Find Nearby Plumbers In Milwaukee, Wisconsin

The majority of reviews — particularly those from 2025 — reflect a consistently professional and skilled team at Olson Superior Plumbing, with multiple technicians (Logan, Francisco, Richie, Aaron, Thomas, Marcos, Elliott) praised for punctuality, courtesy, and technical competence. However, two significant 1-star reviews from 2025 describe serious failures: a technician arriving at the wrong time and refusing to waive a service fee after offering no real help, and a separate incident where a quoted project was doubled in price on the day of work after two failed appointment attempts. Pricing confidence is dragged down by these incidents alongside older Optimal Plumbing reviews describing a contractor who billed more than 2X the written quote and threatened a Mechanic's Lien. Project completion scores are similarly tempered by the abandoned/rescheduled job and the incorrect parts installation described in negative reviews. Experience scores are generally strong based on detailed positive accounts of skilled diagnostics and quality workmanship, but the poor soldering and incorrect drain installation in one Optimal Plumbing review prevent a higher score.

• MIXED CONTRACTOR DATA: This review set appears to contain reviews for at least two distinct businesses — 'Olson Superior Plumbing' and 'Optimal Plumbing LLC' (Ron/Ronnell). These are different companies and should not be scored together. The WW Score has been calculated across all reviews as submitted, but this significantly reduces reliability.
• BLANK REVIEWS: 4 reviews contained no text (only a star rating). These were excluded from dimension scoring but counted in total reviews analyzed.
• RECENCY CONCERN — OPTIMAL PLUMBING: Most Optimal Plumbing reviews are 3–9 years old (2015–2024), with the most critical negative review dating to 2015. These older reviews carry reduced weight but still meaningfully impact pricing and project completion scores.
• DRIVING COMPLAINTS: Two 1-star reviews (2016, 2021) describe dangerous driving by company vehicles and inability to reach anyone by phone. These reflect on professionalism and responsiveness and were factored into the professionalism score.
• PRICING RED FLAG — OPTIMAL PLUMBING: One detailed 1-star review describes a final bill more than 2X the written quote, threats of a Mechanic's Lien, and refusal to communicate. This is a serious pricing and professionalism concern.
• PRICING RED FLAG — OLSON SUPERIOR: One 1-star review describes a $1,800 quote for a job another plumber completed for approximately $360, plus a disputed $95 service fee. This suggests potential price gouging on at least one occasion.
• PROJECT FAILURE — OLSON SUPERIOR: One detailed 1-star review describes two failed appointment attempts, a technician doubling the quoted price on-site, and disrespectful behavior toward management in front of the customer. This is a significant project completion and professionalism failure.
• POSSIBLE GENERIC REVIEWS: Several short 5-star reviews ('Excellent team!', 'Very informative and personable', 'Great service!') lack specific detail. While not conclusive evidence of fake reviews, they add limited scoring value and were weighted conservatively.

This WW Score carries moderate-to-high reliability for Olson Superior Plumbing's recent (2025) performance, but is materially compromised by the inclusion of reviews for a separate business (Optimal Plumbing LLC), several blank reviews, and a small number of serious negative experiences that reveal real risks around pricing transparency and project management consistency.

O'Leary Plumbing receives strong marks for professionalism, with dozens of reviews praising technicians by name for being courteous, punctual, communicative, and personable — particularly Nathan, Dan, Jacob, and Scott. Project completion scores well overall, with many reviews noting same-day service, efficient work, and follow-through, though it is meaningfully dragged down by several serious negative reviews describing abandoned or botched work, a repeatedly failing HVAC installation, and a septic pump job that required a second company to correct. Experience scores moderately well given the volume of positive technical feedback, but is tempered by credible accounts of inexperienced technicians being sent on complex jobs, incorrect parts being used, and a well inspection that missed obvious pressure problems. Pricing is the weakest dimension: while several reviewers called pricing fair or reasonable, multiple reviewers explicitly flagged costs as high, one called a $150 charge for a 5-minute job 'ridiculous,' and another received a bill nearly three times the original estimate — pulling this score down significantly.

• 8 reviews contained no text at all — only a star rating. These were excluded from dimension scoring as they provide no usable evidence.
• A cluster of 5-star reviews from June 2025 share similar generic praise structures and name individual technicians without specific job detail. While not conclusively fake, the pattern warrants mild caution.
• Several negative reviews are older (2016–2021) and may not reflect current service quality. However, the 2025-04-10 negative review about a $1,700 bill vs. $650 estimate and improper drain installation is recent and credible.
• The HVAC installation failure (2021 review) describes a system that failed repeatedly over multiple visits — a significant project completion concern that is weighted accordingly.
• The 2019 septic pump review and 2017 well inspection review describe fundamental technical errors, suggesting inconsistency in technician skill level that is not fully captured by the volume of positive reviews.
• Recency note: The majority of reviews with text are from 2025, which is a positive signal for current service quality. Older negative reviews (2016–2019) are given reduced weight but are not ignored, as they describe serious failures.

This WW Score is based on a substantial volume of reviews with usable text and carries HIGH overall confidence, but consumers should note that while day-to-day service quality appears strong, there are credible and specific accounts of billing disputes, botched installations, and inexperienced technicians on complex jobs that introduce meaningful uncertainty — particularly for large or technically complex projects.

Borth-Wilson earns strong marks across most dimensions, with the majority of recent reviewers praising timely project completion, skilled tradespeople, and clear communication throughout remodels and plumbing service calls. Professionalism scores are pulled down meaningfully by several credible negative reviews describing a rude technician who charged a rescheduling fee, an owner who refused to provide an estimate while another contractor was present, and a serious unresolved installation defect on a water heater. Pricing is the weakest dimension: while several reviewers praised fair and transparent pricing, multiple others reported verbal quotes not being honored, a $60k estimate for a small kitchen, and a $20k quote for a modest bathroom — suggesting inconsistent or high pricing for smaller jobs. Project completion scores well overall, supported by numerous accounts of on-time delivery and follow-through, though one older review describes an abandoned project with unfinished work and a fire hazard. Experience scores well, particularly for complex plumbing and bathroom remodels, with standout praise for technical problem-solving in difficult conditions.

• DUPLICATE REVIEW DETECTED: Two reviews dated 2024-10-06 are nearly word-for-word identical (the bathroom remodel review mentioning dogs). One was excluded from scoring to avoid double-counting.
• RECENCY NOTE: Several negative reviews are from 2017–2019 and may not reflect current business practices. However, negative reviews from 2024 and 2025 confirm that some issues (rude technician, installation quality disputes) persist.
• PRICING INCONSISTENCY FLAG: Multiple reviewers across different years report verbal quotes not honored, unexpectedly high estimates for small jobs, or pricing that felt misaligned with scope. This pattern across time periods reduces confidence in pricing fairness.
• FAKE REVIEW RISK — LOW: The majority of 5-star reviews contain specific names, project details, and varied language, reducing the likelihood of coordinated fake reviews. However, the high volume of 5-star reviews with very similar praise language (e.g., 'one stop shop', 'exceeded expectations') warrants mild caution.
• INSTALLATION DEFECT DISPUTE (2025): The 1-star review from an electrical engineer describing an uncrimped wire on a water heater installation, combined with the company's disputed response, represents a credible quality and customer service concern that is recent and unresolved.
• OLDER REVIEWS (pre-2020): Four reviews dated 2014–2019 were included but given reduced weight per recency rules. The 2017 review describing an abandoned project with a fire hazard and the 2017 pricing dispute are notable but treated as lower-weight historical data.

This WW Score is based on 51 reviews spanning over a decade, with strong data density across all four dimensions and a healthy mix of positive and negative feedback, making it a moderately reliable representation of Borth-Wilson's performance — though prospective customers should note recurring pricing transparency concerns and isolated but credible professionalism complaints.

Quick Fix Plumbing earns strong marks across most dimensions, with the majority of recent reviews (2024) describing David and his crew as professional, courteous, knowledgeable, and responsive. Pricing is a notable strength, with one reviewer citing bids $600–$2,000 lower than competitors and several others calling rates reasonable or fair. However, three negative reviews — spanning 2015, 2018, and 2022 — raise meaningful concerns about project completion and follow-through, including an incomplete job covered with a dishonest explanation, a water heater install that caused downstream damage due to improper bleeding, and a billing dispute over a visit that added no value. These incidents pull down the project completion and professionalism scores from what would otherwise be near-perfect ratings. The recency of the positive reviews (mostly 2024) is encouraging, but the pattern of negative reviews suggests historical quality control issues that should not be ignored.

• One review ('Great! 👍*****') contains no substantive detail and reads as a filler review — it was excluded from dimension scoring but counted in total reviews.
• Three negative reviews (1-star in 2015, 1-star in 2018, 2-star in 2022) describe serious issues: incomplete work, dishonesty, failure to return calls, improper installation causing equipment damage, and a billing dispute — these are significant red flags for project completion and professionalism.
• The 2015 negative review describes Quick Fix failing to return calls, texts, and emails after a faulty water heater installation — a pattern of abandonment after a mistake.
• The 2018 negative review explicitly accuses a technician of lying about a work order and leaving two spigot repairs in poor or incomplete condition.
• Most negative reviews are older (2015–2022), while 2024 reviews are overwhelmingly positive — this may reflect genuine improvement, staff changes, or a shift in reviewer base. Recency weighting was applied in scoring.
• Several 2024 reviews share similar generic praise language ('professional,' 'knowledgeable,' 'would use again') with limited specifics. While not conclusive, this warrants mild caution. No strong fake review pattern detected, but confidence is noted.

This WW Score is based on 21 reviews with strong recency weighting applied; the score is reasonably reliable for current performance but should be interpreted with caution given documented historical failures in project completion and professional conduct.

Viking Plumbing demonstrates strong professionalism with consistently punctual service, friendly technicians, and responsive communication across 127 mentions. Technical expertise and problem-solving ability are well-documented across 95 mentions, with plumbers frequently praised for knowledge and skill. Project completion is solid with 89 mentions showing jobs finished on time and callbacks honored, though a few notable failures (sewer line misdiagnosis, repeated clogs, no-shows) create some concern. Pricing emerges as the weakest dimension (71.0) with 48 mentions revealing complaints about lack of transparency, unexpected cost increases, and prices perceived as high relative to work performed. Recent reviews (past 12 months) are predominantly 5-star with some repetitive phrasing, though older reviews provide balanced perspective.

• FAKE REVIEW PATTERN DETECTED: Multiple identical reviews appear verbatim across different dates (e.g., 'Manny was so friendly and efficient! He cleared 2 drains and they're working beautifully. I will definitely be using Viking for future plumbing needs!' appears on 2025-06-08 and 2025-06-05; 'You guys always do an awesome job!' on 2025-06-08 and 2025-06-05; 'Always great service. Very professional office and plumbers. Thanks' on 2025-06-08 and 2025-06-05; 'Jesse and Justice were amazing!...' on 2025-06-07 and 2025-06-04). This suggests potential review manipulation or bot-generated content.
• RECENCY BIAS: Approximately 40% of reviews are from June 2025 (very recent), with a cluster of suspiciously similar 5-star reviews in early June 2025. Older reviews (2010-2020) provide more balanced feedback including legitimate complaints.
• CRITICAL FAILURES: Three 1-star reviews document serious issues: (1) Sewer line misdiagnosis costing customer $7,000+ in remediation; (2) Urinal valve rebuilt 5 times, still leaked; (3) Multiple no-shows and scheduling failures. These are not minor issues.
• PRICING TRANSPARENCY PROBLEM: Multiple reviews (2020, 2013, 2011) cite unexpected cost increases, lack of upfront pricing disclosure, and bills significantly exceeding quotes. One customer reported nearly 100% increase from quoted price ($618 to $1,100).
• OWNERSHIP/MANAGEMENT CHANGE: Reviews note company was purchased by different ownership, with service quality reportedly declining post-acquisition (2023 reviews show scheduling and follow-up failures).
• INCONSISTENT QUALITY: Wide variance in outcomes—some jobs completed perfectly same-day, others require multiple callbacks or fail entirely. Suggests inconsistent technician quality or training.

This WW Score of 78.2 should be treated with MODERATE-TO-HIGH caution due to suspected review manipulation in the most recent data (June 2025 cluster of identical reviews). The HIGH confidence rating is supported by large mention counts across all dimensions and consistency in older reviews, but the recent fake review pattern undermines the overall trustworthiness of the current score. Pricing remains a genuine weakness with documented evidence of transparency issues. Recommend weighting older reviews (2015-2022) more heavily and requesting itemized quotes in writing before engaging services.

Chris the Plumber demonstrates strong professionalism with consistently punctual arrivals, friendly demeanor, and responsive communication across 98 reviews. Project completion is reliable with most jobs finished on time and follow-through honored in 89 mentions. Technical experience is solid with skilled workmanship evident in 76 reviews. However, pricing emerges as a significant concern: while many reviews praise fair pricing, 12 negative reviews explicitly cite overcharging, inflated estimates, and price gouging (ranging from $800 for 30-minute work to $2,135 for a $750 job elsewhere), creating material doubt about pricing consistency and transparency despite positive mentions in 62 reviews.

• PRICING INCONSISTENCY DETECTED: 12 one-star reviews explicitly allege overcharging and price gouging. Examples include: $800 for 30-minute water heater line modification (2022-09-20), $2,135 quote vs. $750 actual cost elsewhere (2024-10-12), $15,000 quote for pipe work customer completed for $300 (2024-10-12), $1,000 overcharge (2021-02-25). This pattern suggests potential systematic pricing issues despite many positive pricing mentions.
• SCAM ALLEGATIONS: Multiple reviews (2024-10-12, 2024-06-06, 2023-04-10, 2018-12-27) describe deceptive practices including false diagnoses, unnecessary work recommendations, misrepresentation of work performed, and dishonest warranty company reporting. One reviewer documented the visit on recording.
• COMMUNICATION FAILURES: 3 reviews cite non-responsiveness and failure to return calls (2024-11-11, 2018-08-07, 2018-02-15), contradicting the otherwise strong communication profile.
• QUALITY INCONSISTENCY: Several reviews describe poor workmanship outcomes (water heater positioned incorrectly preventing washer/dryer installation, holes drilled in walls unnecessarily, toilet repair that failed immediately after service).
• FAKE REVIEW RISK - MODERATE: 15+ reviews contain nearly identical phrasing ('highly recommend,' 'professional and friendly,' 'reasonable price,' 'great job') with minimal specific detail. Many 5-star reviews from 2024-06-09 have no text. However, the presence of detailed negative reviews with specific dollar amounts and documented incidents suggests this is a real business with both genuine positive and negative experiences rather than purely fabricated reviews.
• RECENCY CONCERN: Most reviews are from 2024 (past 12 months), providing current data. However, negative pricing allegations cluster in 2024 and 2022, suggesting ongoing pattern rather than isolated incidents.

This WW Score of 78.2 should be treated with CAUTION. While professionalism and project completion dimensions are well-supported by high-confidence data, the pricing dimension is severely compromised by 12 credible allegations of overcharging and deceptive practices that directly contradict positive pricing mentions. The score reflects a contractor with strong operational execution but material integrity concerns around pricing transparency and honest estimation. Customers should request detailed written estimates, verify pricing against multiple competitors, and document all communications before engaging this contractor.