FINRA

Without admitting or denying the findings, Hartvigson consented to the sanction and to the entry of findings that he refused to produce information and documents requested by FINRA in connection with its investigation of the allegations made to it in a complaint.

Acceptance, Waiver & Consent(AWC)

Bar (Permanent)

All capacities

Indefinite

2/5/2024

ALLEGES OVERCONCENTRATION IN ALTERNATIVE INVESTMENTS

$580,000.00

$350,000.00

ALLEGATIONS ARE NOT SUPPORTED BY CLIENT INFORMATION AND DOCUMENTATION. FIRM/REP INTEND TO DEFEND THE MATTER AS WITHOUT MERIT. CASE SETTLED TO AVOID THE TIME AND COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH PROTRACTED LITIGATION. SETTLEMENT SHOULD NOT BE DEEMED TO BE AN ADMISSION OF GULIT OR LIABILITY ON THE PART OF THE REP OR IFG. NOR SHOULD IT BE CONSTRUED NEGATIVELY OR AS AN EFFORT TO AVOID THE RISK OF AN ADVERSE AWARD.

Compromise

SETTLED

Compromise

Serttled for :Less

LPL FINANCIAL

Discharged

DISCHARGE FOR CIRCUMVENTING FIRM POLICY IN RELATION TO VARIABLE ANNUITY TRANSACTIONS.

FAMILY MEMBER COMPLAINED ON BEHALF OF CUSTOMER ABOUT THE LOSS OF LIQUIDITY WHEN ASSETS IN BROKERAGE ACCOUNT WERE MOVED TO PURCHASE FIXED ANNUITIES AND LIFE INSURANCE.

$100,000.00

$11,182.57

INCIDENT WAS NEVER SUBSTANTIATED BY CLIENT, AND SETTLED FOR LESS THAN 12% OF INITIAL CLAIM. THRIVENT FINANCIAL (NOT BRETT HARTVIGSON) WAS UNABLE TO PROVIDE DOCUMENTATION TO SUBSTANTIATE A ZERO SUM RESPONSE, AS WAS THEIR RESPONSIBILITY-- MR. HARTVIGSON HAD CHANGED BD AFFILIATION OVER A YEAR PRIOR TO THE TIME OF THE REGISTERED COMPLAINT.

CUSTOMER ALLEGES THAT HE WAS NOT INFORMED OF THE RISK INVOLVED IN PURCHASING HIS VARIABLE UNIVERSAL LIFE CONTRACT ON 9/28/1997. FIRM FOUND NO BASIS FOR ALLEGATION BUT MADE A GOODWILL OFFER TO COMPLAINANT.

$36,000.00

$750.49

SUITABILITY OF PRODUCT/INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTION AMOUNT INCORRECTLY LISTED PREMIUMS PAID BY MEMBER; HAS BEEN UPDATED TO REFLECT $0

$14,448.80

$65,054.51

REVERSED PURCHASE OF VARIABLE UNIVERSAL LIFE PRODUCT AND REFUNDED $65,054.51. MR. HARTVIGSON WAS PRESENT AT 1 MEETING WITH THE CLIENT AND NOT PRESENT AT THE POINT-OF-PURCHASE. HE WAS BROUGHT IN AS A SENIOR AGENT BY A NEWER ADVISOR TO OBSERVE HER WORK. WHEN THE COMPLAINT WAS REGISTERED OVER 3 YEARS POST-VUL SALE, MR. HARTVIGSON HAD MOVED TO CA AND THE NEWER ADVISOR HAD LEFT THE INDUSTRY. THE LOCAL WA AGENCY COULD NOT LOCATE THE MEETING DOCUMENTATION AS WAS THEIR RESPONSIBILITY, YET THRIVENT ELECTED TO SETTLE AND MAKE A FULL REFUND TO CLIENT.