Claimed Google Business Profile Data refreshed Aug 2, 2026

Taylor | Serbin Injury Lawyers Reviews, Ratings & Complaints

301 S McDowell St Suite 1016, Charlotte, NC 28204

5 · 363 Google reviews

Review evidence score

LAW LEADERBOARD · REVIEW EVIDENCE SCORE · FIXED COHORT · 80.4 / 100
Within-market percentile
81.1th percentile
Evidence depth
Strong evidence

Compares public-review evidence only. Not a measure of legal ability or outcomes.

Taylor | Serbin Injury Lawyers is a personal injury attorney in Charlotte, North Carolina with a 5.0-star rating across 363 tracked Google reviews. The current build retrieved 363 reviews for this profile and analyzed 312 text reviews. The firm has an owner reply on 89% of retrieved reviews, 78% of analyzed reviewers explicitly recommend it, and communication is mentioned in 13% of analyzed reviews. Its review pattern is highly consistent based on a consistency index of 98.7.

The most common review themes are explicit recommendation (78%), professionalism (28%), and case results (18%). Reviews in the sample mention matters involving car accident, motorcycle, medical malpractice, and workplace injury. Use these signals as due-diligence inputs rather than proof of specialty or likely outcome.

Review verdict

Taylor | Serbin Injury Lawyers review summary, answered from data.

These direct answers separate what the public review dataset can confirm from licensing, disciplinary, and case-fit questions that require independent verification.

What clients praise

Taylor | Serbin Injury Lawyers reviews most often praise explicit recommendation (78%), professionalism (28%), and case results (18%) in the analyzed sample. These percentages describe text labels in the captured sample, not independently verified service claims.

Is Taylor | Serbin Injury Lawyers legitimate?

Taylor | Serbin Injury Lawyers is listed on Google as a public business profile at 301 S McDowell St Suite 1016, Charlotte, NC 28204, with 363 tracked Google reviews, and the listing is marked as claimed on Google. A public listing does not independently verify attorney licensing, disciplinary history, insurance, or eligibility to handle a specific matter; check the relevant state bar and speak with the firm before hiring.

Is Taylor | Serbin Injury Lawyers a good law firm?

Taylor | Serbin Injury Lawyers has a 5.0/5 public Google rating across 363 tracked reviews. Law Leaderboard retrieved 363 reviews and analyzed 312 review texts for this profile. In that sample, the firm has an owner reply on 89% of retrieved reviews, 78% of analyzed reviewers explicitly recommend it, and communication is mentioned in 13% of analyzed reviews. These are public feedback signals, not a legal endorsement or prediction of case results.

What do Taylor | Serbin Injury Lawyers reviews complain about?

Taylor | Serbin Injury Lawyers reviews in the analyzed negative sample carry the recurring concern labels poor communication (50%) and unprofessional (50%). Percentages describe the relevant review sample and should be read with the rating distribution and coverage notes below.

Does Taylor | Serbin Injury Lawyers respond to reviews?

Taylor | Serbin Injury Lawyers has replied to 89% of the reviews retrieved for this profile, according to public review data. This measures responses to public reviews, not communication with clients during a case. Communication appears in 13% of analyzed review texts.

Firm Snapshot Table

Use this table to see the difference between the firm's public review footprint, the reviews retrieved into the current build, and the text reviews that feed the NLP metrics on this page.

MetricValueWhat it means
Review Evidence Score80.4/100Strong evidence; public-review evidence only.
Within-market score percentile81.1th percentileCompared with the fixed Charlotte, NC cohort.
Tracked Google reviews363Public review count currently visible on the profile.
Reviews retrieved363Review records stored in the current build.
Text reviews analyzed312Review texts used for NLP-derived praise, complaint, and communication metrics.
Owner response rate89%Share of retrieved reviews with an owner reply.
Explicit recommendation rate78%Share of analyzed reviewers who explicitly recommend the firm.
Communication mentions13%Share of analyzed reviews that mention communication.
Professionalism mentions28%Share of analyzed reviews that mention professionalism.
Case-results mentions18%Share of analyzed reviews that mention case results.
Compassion mentions8%Share of analyzed reviews that mention compassion or care.
Consistency index98.7Higher scores indicate a more consistently positive rating pattern.
Average owner response time151.1 daysMean delay between a public review and the owner reply.

Identity-linked office intelligence

Where This Office Sits in Charlotte, NC

An office’s within-market percentile shows how its Review Evidence Score compares with the other profiles in that market. It is a relative position, not a probability, quality rating, or prediction. The score and percentile reflect public-review evidence only—not legal skill, licensing, case outcomes, misconduct, or suitability.

Compare offices side by side →

Evidence score

80.4/100

Score percentile

81.1th percentile

Rating percentile

100th percentile

Review-count percentile

67.6th percentile

Owner-reply percentile

Not scored

Evidence strength and entity relationship

Strong evidence from 312 analyzed review texts. The identity match uses exact source IDs in the private graph; those provider IDs are not exposed here.

Law Leaderboard office ID
llb-office-0726af2d9da976a0
Law Leaderboard brand ID
llb-brand-c5ee6092e8715903
Brand relationship
Taylor | Serbin Injury Lawyers

QA-published themes for this office

The published themes are communication, responsiveness or delays, and outcome language. Theme prevalence is calculated only for offices whose theme result passed minimum sample, confidence, and external precision gates. Outcome language reflects an unverified claim in a review; it is not independent confirmation of what happened.

communication

3.8%

12 matches: 11 positive, 1 negative. Precision in external QA: 96%.

Outcome language (unverified)

2.9%

9 matches: 7 positive, 0 negative, 2 neutral. Precision in external QA: 82%.

Release llb-consumer-intelligence-2026-08-12-r4. Trend fields remain withheld until the separate multi-snapshot publication gate is met.

Historical review data

Review Activity and Response Detail

Public-review aggregates captured through Apr 6, 2026. These figures describe the retrieved history, not a live feed.

Method: review-trends-v1.0.0

Retrieved history begins

Oct 14, 2015

Latest dated review

Mar 17, 2026

Retrieved coverage

100%

363 retrieved of 363 tracked

Recent 12-month reviews

52

Average rating: 5.00/5

Year-over-year review change

Average rating

0.00 stars

5.00/5 in the recent period vs. 5.00/5 in the prior period

Review activity

-66 reviews

52 recent reviews vs. 118 in the prior period

Comparison gates prevent thin or incomplete review history from being presented as a trend. Review text and reviewer identities are not published in these aggregates.

Case Types Mentioned in Reviews

car accidentmotorcyclemedical malpracticeworkplace injurywrongful death

Quick Stats

Reviews/Month
2.5
Avg Review Length
231 chars
Local Guide %
16%

About

Taylor | Serbin Injury Lawyers (formerly The Law Offices of Jason E. Taylor) is a personal injury law firm that has been serving North and South Carolina for over 25 years. Our motto is to "Provide Ju...

What Our Data Shows

The sections below break this firm into measurable signals: responsiveness, communication mentions, review consistency, praised attributes, complaint themes, historical activity, and source-freshness notes. Read them together, not as isolated stats.

Rating Distribution

5 star
359 (99%)
4 star
2 (<1%)
3 star
0 (0%)
2 star
0 (0%)
1 star
2 (<1%)
99% positive reviews 1% negative reviews Consistency index: 98.7

What Clients Praise

explicit recommendation 77.9% of reviews
professionalism 27.9% of reviews
case results 17.9% of reviews
communication 13.1% of reviews
expertise 10.3% of reviews

Common Concerns (from negative reviews)

● poor communication (50%)
● unprofessional (50%)

Other Personal Injury in Charlotte

Provenance

Sources, freshness, and limitations.

Sources

  • • Google Business profile data for the firm, including address, phone, website, business attributes, and aggregate public rating.
  • • 363 retrieved reviews and 312 text reviews used to calculate praise, complaint, communication, and response metrics for this profile.
  • • Consumer intelligence release llb-consumer-intelligence-2026-08-12-r4, derived from llb-depth50-research-2026-08-11-r1, supplies immutable office and brand IDs, market context, evidence-strength tier, and published practice/city memberships.
  • • Historical review aggregates calculated from the retrieved public-review history captured through Apr 6, 2026.
  • • Aggregate business and review-analysis fields rendered from the same exported firm record used by the city rankings; reviewer identities and review text are not republished.

Freshness

  • • Business profile last collected: 2026-04-02 13:16:42.
  • • Review records last collected: 2026-04-06 17:01:44; derived metrics last analyzed: 2026-08-02 20:36:24.
  • • 363 total Google reviews tracked; 363 reviews retrieved; 312 text reviews analyzed.
  • • Consumer intelligence release published 2026-08-12; that is a derived-release date, not a new profile or review observation.
  • • Review-history snapshot: Apr 6, 2026; retrieved coverage: 100% of the tracked-review total.
  • • Methodology version: 2026.04.07. Build packaging timestamp: 2026-08-03 08:34:48 UTC; this is not a source-refresh date.

Limitations

  • • Public review volume, retrieved review records, and text reviews analyzed are different counts and should not be treated as interchangeable.
  • • Historical comparison tiles appear only when retrieved review history reaches both full twelve-month windows and each window meets the rating-count threshold.
  • • Review-derived case-type and praise signals show what appears in the sample; they do not independently verify board certification or case outcomes.
  • • A within-market percentile is a relative position inside the fixed market cohort. It is not a probability, national rank, or legal-performance grade.
  • • A theme appears only when that office result passes the published minimum sample, confidence, and external precision gates; absence is not proof that the topic never appears.
  • • This page helps you evaluate a firm’s public client-feedback footprint, but hiring decisions still require direct due diligence.
← View all Charlotte personal injury lawyers ranked by public review signals
Explore North Carolina personal injury markets → Compare this office in the Car Accident cohort → Compare this office in the Motorcycle Accident cohort → Compare this office in the Workers' Compensation cohort → Report an outdated or incorrect detail on this profile →