Mike Russ Financial Training Center

Review: I purchased the in person P&C, L&D, and Ethics Insurance Pre-Licensing Courses from [redacted] (for their Anaheim location) in November 2009. I did not finish a portion of the course as I moved, and switched jobs. Approximately 1 year later, I inquired by phone, and email a couple of times in order to finish the course. They did not respond. About 6 months after this first attempt, I began additional inquiries on a nearly monthly basis; still with no response Finally in May of 2012, (after inquiring repeatedly that month) they finally responded to me. I was told that I after 1 year there is a $50 re-instatement fee, and after 2 years I would have to pay full price again. It seems convenient, that they waited, and waited until the 2 years elapsed before finally returning my calls/emails. Verbally, one of the Anaheim employees told me that if I still had the attendance card they could have worked with me. But, since I didn't. There was nothing they could do as they didn't track the information. Recently, I found the attendance cards during a move. I contacted [redacted] to see if I could finish the 1 day in P&C, and the 2 days in L&D. This time they responded that there is a 1 year limit before you have to pay full price.

In addition to the P&C, L&D, and Ethics courses, I purchased several add on courses that I did not take. I was verbally told that these classes did not expire. But, they refuse to ever respond on these.Desired Settlement: At a minimum, I would like to be able make up the 1 day of P&C class to finish that course. Ideally, I could take all 3 days. But, it would be acceptable if I could only do the one day. I would be worried about being negatively treated if I went to their course (after this complaint). So alternatively, a refund/partial refund would be acceptable; as, would a large discount to re-take the P&C and L&D courses through their online program. I am not overly concerned abou the add on classes I did not take or get a refund for. My main concern is obtaining my insurance license without having to double pay for the education.

Business

Response:

September 24 2013

Revdex.com

4747 Viewridge Ave #200

San Diego, CA 92123-1688

RE: [redacted]

To Whom It May Concern:

I would like to begin with stating that this is the first time I have ever heard the name [redacted] and upon

my looking into this situation, there are a number of discrepancies with his story.

In November of 2009 Mr. [redacted] enrolled in 92-hours of insurance pre-licensing, at which time he was given

Attendance Cards for EACH of the 3 courses (ALL of which state our class policies) . This consists of:

1. 12-hours of Code & Ethics, which he completed (see Attendance card attached)

2. 40-hours of Life Insurance, missing 1 day- what was Segments 5&6 (see his email of 9/11/13)

3. 40-hours of Property & Casualty, missing 2 days- what was Segments 5,6,7,8 (see his email of 9/11/13)

According to Mr. [redacted], he "inquired by phone and email a couple oftimes" and we "did not respond". We

have no record of every receiving any email from Mr. [redacted] and would like to see any copies he could provide.

Also, all phone calls are answered in our San Diego office and our office is open from 8-5 Monday- Friday and 8-

12 on Saturday (and we do not have an answering machine) so to say that we did not respond does not even

make sense (???) If you call, we answer the phone. If you get a busy signal or no one answers, you call back.

His comments about waiting 6 months, inquires on a monthly basis, ... etc also do not make sense.

Mr. [redacted] stated in his letter to you that, "I recently found the attendance cards" and it clearly states on the

Attendance card that "Your enrollment with [redacted] is valid 1 year from enrollment date" . Yet he still

questions this. The 1 year requirement is also Department of Insurance regulations.

Additionally, Mr. [redacted] wants to take only the sections he did not complete in 2009 in order to complete the

courses. That is not possible due to the Department of Insurance changes in course requirements in the 4

years since Mr. [redacted] (which Mr. [redacted] is aware of and asks about "comparable" sections in his 9/11 email.).

The bottom line is Mr. [redacted] purchased courses that he had 1 year to complete and he did not do so. He then

had 1 year to re-instate his enrollment and complete his classes, he did not do so. The Department of Insurance

requires that he take the entire course in order to complete, but he does not want to (only wanting to do the

sections he did not complete} and now 4 years later because he is not getting the answers he wants to hear, he

wants a refund.

Sincerely,

CFO

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below...

Either [redacted] is incompetent, completely unaware of how the business is being run, or is a blatant liar. I find it unconscionable that he would respond to the Revdex.com in this manner. Regardless, I no longer wish to attend, or ever come in contact with [redacted] employees again.

Prior to contacting the Revdex.com, I had contacted [redacted] about this issue. Most recently [redacted] handled my inquiry. He responded to me on 9/13, and then again on 9/24. My complaint was sent to the Revdex.com on 9/14. Therefore, while my complaint was pending [redacted] was actively looking into my situation. It’s strange that the person handling the Revdex.com complaints would have no idea about this. I can forward this correspondence for your reference. Additionally, I have saved written correspondence from [redacted] on this issue from 2012. The representative did not give their name in this correspondence (email address was [redacted]). This correspondence states the two year requirement. So, were they violating the insurance requirements then? Or, just providing factual false information to me in writing? This email also states that my situation was brought to their CEO. Therefore, I assume it’s a policy to escalate these issues to management. Again, strange that Mr. [redacted] is unable to locate any of this information, and does not know who I am. The emails I sent in between these periods were from my work account. I have switched employers, and no longer have access to these emails.

Regarding the answering machine; this is an outright lie. During business hours, I have spoken to different representatives. They always needed to get back to me, as the issue had to be escalated to “my manager”, the “CEO”, etc.. I never received responses. After business hours, they have an auto attendant (machine) answering the phone. After the voice message plays, there is an option to leave a message in a general mailbox. These were where my messages were left. I called again today at 7:45PM and confirmed that the phone system hasn’t changed, and they still have an answering machine.

I have retained the receipt from the initial purchase through their website. Nowhere does it show a one year completion requirement. The attendance card has the verbiage (in extremely small font) about the one year. But, this was provided during class after my enrollment (and verbally challenged by the instructors). The numerous other supplemental courses did not have any documentation showing a 1 year requirement, and I was told (by the person upselling in Anaheim) that I could take them whenever I wanted. What is Mr. [redacted]’s excuse on these? Did I not buy these? Is there something in his office drawer stating there was a 1 year limit?

When I initially contacted [redacted], I was not looking for a refund. In fact, I was planning on paying [redacted] additional monies to finish my Insurance Courses. I was also willing to pay additional for the test prep, and was going to write off a loss for the supplemental classes I did not take (but paid for). However, based off their ludicrous responses, and the fact that they seem to deliberately distort information (and only reply when it is beneficial to them), I will be expecting at least a partial refund for payments received. I do not care if they state they are refunding the insurance portion, or the supplemental class portion. But, a refund is more than prudent based off the facts. Additionally, I think that there should be consequences for Mr. [redacted] providing false information to the Revdex.com.

Regards,