Whitkirk Waste Solutions: most-reported complaints
Automated analysis of 160 public Trustpilot reviews published 2022-05-05 to 2026-08-05. TrustScore 4.9 from 330 total reviews — see the Trustpilot page. Quick answer: is Whitkirk Waste Solutions legit? Issues below reflect what reviewers reported, not findings of wrongdoing.
Reviewers most often report missed appointments, which account for 50% of the four complaints identified in the 160 reviews analyzed. One example cited involves a booked time slot that could not be met due to problems at disposal points. A trend cannot be established yet as there are not enough reviews to determine a pattern.
How to reach Whitkirk Waste Solutions
These are the contact details Whitkirk Waste Solutions publishes on its Trustpilot profile, as of our last check on 2026-09-24 — phone 01347 825637, email [email protected], address Stillington Road, YORK, YO61 3ET, GB.
The company claimed its Trustpilot profile on 2020-07-17. Trustpilot ranks it 2 of 5 in Septic System Service. We last checked this profile on 2026-09-24 and found 0 new reviews. These are facts Trustpilot publishes about the profile, as of our last harvest.
Companies House: WHITKIRK WASTE SOLUTIONS LIMITED (no. 05647893), active, incorporated 2005 (20.7 years); next accounts due 2027-08-31, last accounts filed 2026-03-24, 2 registered charges. 4 current officers (13 on record historically); 4 filings in the last 12 months (79 filings on record). official record — public register facts, not an indicator of wrongdoing; officer changes are routine in many company structures. Live Companies House status as of 2026-09-23.
Forum footprint: 0 MoneySavingExpert forum discussions mention this company (browse). Roughly 0 of the top, relevance-sorted search results were posted in the last 90 days — an approximate figure by construction, not a true recency count.
Elsewhere: 4.4★ on Google (7 reviews)
TrustScore over time
4.9 → 4.9 across 4 census measurements since 2026-08-12. Our own record, independent of Trustpilot’s display.
Reply behaviour over time
Solid: % of negative reviews replied to. Dashed: typical days to reply. Both as reported on this company’s Trustpilot profile, recorded whenever our census re-checked it and a figure had changed — the gaps between points are not equal: 2026-08-12 (0%, 0.0d) · 2026-08-21 (0%, 0.0d) · 2026-09-06 (0%, 0.0d) · 2026-09-15 (0%, 0.0d).
Policy-page monitoring
We monitor this company’s published policy page for changes. No changes have been detected since we started watching on 2026-09-01.
Automated change detection on the company’s own published policy page — a record of when the page changed, not a judgement on what changed.
14% of its 153 recent 5★ reviews came from accounts that had written only that one review when we captured it (the median across companies is about 39%). A high share is a reason to look closer, not evidence of fake reviews.
Sector benchmark: missed appointments makes up 50% of this company’s complaints vs a 19% median across 18 ranked companies in its sector.
Review velocity: 37 of this company’s 330 Trustpilot reviews (11%) were written in the last 12 months.
Not enough reviews to establish a trend.
What are the most common complaints about Whitkirk Waste Solutions?
Missed appointments
2 reports · 50% of complaints“The booked time slot could not be met due to problems at the disposal points.”
The company replied on 2026-01-13: “Sorry to hear this. Thank you for your feedback!”
Our classifier read this reply as a template response.
“our original appointment was cancelled on the day that you were supposed to come”
The company replied on 2023-10-10: “Thank you for taking the time to share your feedback. We're truly sorry to hear about your negative experience. Please know that your satisfaction is our top priority, and we take your comments…”
Our classifier read this reply as a substantive response.
It promised: to make contact.
Method: reviews are classified into a fixed complaint taxonomy by an automated reader; every category shown is backed by at least two verbatim quotes from distinct reviews. Trends are computed from dated review counts only. Negative reviews are deliberately over-sampled for evidence depth; headline percentages use an unbiased recent sample only. Report updated 2026-08-12.