Technicians — primarily Steve, Rick, and Austin — are repeatedly described as punctual, communicative, courteous, and technically skilled, with multiple reviewers noting they were walked through the diagnostic process in real time. Pricing is frequently called reasonable or fair, with several reviewers specifically noting flat fees, no holiday surcharges, and no upselling, though the score is tempered slightly by two negative reviews. Project completion is very strong overall, with the vast majority of jobs described as fully resolved in a single visit, often same-day; however, two negative reviews — one describing a no-show with no callback, and one describing a technician who walked off the job demanding prepayment — prevent a higher score in this dimension. The negative reviews are credible and specific enough to warrant meaningful score reductions rather than dismissal.

• Two credible 1-star reviews exist: one from 2016 describing a no-show and no returned calls (unprofessional behavior), and one from 2020 (with a follow-up in 2021) describing a technician who refused to begin work without upfront payment and walked off the job. The owner's public response disputing the 2020 review was itself rebutted by the reviewer in 2021, adding credibility to the complaint.
• The 2020 and 2021 negative reviews appear to describe the same incident from two perspectives (original post and follow-up clarification). They have been counted as one incident but two review entries, both factored into scoring.
• A large portion of reviews (roughly 25 of 46) are dated prior to 2022, meaning they are more than 3 years old. While the pattern of quality appears consistent through 2024, older reviews carry reduced recency weight.
• No strong fake review patterns detected. Reviews vary in length, detail, specificity, and writing style. Named technicians (Steve, Rick, Austin) appear across different time periods, lending authenticity. No artificial inflation flags raised.

This WW Score is based on 46 reviews with strong dimensional coverage and HIGH confidence across all four scored dimensions, making it a reliable representation of this contractor's performance, modestly tempered by two credible negative reviews and a significant proportion of reviews older than 12 months.

Dennis Priebe Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism with consistent punctuality, responsive communication, and courteous service across 24 mentions. Project completion is solid at 85.0 based on 18 mentions showing same-day service, follow-through on callbacks, and finished work. Technical experience scores 86.0 from 16 mentions highlighting skilled diagnostics, quality workmanship, and problem-solving ability. Pricing is the weakest dimension at 72.0 from 8 mentions, with customers noting costs are reasonable but occasionally higher than competitors; one customer explicitly stated they found a better deal elsewhere. The company's overall reliability is supported by multiple repeat customers and consistent positive feedback, though older reviews (pre-2015) comprise a significant portion of the dataset.

• Review recency concern: 18 of 37 reviews (49%) are older than 8 years (pre-2015). Only 3 reviews are from the past 12 months (2024, 2021, 2021). This limits confidence in current service quality.
• Multiple placeholder/minimal reviews detected: 5 reviews contain only '.' or 'unknown' or 'No complaints' with no substantive detail (dates: 2016-07-28, 2016-06-21, 2016-06-07, 2016-04-21, 2013-03-25). These were counted but carry minimal evidentiary weight.
• One strongly negative review (1.0 stars, 2017-12-29) explicitly mentions damage caused by work, lack of responsiveness, rudeness, and unethical behavior. This is a significant outlier and suggests potential service quality inconsistency.
• Pricing feedback is mixed: while most reviews praise 'reasonable' or 'affordable' pricing, several customers note costs are 'pricey' (2012-05-16), higher than expected (2011-12-08 competitor was less than half price), or suggest prices 'can be a little lower' (2015-08-02). This suggests pricing may not be consistently competitive.

This WW Score of 82.3 should be treated with MODERATE-TO-HIGH caution: while professionalism and project completion are well-supported by 18+ mentions each, the dataset is heavily weighted toward reviews older than 8 years, limiting insight into current performance. The single 1-star review indicating damage and unethical behavior is a material concern that contradicts the predominantly positive narrative. Pricing feedback suggests the company is not consistently the most affordable option. For current service expectations, prioritize the 3 recent reviews (2024, 2021) which remain positive but are too few to establish strong confidence in present-day operations.

Connor Plumbing earns strong marks for professionalism and technical experience, with dozens of reviewers explicitly praising punctuality, communication, shoe covers, business card introductions, and thorough explanations of work performed. Experience scores are high due to consistent mentions of Chris being a Licensed Master Plumber who accurately diagnoses problems, avoids unnecessary upselling, and delivers quality workmanship. Project completion is solid but meaningfully penalized by three serious negative reviews: one describing a job where the ceiling was cut open and the plumber never returned to finish, one describing an abandoned shower diverter repair after parts arrived, and one citing unprofessional tardiness and a questionable quote. Pricing is the weakest dimension — while several reviewers praised affordability and transparency, multiple reviewers across different years explicitly called pricing high or outrageous, and one noted a $400+ charge for a toilet that still did not flush properly, pulling this score down significantly.

• 11 reviews contain no text — only a star rating. These were excluded from dimensional scoring as they provide no usable evidence.
• 3 reviews with text contain only generic filler ('Great Plumber.', 'unknown', '....') and were treated as no usable data.
• One highly detailed 5-star review (2025-05-10) reads like a promotional testimonial with marketing-style language ('nailed both', 'you won't be disappointed'). While not conclusively fake, it warrants mild skepticism.
• Review spread spans 2011–2025. Reviews older than 3 years (pre-2022) were given reduced weight in scoring, particularly for pricing and project completion, as business practices may have changed.
• Three explicit negative reviews (1-star: abandoned job 2025-03-11; 1-star: abandoned shower repair 2019-07-25; 1-star: unprofessional tardiness and high quote 2013-07-03) represent a meaningful pattern of project completion failures that must not be dismissed despite the high volume of positive reviews.
• One 1-star review (2022-09-07) cites extreme rudeness from office staff and claims to have overheard staff berating the customer after a failed hang-up. This is a professionalism concern attributed to non-field staff and was factored into the professionalism score.
• One 2-star review (2020-09-18) explicitly states pricing was extremely high and the toilet was still not functioning after service — a dual flag for both pricing and project completion.
• One 3-star review (2023-02-16) notes the company was not taking new work and the referral number given went to a full voicemail — a minor responsiveness concern.

This WW Score is based on a large and diverse review set spanning over a decade, with HIGH confidence across all four dimensions; however, the score should be interpreted with caution due to recurring negative patterns around project abandonment and pricing complaints that are partially masked by the high volume of positive reviews.

Level Plumbing demonstrates strong performance across all measured dimensions. Professionalism is consistently praised with references to personable workers, attention to detail, and immaculate restoration work. Project completion is exemplary, with reviews highlighting thorough job execution, follow-through on complex tasks (including discovery of secondary issues), and timely work. Experience is evident through skilled workmanship and problem-solving. Pricing feedback is limited but positive, with one reviewer noting the work justified the cost despite being pricey. The WW Score of 88.2 reflects solid, reliable contractor performance.

• Only 3 reviews analyzed — sample size is small and limits statistical confidence
• All reviews are 5-star ratings with no negative feedback, which may indicate selection bias or incomplete review dataset
• Most recent review is from June 2024, but one review is from October 2022 (nearly 2 years old) — recency is mixed
• No explicit mentions of communication responsiveness, punctuality specifics, or transparent quoting practices
• Pricing dimension based on only 2 mentions — confidence is limited

This score should be treated with caution due to the small sample size (3 reviews) and absence of any negative feedback, which may not represent the full customer experience spectrum. The MODERATE overall confidence reflects adequate data for the dimensions scored, but additional reviews would be needed to validate these findings.

Advanced Plumbing Systems has a strong overall track record built on decades of reviews, with professionalism, responsiveness, and punctuality being the most consistently praised attributes across a large number of reviewers. Project completion scores well, with many reviewers noting jobs were finished on time, within estimate, and with thorough cleanup — including at least one notable callback honored at no charge. Experience and technical skill are frequently cited positively, with multiple reviewers highlighting problem-solving ability and knowledgeable explanations. However, pricing is a meaningful drag on the score: one detailed 2024 review credibly describes aggressive upselling, refusal to provide itemized quotes, and a near-$400 charge for a 15-minute drain clearing, and a separate 2018 reviewer also flagged the cost as 'ridiculous' for a short job. The refusal to provide parts-and-labor breakdowns under a 'Straight Forward pricing' policy is a transparency concern that meaningfully reduces the pricing dimension score.

• PRICING CONCERN: At least two reviewers (2018, 2024) explicitly flagged pricing as excessive or unreasonable for the scope of work performed. The 2024 reviewer also described a $475 upsell for a condensate pump that turned out to need only a repositioned shim — a significant credibility issue.
• TRANSPARENCY CONCERN: The 2024 reviewer and the 2017 reviewer both reported that the company refused to provide itemized quotes with parts, labor rates, or warranty details. This is a structural business practice concern, not an isolated incident.
• RECENCY CONCERN: The majority of reviews (approximately 100 of 125) are older than 12 months, with most dating from 2011–2021. Only a handful of reviews are from the past 12 months (late 2023–2024). The most recent substantive negative review (Feb 2024) describes a notably different and worse experience than older reviews, suggesting possible service quality decline.
• FAKE REVIEW / LOW-SIGNAL REVIEWS: Approximately 15–18 reviews contain only the text 'unknown', a single punctuation mark, or a single letter ('f'). These provide no usable data and were excluded from dimension scoring. Their presence in bulk may indicate platform data artifacts or placeholder entries.
• GENERIC REVIEW PATTERN: A significant number of older reviews (2013–2017) are very brief and generic (e.g., 'Very well.', 'It went well.', 'Great no problems.'). While not conclusively fake, they lack specificity and were given reduced weight in dimension scoring.
• SERVICE QUALITY CHANGE: One reviewer explicitly stated they had previously given a 5-star review in 2021 but downgraded to 1-star in 2024 due to dramatically changed service quality. This temporal shift warrants caution when relying on the aggregate score.

The WW Score of 76.4 is based on a large volume of reviews spanning over a decade and carries HIGH overall confidence in terms of data volume, but users should weight the most recent reviews (2024) more heavily when making a hiring decision, as they suggest a possible decline in pricing transparency and service integrity compared to the company's earlier reputation.

Maxwell-White demonstrates strong professionalism and project completion capabilities, with consistent praise for punctuality, responsiveness, and thorough workmanship across multiple reviews. However, pricing practices are a significant concern, with one detailed complaint about deceptive billing tactics (charging separately for follow-up work presented as included) and a $70 inspection fee structure that the reviewer found exploitative. Three of five reviews explicitly praise fair pricing, but the one negative pricing review is detailed and credible, suggesting pricing inconsistency or lack of transparency. The company excels at communication, technical skill, and on-time delivery, but the pricing dimension substantially lowers the overall score.

• PRICING CONCERN: Review from 2024-04-10 contains a detailed, specific complaint about deceptive billing practices—charging $700 for a simple clog by splitting work into two separate service calls. This is not generic criticism and appears credible.
• RECENCY IMBALANCE: Two of five reviews are from 2022 (over 2 years old). Most recent negative review is from April 2024, suggesting pricing issues may be ongoing.
• POTENTIAL PATTERN: The positive reviews lack specificity about pricing details, while the negative review is highly specific about costs and billing structure. This asymmetry warrants caution.

This score should be treated with moderate caution due to limited sample size (5 reviews) and a credible pricing complaint that conflicts with other positive feedback, suggesting either inconsistent pricing practices or selective service quality based on job type.