map-marker Camberwell, England

Competitor attacking fellow lie detector / his competition

Full refund for something he didn’t pay for ?Jason Hubble is a lie detector competitor and seemingly self regulator. He hasn’t paid for any services. There are also many complaints about Mr Hubble by fellow lie detectors. The key need here is regulation by the government and the law. The lie detector business itself is unregulated and very dodgy. What are the real real qualifications of the people that conduct lie detector tests? Remember, Vulnerable people have committed suicide because of questionable results of testers (who claim to be “ highly qualified”) How can Hubble take the moral high ground when there are complaints about him and he is simply attacking his competition?
View full review

Preferred solution: Apology

Donald C Bfa

This review is from a real person who provided valid contact information and hasn't been caught misusing, spamming or abusing our website. Check our FAQ

Verified Reviewer

Avoid not qualified

stars-rating-full stars-rating-full stars-rating-full stars-rating-full stars-rating-full
EthicalForensics Co Uk - Avoid not qualified
Andrew Chapman Unfortunately due to the high costs involved both in time and expenditure there is always someone looking to circumvent this to become a Polygraph Examiner. Fortunately for the public there is the APA and the UKPA who provide a list of all qualified and experienced Examiners, there are over 4800 worldwide who have taken the time to study and learn their craft and can offer accuracy to a client as they use validated equipment and techniques. We have recently received complaints about an individual passing himself off as a Polygraph Examiner in London. Andrew Chapman of Ethical Forensics has no relevant qualifications to be a Polygraph Examiner, he hasnt attended any formal training nor does he use recognised equipment or techniques which is a concern. We recently wrote to him with the following Dear Andrew Chapman of Ethical Forensics Following many complaints about your practice we would like to point out the following You have no formal qualifications to be a polygraph examiner. If this is wrong please do advise. You havent attended any recognised training. You dont use a recognised and validated polygraph, in fact the device you use is for sale on eBay for a fraction of the cost of the equipment we use and includes an online training program. You dont use any validated techniques so how can you offer any accuracy figures. You appear to pass every client, our lives would be very easy if we adopted this approach but like your test on 30/12/19 on Mr XXXXXX that was brought to our attention you have caused considerable upset for the family. Everyone you test is always in the top 5% of the people you have tested, we have some of your reports. Do you know why a qualified examiner doesnt make claims like this or offer anything other than an NDI, DI or INC result. You claim to have been an examiner for two years, this is very wrong, would you like the dates your website went live? Why lie about this ? Now lets look at the test you ran on XXXXX looking at the report we have been given. We manually score our charts and never rely on computer scoring. Fear and Stress rating, do you have any validated studies on this, have you read the studies on heart rate and deception and why we dont score heart rate. Have you made this up? Low fear responses are typically found in individuals with a psychopathic personality disorder, and this is in no way equated with truth-telling {see:}. I note you dont use a blood pressure cuff, any test our members ran without this would be invalid. Your choice of directed lie is poor and based on what the client tells you; studies have shown this to be far from a good approach. Also reporting this admission in written form is a gross violation of professional ethics. It appears you have scored this as a multi-issue test which if you are using a validated question technique would make the accuracy of this test with a qualified examiner using proper equipment at 75%. There is a reason we use single issue tests, accuracy. Your questions are extremely poor and would be very hard for a subject to pass, this again shows any lack of formal training. Please do choose very carefully whom you work with and make sure the Examiner you work with is a member of the American Polygraph Association and also in the UK the UK Polygraph Association. Andrew Chapman will not be able to provide any accuracy and who can you complain to if you feel something has gone wrong ?
View full review
  • Not qualified at all
Reason of review:
Not as described/ advertised

Preferred solution: Full refund

1 comment

Jason Hubble is the competition and seems to have appointed himself as a self regulator. There are many complaints about his professionalism. Really the government or lawyers - real professionals need to step in.

Why Trust Reviews on PissedConsumer?

  • Professional auto and live moderation
  • 100% user-generated content
  • Equal opportunity and protection
  • Zero tolerance for fake reviews
  • Verified content
  • PissedConsumer is on the Inc. 5000 list

For more information read Blog article