map-marker Omaha, Nebraska

This guy is not to be trusted

stars-rating-full stars-rating-full stars-rating-full stars-rating-full stars-rating-full
Indepth Polygraphs - This guy is not to be trusted
Indepth Polygraphs - This guy is not to be trusted - Image 2
I was tested by this guy, failed 3 times supposedly for cigarette burns when it turned out it was ringworm, I have medical papers to prove it. This guy lacks human emotion, no empathy and preys on the weak and vulnerable to get his pockets fat. His machine needs to be calibrated, and he needs to be investigated for all the harm he has done to innocent people. He spent less than 30 minutes giving me this test, I was crying in the chair, and he went along with the test anyway. He is not conducting polygraphs the right way, and claims they are 98 to 99% effective. Complete lies! I was so blind to polygraphs until I experienced it for myself, and then I looked at how many innocent people were accused based off a machine, it cannot read your thoughts or feelings, only measure your body's responses to questions. How can anyone believe a machine can deem your psychological responses as truth or lie? I will never believe in polygraphs as long as I live after what I went through.
View full review
Reason of review:
Bad quality

He is a charlatan

Larenzo Mfm


View more comments (1)
Christine Hkw
map-marker Hempstead, New York

Testing isn’t accurate don’t waste your time

Took a test with these people last year 2018 and it was the worst thing I could have done went there to get tested and told the truth about every question after the test I waited about a hour or 2 for them to send me a email sayin deception indicated for all my questions I had jus had a baby and my family was now broken due to this test making me look like a lier my advice to people is don’t waste your time or money
View full review
Reason of review:
Not accurate

Preferred solution: Let the company propose a solution


Terrible service

stars-rating-full stars-rating-full stars-rating-full stars-rating-full stars-rating-full
Please stay away from this company. They are unprofessional and they do a terrible job. I took a polygraph with Lisa Ribacoff and I was saying the truth during the test but Lisa sent to somebody else a report saying that I was lying. The result is not correct. I answer to 4 questions and they said that I lied to all of them but I said the truth... She was unprofessional the whole time and she kept making comments not appropriate. She didn’t do any control question during the test and she kept texting with someone else on the phone during whole time I was In the room with her. Please stay away from International investigative group, don’t waste money and don’t ruin your life, taking a polygraph with these people because they will do a terrible job and you are going to regret the trust you give to these people. I also wrote them a letter asking for an explanation and asking then to take again the test, but they never replied.
View full review
map-marker Hoboken, New Jersey

Polygraph Company Unreliable and Unprofessional

My husband suspected I cheated on him throughout our marriage and I never did. I volunteered to take a polygraph test and paid for it my self to prove to him I never cheated and was always faithful in our marriage. We went to Daniel Ribacoff in 2009, who is the owner of Indepth Polygraphs in New York City, on 10 West 47th street, suite 706, and passed that test because of other suspected issues as well. In 2012, we visited the office, thinking the polygraph exam will be tested by Daniel Ribacoff, instead, his daughter Lisa Ribacoff, was the one who issued the polygraph exam. According to Lisa Ribacoff, she has been doing this for 5 years, but the office opened in 2008, I guess training counts as experience to them.

I took the test and failed because deception indicated and there was a 0.007 chance that it was done by a truthful person! I was unsatisfied with the results because I know I never cheated on my husband. I demanded a retake of the test and paid another $400 for the next appointment, which was two days later. My husband went crazy believing that I cheated on him when I never did. That following night I looked up on how the polygraph was scored and the method that was used to determine the score. Articles included types of questions that are given to the person taking the polygraph test and picked up terms such as control questions.

The day of the test, I went to see Lisa and started to sign papers and before the exam, I asked Lisa will there be control questions. She looked at me like I was crazy, and asked me to repeat the question like she did not understand what I was trying to say. Lisa said, "What do you mean control questions?". Lisa then asked me on the polygraph test, "Did I look up ways to beat the polygraph test?". I could not believe she asked that because I ask her, will there be control questions? She asked the same questions and then finished the exam. Lisa said she will call me back about an hour or two because she has to get back to Long Island for something. That night, my husband and I waited 5 hours for the results! She called us around 8 and determined I was a cheater and failed every question including on how to beat the lie detector test. I had no intention of beating the polygraph test when I know I am telling the truth.

I did not believe I failed the test when I know I never cheated. I contacted another examiner in Brooklyn, NY and Barry Kaufman tested me and my husband. We both passed the test and felt relieved. Barry can be found at

If my husband did not give me the chance to take the test again and proved I never cheated, Lisa Ribacoff would have damaged our marriage. She has no skill in polygraph testing and caused *** for three days between me and my husband. I am warning anyone going to the Ribacoffs, DO NOT LET LISA DO THE TEST!!!!

I am sure her testing caused a lot of chaos and negative life changes among other couples. If you are going to the Ribacoff's, do not take the test with Lisa. I will give Daniel Ribacoff a chance, he has more experienced then she does.

View full review
Guest American Polygraph Association Declines Comment as More Racist Text Messages by Member Daniel Ribacoff Surface Dirty Cops & PIs blog founder and editor Jeffrey Augustine reports on newly discovered racist text messages attributed to disgraced polygraph operator Daniel Ribacoff in an article titled, “Trouble for Polygraph Expert Dan Ribacoff as More Racist Texts Surface.” Both and Dirty Cops & PIs previously reported on a different set of racist text messages sent by Ribacoff. The new racist text messages are associated with Ribacoff’s business’s California telephone number, +131********.

One of the newly reported racist text messages associated with Daniel Ribacoff’s California cell phone number (Dirty Cops & PIs blog image) For his report, Augustine contacted the American Polygraph Association—of which Ribacoff is an associate member—”for comment regarding Ribacoff’s alleged racist text messages and their implications for the polygraph industry.” American Polygraph Association President Roy Ortiz (APA photo) In reply, American Polygraph Association president Roy Ortiz “stated that the APA does not comment on matters involving litigation.” It is noteworthy 1) that Augustine’s inquiry was not limited to litigation that Ribacoff faces, 2) that the American Polygraph Association is not a party to that litigation, and 3) that the American Polygraph Association bylaws include no such restriction on commentary. In 2003, American Polygraph Association president Roy Ortiz, then an APA director and the chief of the Los Angeles Police Department’s polygraph unit, was the subject of specific and credible allegations of corruption. American Polygraph Association Director Lisa Ribacoff (APA photo) Augustine also notes that Daniel Ribacoff’s daughter and business associate, Lisa Ribacoff, is a director of the American Polygraph Association: In the course of our research, we discovered that Dan Ribacoff’s daughter, Lisa Ribacoff, is a current director and board member of the American Polygraph Association. Given the serious implications of the racist messages allegedly sent by the father and CEO of Lisa Ribacoff’s company, and in order to maintain a minimal level of integrity, the APA should require Ms.

Ribacoff to recuse herself from participating as a Director of their organization. Augustine’s article may be read in full here.


Anyone can go to polygraph school and pick up *** certificates ... people must be fact checked them self’s with their outlandish expertise...


Subjecting yourself to any type of test of that nature is asking for serious problems. I'll clear up two false statements first, then go over what I call "trap questions".

A trap question is the art of forming statements around a persons answer, so the person answering has no possible way to get around what the interrogator asks _____________________________________________________________________ False statement #1: (Said on Maury Povich, and The Robert Irvine show) "The lie detector test determined" or "The Lie detector says" Those are false statements simply because a lie detector is nothing but a machine, and a machine is an object, it has no thought process or any possible way to determine anything. The person giving the test has an OPINION on how they feel like reading the machine. It would be exactly like someone saying "My computer told me to eat cake" Sounds silly now that it's put into perspective doesn't it? False Statement #2: (Said by Dan Ribacoff on the Steve Wilkos show) Lie detector tests are not admissible in court because you must be tried by a jury of your peers, and a machine is not a jury of your peers.

I seriously couldn't believe the utter sheer stupidity diarrhea of that Dan spewed out of his mouth. While that was clever wording, it was a total lie. The real reason lie detector test are not admissible in court, is because the US supreme court says a machine itself has no possible way to know the difference between a lie and the truth. It is the exact same thing as verbally asking your computer if onions taste good, and having it answer.

______________________________________________________________ TRAP QUESTIONS: (This is not a real term as I made it up) A trap question is specifically designed to work off the answer/situation someone says or is in. In order for the interrogator or person asking the questions so they are right or get out of having to do something Here is an example: (Pawn Stars had probably the best example) There was an episode where someone brought in an antique rifle, where the original color blue was faded, When giving the usual song and dance estimate rick commented about the blue part something along the lines of "Well collectors like something like this a little restored to have vibrant color" so it's not worth that much. The trap comes into play because had the person came in with the blue restored, Ricks reply would have been totally different and he would have said "You restored the blue", a collector wants them in original condition, so because it has been restored, it isn't worth as much. So no matter what condition the rifle was in, it wasn't worth much.

Another example of a real good trap question was on an episode of the Steve Wilkos show. There was a person who had been accused of something for over a year (So they probably got so numb to it it didnt' really bother them any more" 99.9% of people who get accused of something for that long really just don't have any emotions towards the accusation one way or the other. So because the person at that point after that long was probably so thick skinned, Steve said, someone who was accused of what you were wouldn't' be acting as mellow as you are without hardly any emotion I would be tearing up the stage all mad. But on the flip side of that, if they were acting all out of control Steve would have said "someone innocent won't be acting as crazy as you are right now.

You don't' need to be tearing up the stage just because you're mad Yet Steve himself said that he would have been tearing up the stage in the first example. So anyone is screwed against trap questions not a thing you can do against it.

Someone that people think are upper stature, will use these trap questions to prevent anyone from possibly being able to challenge them as they use that to further boost their reputation. __________________________________________________________





reply icon Replying to comment of Guest-817624

After receiving multiple estimates for a gas conversion we decided to go with HUX. We are glad we did.

Owner is dedicated, meaning takes all your calls, personally. Explains in detail and shows you what is going to be done.

Work was completed start to finish exactly as described when we first spoke. A++ to George and his staff

reply icon Replying to comment of Guest-861336

you must be sleeping with that crook george huxtable ,,Hux Plumbing....He is the worst ,,,how much did he pay you to post this ,,,or this must be hux the family guy theif himself

reply icon Replying to comment of Guest-877246

Go check the records at town of oyster bay and also Suffolk county Hux plumber is a crooked contractor


Wow. This is the only complaint on the internet about this company.

How credible is the complaint? NOT VERY! Liars will always lie and avoid responsibility. Blame others.

Typical liar. Cheater and low life.

reply icon Replying to comment of Guest-741582

I believe the liar because he is telling the truth ,,,i am a plumber and the story is true...I have been in business a long time and we NEVER took deposits.....for gas conversions....dont trust hux......

reply icon Replying to comment of Guest-837181

Really Town of Huntington plumber??? No deposit?

Still running your business out of your home as a one man shop. Pathetic how jealous you are. Instead of trying to succeed on your own you bash the guy who is busting his ***. Read the positive remarks on line.

Remember the glass is half full.

You would have learned that in business 101 where they reviewed deposits.

View more comments (56)

Unemployment Expert Tips

Experts Tips on Unemployment and Cyber Security

Feb 3, 2020

Can’t verify your identity via Andrew Stettner, an unemployment expert, comments on how the verification process works and the privacy risks involved. Learn how one consumer resolved his issue.

Andrew Stettner
Andrew Stettner

Andrew Stettner is a senior fellow at TheCenturyFoundation and a non-profit leader who shares expert opinion on unemployment benefits and insurance reform.

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