The Original Kiwi Rating Site Now with 134,218 ratings online

Knight Plumbers Ltd / Plumbers / Plumbing Contractors in Penrose

Is Knight Plumbers Ltd your business?

Please Log in to leave a rating or continue as a guest

  • 100%
    "Fantastic ANZAC Day service. Responded to a very unpleasant waste water blockage in 30 minutes, ascertained a drain unblocker was required, organised one who came promptly. Amazing service and on a public holiday. Most grateful. Tony even phoned in the evening to check we were satisfied with the work of the drain unblockers. "
    Rating by: Lynda  |  Rating posted: 26th Apr, 2017  |  Contact: Tony  |  Job date: Apr, 2017
    Communication: 100%  |  Quality: 100%  |  Reliability: 100%  |  Value: 100%
    Lynda26th Apr, 2017More details…
  • 0%
    "Complaint about Bruce Shaw of Knight Plumbers
    Job-source and repair leak from water pipe located by another company
    I was rung by Bruce at 1231hrs, Wednesday 30 September 2015 that his apprentice, would arrive in half hour (Time from my cell phone record). I had removed the pebbles and scoria near the source of the leak. Digging and finding the source of the leak was required when the apprentice arrived on site.The apprentice arrived at 1300hrs.
    The leak was found. I discussed options and asked for quotes for the two options given by the apprentice: clamp or replace pipe to the main. The apprentice rung Bruce for quotes at 1420hrs

    The apprentice rang Bruce again as time was marching on and hadn't heard from him, at 1450hrs. Bruce was rude to the apprentice for not having gone to collect the clamp. I rang Bruce myself to inform him that there had been a misunderstanding. He was rude and confrontational to me and said that I did not know what he had said to the apprentice. He said he told the apprentice to get the clamp. But the apprentice did not have that understanding as he was waiting for the quotes as requested. Bruce said he would give the quote for the pipe replacement later. Why would any customer have a repair job done and then get a replacement of the pipe as well? He told me it would cost around $360 + GST for the clamp, so in frustration I agreed to it. The apprentice left to get the clamp at around 1453hr according to my phone records.

    The apprentice arrived back with the clamp at 1540hrs and proceeded to attempt the repair with the clamp. He was unsuccessful. However he had not fully exposed the pipe to fully either assess the state of the pipe or give himself a chance to repair the pipe. He could have got this information with adequate exposure of the pipe. The problem was an inexperienced workman and inadequate work practice i.e inadequate exposure of the pipe. See pictures.

    The apprentice made numerous calls while waiting for the registered plumber (his supervisor). He may have also rang Bruce but I am not sure. The registered plumber was at another job and his ETA was 2hrs. The apprentice proceeded to continue attempting the repair job with the clamp without success until the registered plumber’s arrival around 1720hrs.

    Pictures shows the leaking pipe under water and shows inadequate exposure. You can see the clamp, temporarily placed around the pipe, underwater (blue wings underneath the sewer pipe) but not locked in.

    The registered plumber fully exposed the pipe to reveal a corroded and brittle pipe.

    They still attempted to do one repair with the clamp but without success as the pipe disintergrated.

    Another leak was created up the clamp in the pipe due to the brittleness due to corrosion of the pipe.The registered plumber performed a temporary bypass from the house edge to the house boundary near the water main pipe. They completed this part of the job and left at 1820hrs.

    The registered plumber promised to ring the next day with the quote for the pipe replacement. Unfortunately

    because the registered plumber was indisposed for the next 2 days and then the weekend followed, I did not receive a call till Monday 2 October from Bruce.

    Bruce said he would charge 6 hrs for the apprentice’s time at $60 instead of $80 but not charge for the registered plumber's 1hr. When I reassessed my notes and rang Bruce again, and said 6hrs hours was excessive. He accused me of "screwing him". I asked what was the registered plumber's rate, he said $80. Obviously he misrepresented the apprentice's rate to me earlier as well which was not honest of him. He also said he did not want to complete the job. He wanted to get paid for the pipe exposure and leave the job unfinished.

    I said this was thoroughly unprofessional and I said he would not get paid until the full job was completed. But as you can see from the timings this is still excessive as an experienced person would have been able to do the job in much less time. After thinking about the dealings with Bruce, I decided to pursue other options and decided to give the job to Waterleaks Auckland who had detected the leak initially but couldn’t come earlier so I had to involve Knight Plumbers in order to perform the job as soon as possible.

    I have had no problems dealing with the apprentice or the registered plumber. I have been perfectly happy with the registered plumber's professionalism but the interface with Bruce, who had been obnoxious to deal with, was unpleasant.

    This was the main reason to not further deal with Knight Plumbers despite using them previously twice.

    Waterleaks had to complete and to install a bluepipe from the house edge to the water main at a rate quoted by Knight Plumbers. They gladly undertook the job. This job was performed professionally at the agreed rate. The total cost for the job ended up almost double what it should have cost.

    Knight Plumbers did not have adequate supervision of their apprentice who recognised he could not repair the pipe but was forced to continue to attempt to repair an irreparable pipe until adequate supervision became available at the customer's expense. The clock should have been stopped after good exposure of the pipe which was not done initially and quote given for the pipe replacement.

    If the pipe was exposed as it should have been, then clamping around the leak would never have been an option.

    So times should have been:

    Exposure 1300-1430

    Pipe bypass 1720-1820

    Total time 2 1/2hrs double what charged.

    Another major issue is the communication skills of Bruce which was totally inadequate and lacking. He was confrontational and was rude to both to his staff and me, his customer, on more then one occasion.His junior staff was left frustrated with Bruce.

    I see picture I attached do not appear here!

    After the above complaint, I received the following response form Bruce's fellow director, Debbie Knight.

    Jayesh – I am aware of the situation & I am not going to continue on with it in any way.

    You have paid your account & therefore you have accepted situation, I am not going to enter in to any further conversation about this.

    Bruce like me a director & he has handled this in a way that he has seen fit, whether you agree with this or not is your choice & I accept this

    Please leave it as it is & move on.

    Any further emails will not result in a response.


    Jayesh – I am aware of the situation & I am not going to continue on with it in any way.

    You have paid your account & therefore you have accepted situation, I am not going to enter in to any further conversation about this.

    Bruce like me a director & he has handled this in a way that he has seen fit, whether you agree with this or not is your choice & I accept this

    Please leave it as it is & move on.

    Any further emails will not result in a response.

    Rating by: Jayesh  |  Rating posted: 16th Oct, 2015  |  Contact: Bruce Shaw  |  Job date: Sep, 2015
    Communication: 0%  |  Quality: 0%  |  Reliability: 0%  |  Value: 0%
    Jayesh16th Oct, 2015More details…
  • 100%
    "I have had nothing but quality service from Knight Plumbers. I have been a long time customer with them and no matter how busy they are, they always find time to give me quality service and workmanship when I need it. On a late thursday afternoon I rang knight plumbers and spoke to Bruce as I had a nasty leak in my house that needed urgent attending to, they did not hesitate to come and fix it for me. Would highly recommend these professionals to anyone"
    Rating by: Janet  |  Rating posted: 17th May, 2014  |  Contact: Bruce   |  Job date: May, 2014
    Communication: 100%  |  Quality: 100%  |  Reliability: 100%  |  Value: 100%
    Janet17th May, 2014More details…
  • 13%
    "We needed to replace the hot water cylinder in our rental property and asked Knight Plumbers to give us a quote. We were also replacing the kitchen flooring in the property (where the hot water cylinder cupboard is) so we made it clear that the cylinder had to be replaced before the new flooring was laid. We booked the job for the Friday before the flooring was due to be laid on the Monday and were assured that the work would be carried out well in time. At this stage we had still not received the final quote and after chasing many times by phone and e-mail we finally received it the day before the work was due to be done. We were shocked to find that the quote was $4680 plus GST plus electrician costs for the cylinder we had requested. It was clearly too high but we felt we had no choice but to go ahead as we had no time left to find someone else. As it turned out, they did not show up. When I rang to find out what happened Bruce said he had had a falling out with one of his guys and so had noone available to do the job. When I said he had let us down he became very confrontational and said we could go elsewhere if we were not happy. By this stage it was Friday night and we were desperate. In a stroke of extreme good luck we contacted a hot water specialist who went out of his way to do the job on Sunday. The final price was $3300 inclusive of everything for exactly the same cylinder Knight Plumbers would have charged us over $5000 for. I would never use them again - in our experience they were expensive, unreliable and unaccountable."
    Rating by: Catherine  |  Rating posted: 25th Feb, 2014  |  Contact: Bruce Knight  |  Job date: Feb, 2014
    Communication: 0%  |  Quality: 50%  |  Reliability: 0%  |  Value: 0%
    Catherine25th Feb, 2014More details…