Minimax Consulting, LLC Peter W. Chabot, Statistical Fraud, Criminals, Liars, Thieves, Phony Credentials, Providence, Rhode Island
Minimax Consulting cannot produce statistical data output that can be replicated -- an inherent part of the scientific method. They will not supply you with the most fundamental information about the procedures they followed: what stats package was used and the version, sample observations used, how they handled missing and outlier data, if the data had to be transformed and how, any randomization or jackknifing done, no CIs reported for any test statistic, no graphical output, whatsoever.
When you request verification, PattiLou Normand will claim repeatedly that they have met all contractual agreements, and will refuse to supply you with any data matrices, or metadata, functions used, models selected and why, vector loadings, they will be unwilling to provide ANY of the ORIGINAL, statistical output.
However, PattiLou Normand will also insist that they are sorry you could not work together to rectify things (that places some of the blame on you), and they are still willing to speak with you about the situation (thin appearance of being cooperative, in case you decide to sue), all the while professing they have met all their obligations to you, contract terminated. All empty, non-sensical, and contradictory words.
Keep your money, your reputation, and your sanity, people. I paid Minimax Consulting $1800.00 in advance (they require payment upfront, but also have a No-Refund Policy, another red flag), and after nearly 4 wasted months, 8 phone calls, and almost 30 of the same exasperating, cookie-cutter emails about an analyst working feverishly on my project, and after I demanded either my money back or the legitimate work for which I paid, they sent me a document that is utterly worthless, more than full of dubious results that I could never give to my committee or publish in a peer-reviewed journal.
Any reputable statistician, company, or scientist will provide all necessary intermediate data so that their work can be reproduced. With Minimax Consulting, you will get far more dishonor and frustration than you ever bargained for, and far less quality and quantity of product for which you rightfully are due.
Don't just believe my experiences, friends. Read other complaints at (((Redacted))), google 'Minimax Consulting Complaints', and check out their record at the BBB of RI. Theyhave lost their BBB accreditation as of May 2010, andsuffer a dismal rating of "D". It won't take too much digging for you to discover that Minimax Consulting runs a bogus operation, scamming people out of theirhard-earned money daily.
And while Minimax screwed me and countless others (based on the postings), I hope this message prevents someone else from being scammed by their glamorous, internet facade.
If you have already been scammed by Minimax, report them to the AG of RI and the AG of your state of residence. You can also file investigative complaints with multiple agencies listed on (((Redacted))), usps.gov, and many other consumer rights internet sites, especially ic3.gov and fbi.gov, as Minimax is engaging in both mail and internet fraud.
Best of luck to all.
And screw you, Minimax.
CLICK here to see why Rip-off Report, as a matter of policy, deleted either a phone number, link or e-mail address from this Report.
2 Updates & Rebuttals
College Student
Fort Lauderdale,Florida,
United States of America
The owner's husband - convicted of a similar scam
#3Consumer Comment
Sat, January 22, 2011
United States of America
before the
Securities and Exchange Commission
Investment Advisers Act of 1940
Release No. 2142 / July 3, 2003
Administrative Proceeding
File No. 3-11170
In the Matter of
PETER W. CHABOT,
Respondent.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
ORDER INSTITUTING ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT TO SECTION 203(f) OF THE INVESTMENT ADVISERS ACT OF 1940, MAKING FINDINGS AND IMPOSING REMEDIAL SANCTIONS
. The Commission's Complaint alleges that, beginning in 1999, Chabot, individually and through the defendants, raised over $1.1 million from approximately 14 investors by making material misrepresentations and omissions to them concerning an alleged offshore hedge fund. Chabot falsely claimed he was a successful Wall Street trader and had a successful track record operating an earlier hedge fund. Chabot then caused to be prepared false and misleading account statements for the investors claiming that the hedge fund had assets of $135 million. As alleged in the Commission's Complaint, the hedge fund raised only approximately $1.16 million and Chabot did not buy stocks or other securities with investors' monies. Instead, he spent their money on personal expenses, including over $100,000 on computers, clothes, foreign travel, and sports tickets, and an additional $100,000 for the rent of a loft apartment.
4. On January 8, 2002, Chabot pled guilty to one count of securities fraud in violation of Title 15 United States Code Section 78j(b), 17 C.F.R. Section 240.10b-5 and one count of wire fraud in violation of Title 18 United States Code Section 1343 before the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, inUnited States v. Peter W. Chabot, Case No. 02 Cr 19. On February 27, 2002, Chabot was sentenced to 27 months imprisonment to run concurrently on both counts, supervised release of 36 months and restitution of $1,265,868.
5. The counts of the criminal information to which Chabot pled guilty alleged, among other things, that Chabot made false representations to potential investors about the "Sirens Synergy Fund" and obtained approximately $1.2 million from investors. From July 1999 through August 2001, Chabot also distributed fictitious monthly statements to investors that falsely portrayed the Synergy Fund as having investment gains of as much as approximately 20 percent per year.
6. On June 25, 2003, a final judgment was entered by consent against Chabot and Chabot Investments permanently enjoining Chabot and Chabot Investments from violating Section 17(a) of the Securities Act, Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and Sections 206(1) and (2) of the Advisers Act.
MCGfraud
Lubbock,Texas,
USA
Company renamed MCG - you can try to run, but not hide forever from the truth.
#3Author of original report
Wed, July 21, 2010
Aren't you the clever ones, Charlotte and Peter? Changing the business name amidst an onslaught of disparaging publicity and consumer complaints being investigated by the AG of RI, the AGA, the FTC, the ICP3, and many others, most assuredly. Here's hoping we (i.e., the many you have swindled) have managed to cost you equal aggravation, time, and money. Peter, Charlotte, and all MCG (formerly Minimax Consulting of Providence) employees -- why don't you acquire bonafide (and verifiable) degrees and make honest livings, for a change? You will sleep better at night.