World Discovered

This is in regard to the October 30, communication from [redacted] to your office, which further responds to my request for more information from himMr [redacted] raises four points:1.In regards to flights nearly double I sent an attachment twice in regards to flights from [redacted] airport to HON Honolulu 6/8/- 6/15/showing a comparison of prices on [redacted] averaging over $2,Compared to [redacted] averaging$1,300.2.In regards to the statement of being a Time Share Exchange programThis is under the section of the website once logged in titled "Deposit your week" and "Exchange Inventory"3.See attachment with this letter for ratings for [redacted] resort in Virginia Beach, VA4.The statement about a room broken into in Tennessee is from a review of one of the lodgings offered on [redacted] site.With regard to the prices of air fare from Cleveland to Honolulu in June 2018, we do not believe that Mr [redacted] is comparing "apples to apples." My client ran a search, a screen shot of which is attached, and found the round-trip [redacted] Airlines flight, leaving Cleveland at 8:a.mon June 8, 2018, and returning to Cleveland on June 15, 2018, for a price of$1,per personFor two people, the round trip is $2,The [redacted] price appears to be $1, I do not know what pricing structure Mr [redacted] captured in the material he provided to you.Although there is a savings compared to the [redacted] price, my client does not tout any spectacular air fare deals Air fares are not why my client recommends that potential customers become membersPotential customers are informed that air fares are offered, more as a convenience (akin to one-stop shopping) than anything else.With regard to Mr***' allegation that World Discovered Pacific ("***") is "just a timeshare exchange program," this allegation is not true Mr [redacted] says that he saw the reference to the timeshare exchange program on the website, which is true However, the timeshare exchange is an additional feature on the website, made available to members who wish to use it Namely, if a member owns a timeshare and not using it, the member can upload it to the system and others can take advantage of something the member is not using, which benefits both the member posting the timeshare and the member who takes advantage of the posting The terms and conditions of this feature are stated in the website It is disingenuousto characterize ***, as a whole, as nothing more than a timeshare exchange program.With regard to the materials that Mr [redacted] supplied to you on [redacted] in Virginia Beach, Virginia, I assume that this information was supplied with regard to his allegation that the "ratings" on " a lot of the resorts/hotels are subpar." The materials that Mr [redacted] provides does not indicate the source of the ratings In any case, the ratings that Mr[redacted] does provide refers to one resort, not "a lot" of resorts or hotels.Even if Mr [redacted] intended that "a lot" referred to "ratings" as opposed to "resorts/hotels," then he must have meant that "a lot" of the ratings for any particular resort, like [redacted] , are "subpar."Because [redacted] is the only one he provided, it is debatable, at the very least, whether "subpar'' is a fair summary of the reviews of [redacted] , because it is not known what Mr [redacted] intends "par'' to meanIn the materials he provides, there are ten ratings shown, and the materials summarize the ratings as "7.9," which appears to mean on a point scale The ratings that do appear in the materials from Mr [redacted] are as follows:7.9/- good/good9.6/O - exceptional/exceptional9.2/O -- wonderful/superb 4.6/O - disappointing/bad 5/1O - fair/passable5.8-1O - Okay/Okay 6.7/- pleasant/everything was ok apart from 8.3/1O - very good/very good7.5/1O - good/great place to stay 7.1/1O - good/vacation.The information Mr [redacted] provides does not provide a basis upon which one can conclude that the ratings on a lot of hotels and resorts are subparThe reviews appear (but we are not sure of this) to be from [redacted] It is not known whether the reviews are based on experiences that were generated through bookings made through ***, or [redacted] , or through any number of internet sources, or directly with [redacted] .Furthermore, Mr [redacted] does not indicate that he was considering booking anything in Virginia Beach, much less the [redacted] Mr***' disclosures to [redacted] indicated that he intended to visit Hawaii once a year for the next three years to island-hop.If Mr [redacted] desires to stay at a certain type of property, then he should conduct his searches by the number of "stars" assigned to the propertiesFor example, there are varied ranges of properties available, with relative "star'' rankingsTypically, a lower number of "stars" will indicate a property that has a price point that is lower than the typical multi-star property.The experience of individual customers will vary, depending on their personal preferences and expectations, and will be reflected in their subjective reviews on sites like [redacted] One can imagine that even multi-star properties will receive negative reviews, based on a particular customer's perceived experience at that property on a particular occasion Likewise, a lower "starred" property may receive a "10/1O" rating; it simply "depends" on the individual customer and the individual experience of many customers over a wide range of circumstances.However, it is not correct to issue a blanket statement that "a lot" of hotels and resorts are "subpar."Finally, Mr [redacted] says that a room in one of the hotels being offered was broken into according to a reviewThe location or identity of the hotel is not identified, nor are the circumstances of the bredetailedHowever, it would not be surprising that this kind of incident occasionally happens at hotels and resortsI would hazard a guess that no hotel, resort, nor any entity even remotely connected to the hospitality business, would encourage or facilitate such a criminal actSome times, criminals do things beyond the reasonable control of law abiding citizens and those catering to their vacationing needs and wantsCertainly, an aberration like a breat an unknown hotel involving an unknown gust from Tennessee would not justify a refundIt would be like saying that a dissatisfied customer who bought a [redacted] should get a refund, because he read somewhere that the same model [redacted] was used in a bank robbery.We have responded to Mr***' allegations and responded to the information he has providedWe have yet to see any misrepresentations as to the product which he purchasedUpon examination and analysis, the materials Mr [redacted] has submitted to you do not support his allegations

I am [redacted] and I was sending this email to Wanda at world discoveredSorry for the typing errorMy number is [redacted] if you have any questions and need to talk to meWorld discovered sold or transfer a loan with no authorization from meI am Mr Wanda @ World Discovered to attached proof Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: Sincerely, [redacted]

Thank you for cancelling my loan, and service Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me Sincerely, [redacted] ***

Subject: 04-11-World Discovered, LLC -- [redacted] (ID# [redacted] ) -- pdf of response letter from World Discovered LLC Ms [redacted] , Attached is a pdf file of the response by World Discovered, LLC, to the complaint from [redacted] , Revdex.com ID # [redacted] We are very interested in examining the emails sent to MsOcampo from IDS, Inc., and in particular, the originating email address used by IDS, IncThank you Carl HO***, Esq

From: Carl Osaki [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 11:AM To: 'Revdex.com' Cc: Allison Kubo Subject: 10-26-16- World Discovered/ Revdex.com/ [redacted] -Cuney-Gruenke-Hale --- RE: You have a New Message from Revdex.com of Hawaii Regarding Complaint # MsKelley, I do not know if I am navigating the web site correctly or not I believe that the [redacted] matter is the only one of the four complaints, which has an attachment Do any of the other three (Cuney, Gruenke, and Hale) have attachments? Carl HOsaki, EsqTown Tower, No17G Queen Street Honolulu, HI Ph: (808) 528-Fx: (808) [email protected]

With the pending litigation and the limitations on WD's ability to communicate effectively with customers like Mr***, it is difficult for WO to assess the accuracy of either Mr***'s complaints about the *** product, or the *** response that Mr*** is fabricating his complaints
Frankly, in light of the history that WO has experienced, WO would tend to put more credence in Mr***'s version of events, even without knowing the full extent of the facts.WO is not sure what numbers Mr*** is calling, but if he is calling a WO telephone number, his calls are most assuredly answered If Mr*** is calling an *** number, then it would not be surprising that Mr*** is not able to speak with an *** representative.Although the statutory rescission period has long since expired, WO will refund Mr*** as follows: a refund of $1,(that is, the $down payment and $monthly payments), and a cancellation of the loan The $was paid to ***, and WO does not have control over that amount.This should conclude Mr***'s matter insofar as WO is concerned

From: Carl Osaki [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, April 27, 5:PMTo: Kaina Kelley Cc: Allison Kubo Subject: 04-27-World Discovered LLC - *** *** -- pdf of letter dated April 27,

Complaint: ***
Mrs Wanda from World Discovered emailed communication stop after I brought to her attention that I did not have a page in my contract that show my husband and my signature.My copies that I have does not include that pageI feel that people are being scam out of thousand of dollars. No I did complain in August to the accountant, which he no longer with World Discovered of my concerns of scam and misleading sales tactic for about hour or more on his cell phone, then he wrote my concerns and said he would have Mrs Wanda, the Manager call me which she never did.Its humanlly almost imposible to call and get Mrs WandaI only got her email address after saying I would report to BBS for scam.Also Mrs Wanda did leave a voice message which I currently have stating that *** get a portion on whatever funds they collect or scam people for
*** ***

This is in regard to the October 23, complaint your office communicated from *** *** As you probably are aware by now, Mr*** is well beyond the statutory rescission periodHis complaint is generally stated,with no specifics We would like to know what he means by his
statement that the "value of vacations is no where near what is promised." If you could obtain details of that, it might assist us in responding.Thank you for your attention to this matter

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me
Sincerely,
*** ***

This is a response to Attorney [redacted]’s letter dated 10/26/17.1.      In regards to flights nearly double I sent an attachment twice in regards to flights from [redacted] – [redacted] airport to HON Honolulu 6/8/18 – 6/15/18 showing a comparison of prices on [redacted] averaging over $2,000. Compared to [redacted] averaging $1,300.2.      In regards to the statement of being a Time Share Exchange program. This is under the section of the website once logged in titled “Deposit your week” and “Exchange Inventory”3.      See attachment with this letter for ratings for [redacted] resort in Virginia Beach, VA4.      The statement about a room broken into in Tennessee is from a review of one of the lodgings offered on [redacted] site.  My motivation is to get out of a contract that I will never use and I feel the software does not benefit a traveler any more than researching free travel sites on the internet.Tell us why here...

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Attached is the only email I received from IDS.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

This is in response to Atty. Carl [redacted]’s letter dated
11/4/17. [redacted] and or Atty. [redacted] are just stretching out this whole matter. I
have sent in samples from [redacted] website and compared them to other online travel
companies. I feel at this time I would like the Revdex.com to conduct an independent
research of [redacted] with access to their website to do their own investigations. I
feel it is sad the [redacted] takes advantage of consumers with their questionable
sales tactics. I have been roped into an expensive contract for a service that
in my opinion does not deliver the type of savings that was promised at their
demonstration. I am asking the Revdex.com to conduct an independent investigation
of [redacted]’s website and compare their pricing to other online free travel sites
and conclude if the service is worth the cost of the program.Thank you,[redacted]

This is in regard to the October 23, 2017 complaint your office communicated from [redacted].  As you probably are aware by now, Mr. [redacted] is well beyond the statutory rescission period. His complaint is generally stated, with no specifics.  We would like to know what he means by his statement that the "value of vacations is no where near what is promised." If you could obtain details of that, it might assist us in responding.Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
[redacted] 
[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted] Wanted to say thank you for helping with the travel scam case they are willing to void the contract and reimburse me. It would not have happened with out you! I am fine with accepting the agreement. I wish to leave it open until I receive written confirmation from [redacted] or reimbursement.  Not that I don't trust them or anything.   Thanks again![redacted]

I am [redacted] and I was sending this email to Wanda at world discovered. . Sorry for the  typing error. . My number is [redacted] if you have any questions and need to talk to me. World discovered sold or transfer a loan with no authorization from me. I am Mr Wanda @ World Discovered to attached proof. 
Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
Sincerely,
[redacted]

This is in regard to the October 30, 2017 communication from [redacted] to your office, which further responds to my request for more information from him. Mr. [redacted] raises four points:1.In regards to flights nearly double I sent an attachment twice in regards to flights from [redacted] airport to HON Honolulu 6/8/18 - 6/15/18 showing a comparison of prices on [redacted] averaging over $2,000. Compared to [redacted] averaging$1,300.2.In regards to the statement of being a Time Share Exchange program. This is under the section of the website once logged in titled "Deposit your week" and "Exchange Inventory"3.See attachment with this letter for ratings for [redacted] resort in Virginia Beach, VA4.The statement about a room broken into in Tennessee is from a review of one of the lodgings offered on [redacted] site.With regard to the prices of air fare from Cleveland to Honolulu in June 2018, we do not believe that Mr. [redacted] is comparing "apples to apples." My client ran a search, a screen shot of which is attached, and found the round-trip [redacted] Airlines flight, leaving Cleveland at 8:20 a.m. on June 8, 2018, and returning to Cleveland on June 15, 2018, for a price of$1,105.12 per person. For two people, the round trip is $2,210.24. The [redacted] price appears to be $1,270.06.  I do not know what pricing structure Mr. [redacted] captured in the material he provided to you.Although there is a savings compared to the [redacted] price, my client does not tout any spectacular air fare deals.  Air fares are not why my client recommends that potential customers become members. Potential customers are informed that air fares are offered, more as a convenience (akin to one-stop shopping) than anything else.With regard to Mr. [redacted]' allegation that World Discovered Pacific ("[redacted]") is "just a timeshare exchange program," this allegation is not true.  Mr. [redacted] says that he saw the reference to the timeshare exchange program on the website, which is true.  However, the timeshare exchange is an additional feature on the website, made available to members who wish to use it.  Namely, if a member owns a timeshare and not using it, the member can upload it to the system and others can take advantage of something the member is not using, which benefits both the member posting the timeshare and the member who takes advantage of the posting.  The terms and conditions of this feature are stated in the website.   It is disingenuousto characterize [redacted], as a whole, as nothing more than a timeshare exchange program.With regard to the materials that Mr. [redacted] supplied to you on [redacted] in Virginia Beach, Virginia, I assume that this information was supplied with regard to his allegation that the  "ratings" on " a lot of the resorts/hotels are subpar."   The materials that Mr. [redacted] provides does not indicate the source of the ratings.  In any case, the ratings that Mr.[redacted] does provide refers to one resort, not "a lot" of resorts or hotels.Even if Mr. [redacted] intended that "a lot" referred to "ratings" as opposed to "resorts/hotels," then he must have meant that "a lot" of the ratings for any particular resort, like [redacted],  are "subpar."Because [redacted] is the only one he provided, it is debatable, at the very least,  whether "subpar'' is a fair summary of the reviews of [redacted], because it is not known what Mr. [redacted] intends "par'' to mean. In the materials he provides, there are ten ratings shown, and the materials summarize the ratings as "7.9," which appears to mean 7.9 on a 10 point scale.  The ratings that do appear in the materials from Mr. [redacted] are as follows:7.9/10 - good/good9.6/1 O - exceptional/exceptional9.2/1 O -- wonderful/superb 4.6/1 O - disappointing/bad 5/1O - fair/passable5.8-1O - Okay/Okay 6.7/10 - pleasant/everything was ok apart from . . . 8.3/1O - very good/very good7.5/1O - good/great place to stay 7.1/1O - good/vacation.The information Mr. [redacted] provides does not provide a basis upon which one can conclude that the ratings on a lot of hotels and resorts are subpar. The reviews appear (but we are not sure of this) to be from [redacted].  It is not known whether the reviews are based on experiences that were generated through bookings made through [redacted], or [redacted], or through any number of internet sources, or directly with [redacted].Furthermore, Mr. [redacted] does not indicate that he was considering booking anything in Virginia Beach, much less the [redacted]. Mr. [redacted]' disclosures to [redacted] indicated that he intended to visit Hawaii once a year for the next three years to island-hop.If Mr. [redacted] desires to stay at a certain type of property, then he should conduct his searches by the number of "stars" assigned to the properties. For example, there are varied ranges of properties available, with relative "star'' rankings. Typically, a lower number of "stars" will indicate a property that has a price point that is lower than the typical multi-star property.The experience of individual customers will vary, depending on their personal preferences and expectations, and will be reflected in their subjective reviews on sites like [redacted].   One can imagine that even multi-star properties will receive negative reviews, based on a particular customer's perceived experience at that property on a particular occasion.   Likewise, a lower "starred" property may receive a "10/1O" rating; it simply "depends" on the individual customer and the individual experience of many customers over a wide range of circumstances.However, it is not correct to issue a blanket statement that "a lot" of hotels and resorts are "subpar."Finally, Mr. [redacted] says that a room in one of the hotels being offered was broken into according to a review. The location or identity of the hotel is not identified, nor are the circumstances of the break-in detailed. However, it would not be surprising that this kind of incident occasionally happens at hotels and resorts. I would hazard a guess that no hotel, resort, nor any entity even remotely connected to the hospitality business, would encourage or facilitate such a criminal act. Some times, criminals do things beyond the reasonable control of law abiding citizens and those catering to their vacationing needs and wants. Certainly, an aberration like a break-in at an unknown hotel involving an unknown gust from Tennessee would not justify a refund. It would be like saying that a dissatisfied customer who bought a [redacted] should get a refund, because he read somewhere that the same model [redacted] was used in a bank robbery.We have responded to Mr. [redacted]' allegations and responded to the information he has provided. We have yet to see any misrepresentations as to the product which he purchased. Upon examination and analysis, the materials Mr. [redacted] has submitted to you do not support his allegations.

This is in regard to the November 3, 2016 response from [redacted], regarding her complaint.Ms. [redacted] may not have kept a copy of the agreement she signed, but World Discovered LLC ("WO") provided her with a copy of her signatures on the agreement.   Ms.[redacted] remains vague about her complaint that WD allegedly "scammed" her. Indeed, Ms. [redacted] used the [redacted] program and redeemed the $500 certificate that WO provided to her in June 2016. She is well beyond the statutory rescission period.Nevertheless, WO has elected to refund Ms. [redacted] $669, which is theamount that she deposited ($1,169), less the $500 certificate which she redeemed in June 2016 (thus, $1, 169 - $500 = $669).  WO has also instructed that the portion of her purchase which Ms. [redacted] financed be canceled.We trust that this will satisfactorily resolve this matter.

Dear [redacted], In response to complaint ID number [redacted], [redacted] is not World Discovered and has no partnership with them. [redacted] was a vendor of World Discovered, but no longer has a business relationship with them. World Discovered sold travel club memberships and [redacted] acted as the fulfillment...

center for World Discovered travel club members. World Discovered and [redacted] are wholly and completely separate entities. World Discovered sold travel club memberships based on promises, features and benefits that they knowingly could not and did not deliver upon. Hence the dissolution of the business relationship between [redacted] and World Discovered. [redacted] was not involved in the sales process whatsoever and therefore did not make any promises or sales pitches to any of the World Discovered members. The [redacted] name should be removed from this complaint based on the information contained above. Please remove this complaint from the Revdex.com because we are not World Discovered.

This is in regard to the complaint from [redacted], a copy of which is As always, it is the aim of World Discovered LLC ("WO") to provide its customers with the best product that is available and to service its customers in a fair manner. Mr.[redacted]'s issues appear related to buyer's...

remorse, long after the statutory rescission period has expired, and his complaint appears to have been prompted by one-sided communications from [redacted], Inc. ("[redacted]").  To understand Mr. [redacted]'s complaint, it is important to understand the business model WO pursued and its relationship and ongoing dispute with [redacted].WO marketed and sold a product made available by various entities called "fulfillment companies." In this industry, fulfillment companies offer discounted rates on various travel-related items and services, like hotel rooms, etc., through internet portals. Fulfillment companies contract with "distributors" like WO to market and sell access to the fulfillment companies' inventory.  After a sale, a customer relates directly with the fulfillment company.However, because of the nature of the business and the manner of the sale, customers often relate the fulfillment companies' performance to WO, especially if the customer is unable to resolve issues with the fulfillment companies directly or is otherwise not satisfied with the services provided by the fulfillment companies.  The business that WO engages in is a regulated one, and WO complies with state laws and regulations regarding its business practices, including providing a right to rescind within specified time periods.In WD's case, it contracted with [redacted], a fulfillment company, to market and sell [redacted]' product on March 2, 2016.  Within a very short period of time, WO became wary of [redacted] because of various aspects of [redacted]' business practices, which included misrepresentations to WO and its own customers.  By July 28, 2016, WO terminated the contract with [redacted], pursuant to the terms of the contract.  [redacted] responded by initiating a civil action in the state courts of California against WO on August 3, 2016, captioned [redacted]. Inc. v. World Discovered LLC. et al., Case No. [redacted], Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles.  On August 29, Ms. [redacted] November 9, 2016Page 2 of 32016, [redacted] moved for a temporary restraining order against WO upon 24-hours' notice, and the upshot of that motion was to prevent WO from communicating with [redacted] customers.[redacted] then began to send various one-sided communications to customers, to which WO was not able to respond. WO believes that it may have been because of these one­ sided [redacted] communications to customers like Mr. [redacted], that prompted Mr. [redacted]'s complaint. The evidence of this is clear in Mr. [redacted]'s reference to "World Discovered Pacific LLC" as a "name change" for WO, which it is not.  [redacted]' unilateral communications appear to have been the primary cause of Mr. [redacted]'s dissatisfaction, because WO has not had a direct communication from Mr. [redacted] complaining about anything.WO reviews customer complaints on a case-by-case basis. Virtually all customer complaints involve dissatisfaction with the [redacted] product, ranging in issues from difficulties in accessing the web portal to discounts which do not amount to much. In some cases, WO has refunded the amounts that customers have paid to WO, but cannot refund amounts that [redacted] has collected. With the on-going litigation and WD's inability to communicate effectively with customers, WO is in an awkward position in assessing the merits of customer complaints. Typically, customers contact WO when they cannot reach [redacted] personnel or are otherwise unable to resolve their issues with [redacted]. Customers then communicate their issues to WO. WO, in turn, communicates the customer's issues to WD's attorney, who then relays it on to [redacted]' attorney.  In every case, WD's attorney requests to be kept informed about what [redacted] does with the customer's issues and how [redacted] deals with those issues. Invariably, WO is not kept informed. Reserving for the moment on any editorializing about the manner in which [redacted] is conducting the California litigation, WO has on the docket a motion to dismiss which will be heard in December 2016, and is investigating avenues of relief from the injunction. Pending that, WO is quite hamstrung in its ability to effectively communicate and deal with customers who complain.In Mr. [redacted]'s case, his complaint appears to spring from a change in mind long after the statutory rescission period had expired.   His complaint also appears tied to [redacted] communications  made after the temporary restraining order was entered, thus preventing WO from communicating with him.   With the pending litigation with [redacted], and the limitations on WD's ability to communicate effectively with customers like Mr. [redacted], it is difficult for WO to  assess what underlies his present change of mind about the purchase.As stated in my November 4, 2016 letter to you, WO will cancel Mr. [redacted]'s loan, and issue him a refund of $1,699.  Mr. [redacted] made a deposit of $2, 199 on April 25, 2016, and used his membership and redeemed a $500 certificate. Thus, $2, 199 - $500 = Ms. [redacted] November 9, 2016Page 3 of 3$1,699 refund was made on November 6, 2016. This should conclude Mr. [redacted]'s matter insofar as WO is concerned.