Complaint Review: InfoSec Institute
InfoSec Institute Poor quality, extremely unresponsive, lacking in customer service, and did not live up to Infosec Institute guarantee! Elmwood Park Illinois
Failed to live up to course syllabus; failed to live up to their guarantee; poor customer service, unresponsive, and as a former United States Marine, I found them greatly lacking in integrity. They claim a 93% pass rate for their in class and online class, however, they would not provide any data to me to back up this claim. I asked for the data because the instructor informed me that the pass rate was much lower. I felt like I was being ripped up from the very first day. And the instructor was right, nowhere close to 93% of the class passed on the first try.
The instructor was often late to class and the last day we were supposed to take a full test and instead we took a 20 question test and left while it was still morning. When I called to complain, I often go the run-around. They did eventually offer me an online class. However, this class timed out and after sending several emails and not getting a response, I gave up. I have all email correspondence to back up my claim.
I have taken several instruction classes, and InfoSec ranks as the worst. Terrible experience, would not ever recommend them. I feel like a wasted my money completely
This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 05/13/2013 09:19 AM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/infosec-institute/elmwood-park-illinois-60707/infosec-institute-poor-quality-extremely-unresponsive-lacking-in-customer-service-an-1050485. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year. Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report. READ: Foreign websites steal our content
If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here: