BenchPrep

The Bench Prep customer service team reached out and did a good job trying to fix this for me after I posted the review. I would say give them a few more cycles before doing the PHR with them, but if the content is updated the technology is actually really good.

BenchPrep is a turn-​key solution for education and training companies to create and deliver personalized digital learning experiences across multiple devices including web, tablet and mobile. More than 1 million learners have used BenchPrep. The company was voted «most innovative and best-​in-​class test prep and assessment platform» at the Education Innovation Summit and won the New Venture Challenge at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business. BenchPrep has been featured in The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, TechCrunch, Publishers Weekly and Fast Company as a leading education innovator.

Hire a Proof-​reader. I shall rate the bar review program on a scale of one to ten
1. Customer support = zero as it is impossible to get anyone on the phone;
2. Ease of program use = zero and see customer support above;
3. Quality of questions = 10; but
4. There are clearly too many questions with typographical errors.
Great questions for the most part, awful program and non-​existent customer support.
Here is an example of two questions that were commingled. How can this happen on a bar review program?
Q. Kimberly Lacy was a young aspiring actress who had recently re-​domiciled in California after graduating high school in Alpine, Texas. One afternoon, she received a telephone call from her agent, Marvin Masterson, who invited her to dinner to discuss a new film contract. Kimberly agreed to meet Masterson at her favorite Beverly Hills sushi (a restaurant specializing in Japanese raw fish) restaurant «Tokyo» later that evening.
When Kimberly arrived, she parked her car, a 1967 Chevrolet Impala convertible, at the Rodeo Parking Co. lot across the street from «Tokyo.» The parking attendant directed Kimberly to leave her keys in the car and he handed her a receipt stub as she left. At «Tokyo,» Kimberly and Marvin discussed her new movie role while enjoying their favorite dishes of halibut sashimi, quail eggs with uni (sea urchin) and salmon skin hand rolls. After Kimberly agreed to accept her new acting role, Marvin accompanied Kimberly to the Rodeo Parking Co. lot.
It was raining hard in Fresno one evening as Harry, a cab driver, was looking for one last passenger. Sue flagged him down and directed him to take her to her home at 16 Parkside Lane. Harry recognized Sue as a former girlfriend, and Sue invited him into her house when they arrived.
Unknown to Harry, Sue was an undercover police officer who worked in the sex crimes unit. When they were inside Sue’s house, Sue made sexual advances toward Harry, who responded by kissing her and holding her hand. Sue was about to kiss Harry again, when she got up to answer the phone in the kitchen.
While she was on the phone, Harry picked up Sue’s solid gold ring that she had carelessly left on the living room table. Harry planned to take the ring to a jeweler the next week and return it to Sue with a diamond in it, in appreciation for her hospitality. He put it into his pocket and got ready to leave.
As he left her house, Harry reminded Sue that she had not yet paid her fare of $ 2.50. She handed Harry a $ 20.00 bill and said, «Harry, keep the change.»
Before Harry reached the garage and returned the cab, he stopped into a bar. There he met a shady-​looking character, Bob, who offered to sell him a two-​month-​old color TV for $ 50.00. Bob said that he would take only cash and that he also had some unboxed silverware and jewelry he could sell Harry from his van, which was parked outside. Bob said, «You better decide fast, because I’ve got to get out of town right away.» Harry, who knew that the TV was worth $ 500.00, gave Bob $ 50.00 and Bob gave Harry the TV, which was not in a box. Bob did not tell Harry that he had just stolen the television from a house down the street.
Based on the above facts, for which of the following crime (s) should Harry be convicted?
A. battery upon Sue and larceny of the ring
B. larceny of the ring
C. embezzlement of the ring
D. receiving stolen property
Solution:
The correct answer is D.
Even though Bob did not tell Harry that the TV is stolen, there are enough circumstances present to indicate to Harry that the TV is stolen. Even if one considers choice (D) as only possibly correct, the other three alternatives are wrong. There was no larceny of the ring, since Harry intended to return it. As a consequence of larceny being incorrect, applicants need not even consider the battery upon Sue as presented in choice (A). Anyway, there was obviously consent to the battery. In addition, there was no embezzlement of the ring since Harry was not in lawful possession of it, thus choice © is incorrect