Lexbe

Ludmilla from Thompson Brown Legal (51 -100 Employees )

I'm flabbergasted at the audacity of this small local business to market itself as a large established company in this industry. Phantasmagoric Interface, search tool is neither accurate or predictable and the production feature caused us nightmares. Our paralegals became frustrated when trying to address the issues they've encountered and instead of solving the problem, Lexbe first tried to make us look ignorant by pushing additional consulting services only to confirm what was already brought to their attention- Software is full of glitches and their customers are used as guinea pigs. What an expensive way to spend your money and time!

Thomas Stagg from Stagg, Terenzi, Confusione & Wabnik

This is an awful company and program in my opinion. Avoid it at all costs.

It advertises itself as able to perform tasks similar to larger and more expensive programs, but it is not worth the cost. My experience with the company has been dreadful. They seem to be interested in taking my firm's money than anything else. We explained to the company three months ago that we had issue with their program, which required the use of Lexbe to search the individual e-mails from a large document production. When we searched for the list of e-mails as the instructions in the training videos suggested, we found some glitches. Our objective in using Lexbe was to be able to create searches in order to produce a “hits” list. If the search worked properly, we should have been able to use the “hits” list in order to “split” or isolate the documents by creating new pdfs based on the list. However, after looking at the “hits” for a specific “searched” email address, we realized that the data description in the “hits” list did not match the split documents. We saw that based on the search, the “hit” results were off. We called a representative from Lexbe to explain that the “hits” were inaccurate. We have emails from Lexbe technical support saying "I looked into the issue of the page numbers noted in the "Hits" not corresponding to the actual search hit results. I was able to replicate the issue on my end and have escalated it to our software team for further investigation. I will get back to you shortly with more information after our team investigates." In other words, we identified an issue caused by an internal Lexbe software glitch. The suggestion was to use "native" files rather than PDF files, but of course that is not always possible in litigation. A few days later, we were told: "Our software team was able to determine the cause of the issue which is data specific and relates to internal page breaks applied to the documents in this production. They are currently working to find a solution." The then said "Our team is going to change the software to take this unique situation into account. This change will be in effect with the next release and we will advise when that release occurs. Following the next release, you should no longer encounter this issue." They suggested "In the meantime, the workaround is to download the native version of the document...." Again, the native file is often not available from an opposing party in a litigation. Long story short, Lexbe never provided us with a solution.

We informed Lexbe that we would not ask for money back for the funds previously paid to it , but wanted to suspend the account since the product was not as advertised. However, Lexbe refused to suspend or cancel our account and is currently demanding monthly payments. My advice is to stay far away from this company.