Mosaic Pacific Investment Advisors LLC

Subject: Re: You have a New Message from Revdex.com of Hawaii Regarding Complaint # [redacted] Attach is my response to Mosaic's letter dated June 20,Thank you, [redacted] To: Revdex.com of Hawaii, Inc Bishop Street, Ste Honolulu, Hi From: [redacted] [redacted] ** Aiea, Hi June 29, Subject: Complaint ID No [redacted] , responding to Andrea Deutsch letter dated June 20, I am responding to subject letterI will quote each statement from Andrea And respond accordingly 1.) “He ( [redacted] ) also needed to change his investment objectives to get more income from his investments.” This is not trueI did not “need” to change my investment objectives to get more incomeI wanted a lower risk portfolio for my investments and at the same time, generate some incomeThis was my retirement money and I didn’t want to invest too heavily in stocks 2.) “However, all these changes came after he purchased the latest Annuity.” MisleadingI purchased the annuity on February 23, I requested the changes to my investment objectives in Spring of The conversion was delayed by Andrea for reasons unknown to meThen, in or around November/December Andrea took a leave of absenceThe final conversion of my investment portfolio was done in or about May So, Andrea was right in saying that the changes to my investments came after I purchased the latest annuity because it was delayed for a year by her 3.) “When his ( [redacted] ) Voya annuity and Standard annuity were past their surrender periods he asked me to research and look for another annuity he could invest in because he didn’t want to pay the taxes on the gains he made with the previous annuities if he cashed them out.” Not quite trueAndrea told me to hold on to the annuities and she’ll look for another annuity programI had no concerns about cashing out my annuityAndrea wanted to have me continue the annuity program to act like a safety net from the stock market 4.) ”I found an annuity at Americo that was a suitable investment and met the client’s objectives.” Not true I wanted an annuity that was similar to what I had with Voya and StandardAndrea said that Americo was such an annuityI distinctly remember Andrea saying that Americo was like Voya and StandardThis is why I didn’t give it much thoughtI just signed what she wanted me to signI had done this many times before and had no problems 5.) “The Americo annuity application required a suitability form completed with the client’s income, etc signed by the client on 2/20/16.” Andrea filled this form out and wanted me to sign itThere was no discussion on fees 6.) “I also met with the client once the contract was in force and discussed each feature of the policy Athe persistency bonus of 5% at the end of the surrender period of years, Bthe administrative fee of 1.5%, CCrediting option will be over a two-year tied to the S&P index ..” Not True None of the above A,B, C, is trueIn reference to, AAndrea initially told me that the bonus would be $5,and not 5%Shortly after I received the acknowledgement of the annuity from Americo, I emailed Andrea on 4/8/about not receiving this bonus which she said I would receive upon signing up with AmericoCopy of this email is shown on enclosure of the complaintAndrea did not reply to this email so I emailed her again on 4/13/as shown on enclosure of the original complaint asking again about the bonusI said she can tell me at the meeting the following dayAt this meeting, Andrea said the bonus will be awarded at the end of the first year into the annuityI didn’t think that was too bad so I let it goWhen the first annual report came from Americo, there was no sign of the bonus as shown on enclosure of the complaintI had a meeting with Andrea and Cory on May 9, At this meeting, Cory said that the bonus will not be awarded till the end of the annuity term, i.eafter yearsAndrea concurred with CoryCory then mentioned that the bonus was not $5,but 5%Things that Andrea told me that I thought were facts were just getting overturned left and right BAndrea never mentioned at any time about Americo’s Administrative Fee of 1.5%I personally feel that Andrea did not mention this fee because had she done so, I think she knows that I would not sign up with AmericoI believe she knew how I felt about fees CAndrea never mentioned that the crediting option will be over a year periodPrior to signing the annuity contract, Andrea said that Americo was like Voya and StandardVoya and Standard crediting option was on an annual basisSo, this was obviously omitted by AndreaSecondly, during a phone conversation prior to the May 9, meeting, Andrea referred to the December 31, Mosaic Quarterly reportAndrea noted that there was a difference between the Mosaic end of year report and the Americo’s first year annual report as of April 20, The difference Andrea said was due to a gain that I had after one year in the annuityAt this point, Andrea thought that the annuity program was being credited on an annual basisI also assumed that understandingAs it turned out, this was not true and during the May 9, meeting, Andrea did an about face and said the crediting was done every yearsAndrea’s logic for concluding that I had a gain in my annuity after one year was flawed because, her Mosaic end of year report was wrong which led her to believe that I had a gain 7.) “We met on May 9, and we noticed that the statement did reflect a death value amount less than his original investmentI asked if I could clarify this amount with Americo and get back to him.” Not TrueWe did meet on May 9, but Andrea and Cory did not notice that the Americo annual statement did reflect a death value amount less than the original investmentI noticed this amount and brought it to their attention which is one of the reasons why I wanted to have this meetingI finally told them that I thought I had principal protection which is what Andrea said I would have and she even noted it on the Americo applicationThey didn’t say anythingI asked if I were to die tomorrow, will my beneficiaries get the original investment or the lesser amount (i.emy principal investment less 3%)? The principal amount less 3% was the “Accumulative Value” of my annuity as of April 20, per my annual statementCory along with Andrea said that my beneficiaries would get the lesser amount if I would die tomorrowI was really upset at this because I told them over and over that I thought I had principal protectionFinally, Cory said that I had principal protection only after years, not year to yearTherefore, if I die tomorrow, I don’t have principal protectionI asked Cory and Andrea about this, times whether this was really true and they “stuck by their guns” and said “yes”I was very upset because again things started to unravel more and moreThe accuracy of the facts that I thought were to be true when told to me by Andrea, was being completely overturned and untruePlease note that this is how I left the meetingAt this point, there was no mentioning that Andrea would clarify with Americo about this issue as she stated aboveIt was either the same day or the following day that I got a call from Cory saying that what I understood I had for principal protection was trueIf I die tomorrow, my beneficiaries would get the principal investmentThis experience tells me that as situations arise, I cannot believe what I always here from Andrea and Cory 8.) “I serviced this client to the fullest, by making sure his beneficiaries were correctly spelled on his policy, to meeting with him while on maternity leave.” Not TrueI gave Andrea a list of my beneficiaries when I opened up my annuity I noticed that one of the beneficiary names were wrong when I received the confirmation from Americo so I asked Andrea to correct itI assumed she didHowever, when I was going through my files a year later, I noticed that the name was not correctedEvidently, Andrea did not follow up to see if the names were correctedI requested for a second time that my beneficiaries name be correctedAfter receiving conformation, my beneficiary’s names were correctedAgain, I had to bring it to the attention of Andrea and not the reverse 9.) “I met with him ( [redacted] ) to review his accounts and processed any requests he wanted to have his dividends go to his personal checking account on a monthly basis.” Not TrueI never wanted my dividends to go into my checking account on a monthly basisMy objective was to withdraw my dividends whenever I wanted and I did it myself 10.) “I also brought in another partner, who also help to manage his investment accounts since the client wanted to change his investment objective once his business had to close due to his health issues.” Reason for investment changes is not trueAs mentioned in my rebuttal in paragraphs and above, I wanted an investment change because I wanted a lower risk type of portfolioWhen I told Andrea I wanted to change my investment strategy back in Spring of 2015, I had no thought of closing my business due to my healthAt that time, my health was okay, not great, but okayIt had no affect on my business situationSo, if Andrea is implying that my health was the cause for changes in my investment objective, this is simply “not true” 11.) “In my opinion, we went above and beyond for this particular client because I had worked with him for so long and his trust and loyalty meant so much to meI appreciated his business and always put his objectives and interest first.” QuestionableReferencing my original complaint, the attachment to enclosure 8, I mentioned to Andrea, in our meeting in April of 2016, that when I presented my portfolio loss of about 6% from March to March 2016, there was no responseI mentioned that the S&P had no change during this period, yet my portfolio loss 6% of its valueAll Andrea did was make a copy of my reportTo this day, over a year later, she gave me no responseThere was no acknowledgement, discussion as to cause, nor any corrective action mentioned, yet I pay her a feeTherefore, I “question” whether she “put my objectives and interest first” 12.) “All the details and features of the Americo annuity were fully disclosed on at least three different meetings: at the signing of the application, on the date of delivery and more recent at our May 9th meeting.” Not True 13.) “I understand in the last months, he has been going through a lot of changes and I tried to do everything I could to make the changes and transitions as painless as possible.” Really? My positive attitude about my health presents no problem for meI have had this health issue for over years and I don’t let it govern my quality of lifeAndrea said she tries to make the changes and transitions as painless as possible? Who’s in Pain? Not meI’m just retiring earlier than planned and I’m enjoying itAfter closing my business, what pain is Andrea referring to when I visited my alma mater in Colorado after leaving there almost years ago? What pain is there when I can go to Vegas anytime I want? What pain is there when I went on a New Zealand/Australia cruiseAll of these events were done in months after I closed the businessThe only pain I have during the past months was with Andrea 14.) “In conclusion, I believe that the best resolution for this client is that he find someone he can work with since he didn’t feel that I was able to service him to meet his needsI received an email today that he will be transferring to another advisor and I wish him the best!” Discontinued ServiceIt appears to me that Andrea is recommending I find someone else to work withI had told her that I am discontinuing her service in the email she mention receiving from meAgain, I believe what she is recommending is for me to change managers for my stocks and bond portfolioThis complaint is not about my stocks and bonds portfolioThis complaint is about wanting to get out of the annuity program without any cost to me My responses to Cory’s “Description of Events” is as follows: 15.) “My response to Mr [redacted] was in regards to what was shown on the official Americo statementI had, up to that point, never encountered an error with an annuity statementAs such, at first was baffled, however, took it as fact until we could do further investigation.” Twisted During the meeting, Cory did not seem baffled as he described aboveIn addition to the response I gave above in paragraph 7) describing the situation of death benefits, why did Cory come up with the idea that principal protection was only applied after the year term? This is a complete misrepresentation of the annuityThis was a story that was just made upIf a representative knows the company’s policy and see that there is a conflict between a customer’s statement and the company’s annuity policy, the representative should not make up stories and tell the customer something that is not trueThis will just get the customer more upset and mad because integrity is lostOnce a representative lies to a customer, it’s very hard to believe any future discussions to be true 16.) “In regards, to Mr [redacted] ’s statement that Voya and Standard did not have expenses: this is falseAll annuities carry expensesIn Voya and Standard’s case, the expenses are charged to the client in the form of lower interest.” Taken out of contextIt appears that Cory is attempting to paint a bleak picture of my competency about businessThe only place in my complaint that I mention the word “expenses” is as follows” “ When Voya and Standard determined my accumulative value, it could never go down because there were no expenses to bring it down.” The main subject is how I, the customer, see the accumulative value on his annual statementThe context of “Expenses” was used to describe the actual fluctuation it has on “Accumulative Value” on the reportAs a customer, I do not care where or how the company accounts for their expensesI do not want to see expenses being deducted from my accumulative valueThis is my choice and I should have been told of this deductionCory apparently is trying to justify that expenses are either hidden or displayed and that the hidden expenses are in the form of lower interest ratesThis is irrelevant to meI chose Voya and Standard because I did not see any expenses deducted from my accumulative valueCory should not try to justify for the situation I’m in because I was not given the complete information to make a sound decision As a business owner for over years, I know all businesses have expensesWhen Cory said that “all annuities carry expenses”, it seem to be a trivial statement for there is no existence of the opposite 17.) “In our opinion, Americo offers fee transparency in contrast to the unknown fees charged by Voya and Standard.” This contrast to the unknown fees charged by Voya and Standard is not in questionI should have been told of the transparency that Administrative Fees will be deducted from the accumulative value so that I could have made a choice to my satisfactionBasically, I should have been given the “True” facts about this annuity and not have stories changed as issues came to surface In conclusion, as evidence above, I do not agree with Andrea’s responsesShe did not address the issue I suggested as a remedyHer conclusion, that I find another manager, was “moot” since I had already emailed her discontinuing her servicesThe services Andrea is referring to is my stocks and bond portfolio and has nothing to do with the annuity in this complaintI would want to discontinue the Americo annuity that Andrea presented to me without incurring any costs, such as surrender chargesI would like my principal investment back and made “whole” again prior to signing the contract [redacted]

Subject: Attached Business Response for Complaint ***Hi ***Attached is the Business response for Complaint ***.Thank you, *** *** *** * *** ***

Subject: Re: You have a New Message from Revdex.com of Hawaii Regarding Complaint #[redacted] Attach is my...

response to Mosaic's letter dated June 20,2017 Thank you, [redacted]
To:     Revdex.com of Hawaii, Inc.           1332 Bishop Street, Ste 615           Honolulu, Hi.  96813   From: [redacted]           [redacted].           Aiea, Hi.  96701   June 29, 2017   Subject:        Complaint ID No. [redacted], responding to Andrea Deutsch letter dated June 20, 2017     I am responding to subject letter. I will quote each statement from Andrea And respond accordingly.   1.) “He ([redacted]) also needed to change his investment objectives to get more income from his investments.”   This is not true. I did not “need” to change my investment objectives to get more income. I wanted a lower risk portfolio for my investments and at the same time, generate some income. This was my retirement money and I didn’t want to invest too heavily in stocks.             2.) “However, all these changes came after he purchased the latest           Annuity.”   Misleading. I purchased the annuity on February 23, 2016. I requested the changes to my investment objectives in Spring of 2015. The conversion was delayed by Andrea for reasons unknown to me. Then, in or around  November/December 2015 Andrea took a leave of absence. The final conversion of my investment portfolio was done in or about May 2016. So, Andrea was right in saying that the changes to my investments came after I purchased the latest annuity because it was delayed for a year by her.   3.) “When his ([redacted]) Voya annuity and Standard annuity were past their surrender periods he asked me to research and look for another annuity he could invest in because he didn’t want to pay the taxes on the gains he made with the previous annuities if he cashed them out.” Not quite true. Andrea told me to hold on to the annuities and she’ll look for another annuity program. I had no concerns about cashing out my annuity. Andrea wanted to have me continue the annuity program to act like a safety net from the stock market.   4.) ”I found an annuity at Americo that was a suitable investment and met the client’s objectives.”   Not true.  I wanted an annuity that was similar to what I had with Voya and Standard. Andrea said that Americo was such an annuity. I distinctly remember Andrea saying that Americo was like Voya and Standard. This is why I didn’t give it much thought. I just signed what she wanted me to sign. I had done this many times before and had no problems.   5.) “The Americo annuity application required a suitability form completed with the client’s income, etc……. signed by the client on 2/20/16.”   Andrea filled this form out and wanted me to sign it. There was no discussion on fees.             6.)  “I also met with the client once the contract was in force and discussed each feature of the policy… A. the persistency bonus of 5% at the end of the surrender period of 7 years, B. the administrative fee of 1.5%, C. Crediting option 2 will be over a two-year tied to the S&P 500 index…..”   Not True.  None of the above A,B, C, is true. In reference to,   A. Andrea initially told me that the bonus would be $5,000 and not 5%. Shortly after I received the acknowledgement of the annuity from Americo, I emailed Andrea on 4/8/2016 about not receiving this bonus which she said I would receive upon signing up with Americo. Copy of this email is shown on enclosure 3 of the complaint. Andrea did not reply to this email so I emailed her again on 4/13/2016 as shown on enclosure 4 of the original complaint asking again about the bonus. I said she can tell me at the meeting the following day. At this meeting, Andrea said the bonus will be awarded at the end of the first year into the annuity. I didn’t think that was too bad so I let it go. When the first annual report came from Americo, there was no sign of the bonus as shown on enclosure 5 of the complaint. I had a meeting with Andrea and Cory on May 9, 2017. At this meeting, Cory said that the bonus will not be awarded till the end of the annuity term, i.e. after 7 years. Andrea concurred with Cory. Cory then mentioned that the bonus was not $5,000 but 5%. Things that Andrea told me that I thought were facts were just getting overturned left and right.   B. Andrea never mentioned at any time about Americo’s Administrative Fee of 1.5%. I personally feel that Andrea did not mention this fee because had she done so, I think she knows that I would not sign up with Americo. I believe she knew how I felt about fees.   C. Andrea never mentioned that the crediting option will be over a 2 year period. Prior to signing the annuity contract, Andrea said that Americo was like Voya and Standard. Voya and Standard crediting option was on an annual basis. So, this was obviously omitted by Andrea. Secondly, during a phone conversation prior to the May 9, 2017 meeting, Andrea referred to the December 31, 2016 Mosaic Quarterly report. Andrea noted that there was a difference between the Mosaic end of year report and the Americo’s first year annual report as of April 20, 2017. The difference Andrea said was due to a gain that I had after one year in the annuity. At this point, Andrea thought that the annuity program was being credited on an annual basis. I also assumed that understanding. As it turned out, this was not true and during the May 9, 2017 meeting, Andrea did an about face and said the crediting was done every 2 years. Andrea’s logic for concluding that I had a gain in my annuity after one year was flawed because, her Mosaic end of year report was wrong which led her to believe that I had a gain.   7.) “We met on May 9, 2017 and we noticed that the statement did reflect a death value amount less than his original investment. I asked if I could clarify this amount with Americo and get back to him.”   Not True. We did meet on May 9, 2017 but Andrea and Cory did not notice that the Americo annual statement did reflect a death value amount less than the original investment. I noticed this amount and brought it to their attention which is one of the reasons why I wanted to have this meeting. I finally told them that I thought I had principal protection which is what Andrea said I would have and she even noted it on the Americo application. They didn’t say anything. I asked if I were to die tomorrow, will my beneficiaries get the original investment or the lesser amount (i.e. my principal investment less 3%)? The principal amount less 3% was the “Accumulative Value” of my annuity as of April 20, 2017 per my annual statement. Cory along with Andrea said that my beneficiaries would get the lesser amount if I would die tomorrow. I was really upset at this because I told them over and over that I thought I had principal protection. Finally, Cory said that I had principal protection only after 7 years, not year to year. Therefore, if I die tomorrow, I don’t have principal protection. I asked Cory and Andrea about this, 3 times whether this was really true and they “stuck by their guns” and said “yes”. I was very upset because again things started to unravel more and more. The accuracy of the facts that I thought were to be true when told to me by Andrea, was being completely overturned and untrue. Please note that this is how I left the meeting. At this point, there was no mentioning that Andrea would clarify with Americo about this issue as she stated above. It was either the same day or the following day that I got a call from Cory saying that what I understood I had for principal protection was true. If I die tomorrow, my beneficiaries would get the principal investment. This experience tells me that as situations arise, I cannot believe what I always here from Andrea and Cory.   8.)  “I serviced this client to the fullest, by making sure his beneficiaries were correctly spelled on his policy, to meeting with him while on maternity leave.”   Not True. I gave Andrea a list of my beneficiaries when I opened up my annuity.  I noticed that one of the beneficiary names were wrong when I received the confirmation from Americo so I asked Andrea to correct it. I assumed she did. However, when I was going through my files a year later, I noticed that the name was not corrected. Evidently, Andrea did not follow up to see if the names were corrected. I requested for a second time that my beneficiaries name be corrected. After receiving conformation, my beneficiary’s names were corrected. Again, I had to bring it to the attention of Andrea and not the reverse.   9.)  “I met with him ([redacted]) to review his accounts and processed any requests he wanted to have his dividends go to his personal checking account on a monthly basis.”   Not True. I never wanted my dividends to go into my checking account on a monthly basis. My objective was to withdraw my dividends whenever I wanted and I did it myself.   10.)  “I also brought in another partner, who also help to manage his investment accounts since the client wanted to change his investment objective once his business had to close due to his health issues.”   Reason for investment changes is not true. As mentioned in my rebuttal in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, I wanted an investment change because I wanted a lower risk type of portfolio. When I told Andrea I wanted to change my investment strategy back in Spring of 2015, I had no thought of closing my business due to my health. At that time, my health was okay, not great, but okay. It had no affect on my business situation. So, if Andrea is implying that my health was the cause for changes in my investment objective, this is simply “not true”.   11.) “In my opinion, we went above and beyond for this particular client because I had  worked with him for so long and his trust and loyalty meant so much to me. I appreciated his business and always put his objectives and interest first.”   Questionable. Referencing my original complaint, the attachment to enclosure 8, I mentioned to Andrea, in our meeting in April of 2016, that when I presented my portfolio loss of about 6% from March 2015 to March 2016, there was no response. I mentioned that the S&P 500 had no change during this period, yet my portfolio loss 6% of its value. All Andrea did was make a copy of my report. To this day, over a year later, she gave me no response. There was no acknowledgement, discussion as to cause, nor any corrective action mentioned, yet I pay her a fee. Therefore, I “question” whether she “put my objectives and interest first”.   12.) “All the details and features of the Americo annuity were fully disclosed on at least three different meetings: at the signing of the application, on the date of delivery and more recent at our May 9th meeting.”   Not True.   13.) “I understand in the last 18 months, he has been going through a lot of changes and I tried to do everything I could to make the changes and transitions as painless as possible.”   Really? My positive attitude about my health presents no problem for me. I have had this health issue for over 11 years and I don’t let it govern my quality of life. Andrea said she tries to make the changes and transitions as painless as possible? Who’s in Pain? Not me. I’m just retiring earlier than planned and I’m enjoying it. After closing my business, what pain is Andrea referring to when I visited my alma mater in Colorado after leaving there almost 45 years ago? What pain is there when I can go to Vegas anytime I want? What pain is there when I went on a New Zealand/Australia cruise. All of these events were done in 3 months after I closed the business. The only pain I have during the past 18 months was with Andrea.             14.) “In conclusion, I believe that the best resolution for this client is that he find someone he can work with since he didn’t feel that I was able to service him to meet his needs. I received an email today that he will be transferring to another advisor and I wish him the best!”   Discontinued Service. It appears to me that Andrea is recommending I find someone else to work with. I had told her that I am discontinuing her service in the email she mention receiving from me. Again, I believe what she is recommending is for me to change managers for my stocks and bond portfolio. This complaint is not about my stocks and bonds portfolio. This complaint is about wanting to get out of the annuity program without any cost to me.     My responses to Cory’s “Description of Events” is as follows:   15.) “My response to Mr. [redacted] was in regards to what was shown on the official Americo statement. I had, up to that point, never encountered an error with an annuity statement. As such, at first was baffled, however, took it as fact until we could do further investigation.”   Twisted.  During the meeting, Cory did not seem baffled as he described above. In addition to the response I gave above in paragraph 7) describing the situation of death benefits, why did Cory come up with the idea that principal protection was only applied after the 7 year term? This is a complete misrepresentation of the annuity. This was a story that was just made up. If a representative knows the company’s policy and see that there is a conflict between a customer’s statement and the company’s annuity policy, the representative should not make up stories and tell the customer something that is not true. This will just get the customer more upset and mad because integrity is lost. Once a representative lies to a customer, it’s very hard to believe any future discussions to be true.   16.) “In regards, to Mr. [redacted]’s statement that Voya and Standard did not have expenses: this is false. All annuities carry expenses. In Voya and Standard’s case, the expenses are charged to the client in the form of lower interest.”   Taken out of context. It appears that Cory is attempting to paint a bleak picture of my competency about business. The only place in my complaint that I mention the word “expenses” is as follows”   “ When Voya and Standard determined my accumulative value, it could never go down because there were no expenses to bring it down.”   The main subject is how I, the customer, see the accumulative value on his annual statement. The context of “Expenses” was used to describe the actual fluctuation it has on “Accumulative Value” on the report. As a customer, I do not care where or how the company accounts for their expenses. I do not want to see expenses being deducted from my accumulative value. This is my choice and I should have been told of this deduction. Cory apparently is trying to justify that expenses are either hidden or displayed and that the hidden expenses are in the form of lower interest rates. This is irrelevant to me. I chose Voya and Standard because I did not see any expenses deducted from my accumulative value. Cory should not try to justify for the situation I’m in because I was not given the complete information to make a sound decision.   As a business owner for over 25 years, I know all businesses have expenses. When Cory said that “all annuities carry expenses”, it seem to be a trivial statement for there is no existence of the opposite.   17.) “In our opinion, Americo offers fee transparency in contrast to the unknown fees charged by Voya and Standard.”     This contrast to the unknown fees charged by Voya and Standard is not in question. I should have been told of the transparency that Administrative Fees will be deducted from the accumulative value so that I could have made a choice to my satisfaction. Basically, I should have been given the “True” facts about this annuity and not have stories changed as issues came to surface.   In conclusion, as evidence above, I do not agree with Andrea’s responses. She did not address the issue I suggested as a remedy. Her conclusion, that I find another manager, was “moot” since I had already emailed her discontinuing her services. The services Andrea is referring to is my stocks and bond portfolio and has nothing to do with the annuity in this complaint. I would want to discontinue the Americo annuity that Andrea presented to me without incurring any costs, such as surrender charges. I would like my principal investment back and made “whole” again prior to signing the contract.       [redacted]