THE CLIENT ALLEGES HIS FINANCIAL ADVISORS PLACED HIM IN C SHARES WHICH WERE INAPPROPRIATE AND EXPENSIVE. TIME FRAME: JULY 2007 TO JANUARY 2010.

$10,000.00

$6,000.00

I WAS NOT NAMED IN THIS ISSUE. THIS ACCOUNT WAS NOT ASSIGNED TO ME, I NEVER KNEW ANYTHING ABOUT THIS ACCOUNT UNTIL THIS WEEK. THIS WAS A CLIENT, I THINK WHO WAS ASSIGNED TO ONE OF MY PARTNERS WHEN THEIR BROKER LEFT UBS SOMETIME PRIOR TO 2010. WE LEFT UBS JAN 2010. THE COMPLAINT APPARENTLY CAME IN 2012. I WAS NEVER INFORMED OF THE COMPLAINT. I WAS NOT PRIVY TO THE RESOLUTION. I WAS NOT ADVISED OF THE SETTLEMENT NOR ASKED TO PARTICIPATE.

CLIENT ALLEGES FINANCIAL ADVISOR MADE UNSUITABLE INVESTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS. ALLEGED DAMAGES: ESTIMATED TO EXCEED $5000. TIME PERIOD: 2002

CLIENT FILED FOR ARBITRATION. BROKER WAS NOT NAMED AS A RESPONDENT. PLEASE ARCHIVE. COMPLAINT FILED MORE THAN 24 MONTHS AGO AND DID NOT RESULT IN A SETTLEMENT OF $10,000 OR MORE.

CLIENTS ALLEGE THAT IE RECOMMENDED PURCHASE OF UNIVERSAL LIFE POLICY AS EXCELLENT PLAN FOR RETIREMENT. CLIENTS FURTHER ALLEGE POLICY WAS NOT CONSISTENT WITH CLIENT'S OBJECTIVES, WAS NOT WHAT IT WAS REPRESENTED TO BE AND WAS NOT INEXPENSIVE. TIME PERIOD 12/90. CLAIMED LOSSES $22,250.00.

$22,250.00

PAINEWEBBER DENIED THE CLAIM. Not Provided

CLIENT, THROUGH HIS ATTORNEY, ALLEGES THAT HE RELIED UPON BROKER'S REPRESENTATIONS AND AGREED TO TRANSFER INSURANCE POLICY FROM TAXATION II TO THE (PROTECTOR) THAT SHE RECOMMENDED IN AUGUST 1990. CLIENT IS SEEKING THE DIFFERENCE OF THE TWO POLICIES $77,082.82.

$77,082.82

$25,000.00

PAINEWEBBER SETTLED THE CLAIM FOR $25,000 IN THE INTEREST OF CLIENT RELATIONS. I DENY THE ALLEGATIVES MADE BY [CUSTOMER]. I DID NOT MISREPRESENT ANY PART OF THIS TRANSACTION AND I WAS NOT ASKED TO CONTRIBUTE TO ANY PART OF THIS SETTLEMENT.

CLAIMANTS ALLEGE MISREPRESENTATION, BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY AND UNSUITABLE INVESTMENTS IN LPS (PW EQUITY PARTNERS 1, PW DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS 4, CPA 10, GEODYNE 111-F AND NATIONAL TAX CREDIT PARTNERS); CLAIM DAMAGES IN THE AMOUNT OF $52,837.

$57,837.00

$36,485.00

THE NASD DISMISSED CLAIMS AS TO PW EQUITY PARTNERS 1 AND PW DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS 4 ON JURISDICTIONAL GROUNDS. CLAIMANTS HAVE AGREED TO DISMISS THE REMAINING CLAIMS WITH PREJUDICE AND TO RETURN THE LP UNITS IN EXCHANGE FOR A PAYMENT OF $36,485. BASED UPON THE CURRENT SECONDARY MARKET VALUE OF THE LP UNITS, THE NET COST TO PAINEWEBBER IS APPROXIMATELY $22,000. PAINEWEBBER MAKES THIS SETTLEMENT TO AVIOD THE COSTS OF LITIGATION. THE LP'S COMPLAINED OF WERE FULLY AND FAIRLY EXPLAINED TO THE [CUSTOMERS] AND WERE SUITABLE FOR THEM IN LIGHT OF THEIR INVESMENT OBJECTIVES AND BACKGROUND. IN ADDITION THERE WERE A NUMBER OF OTHER INVESTMENTS IN THE ACCOUNTS INCLUDING MUTUAL FUNDS, LIFE INSURANCE, ANNUITIES AND CD'S. I DENY ANY LIABILITY IN CONNECTION WITH THE HANDLING OF THESE ACCOUNTS AND I WAS NOT ASKED TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE SETTLEMENT.

DAUGHTER OF CUSTOMER [CUSTOMER] ALLEGES MISREPRESENTIONS AND UNAUITABILITY OF INVESTMENTS IN LIMITED PARTNERSHIPS (INCLUDING CPA 10 PW EP 2 GEODYNE III A, C, AND E) COMMON STOCK, MUNICIPAL BOND FUNDS AND ANNUITIES. SEEK COMPENSATORY DAMAGES OF $107,136.

$107,136.00

$50,000.00

ALL CLAIMS WERE DISMISSED IN EXCHANGE FOR PAYMENT BY PAINEWEBBER OF $50,000. THIS CLAIM IS BEING BROUGHT MY [OTHER CUSTOMER NAMED] COMPLETELY WITHOUT [CUSTOMER'S] KNOWLEDGE, ALL OF THE INVESTMENTS WERE SUITABLE AND CONSISTENT WITH [CUSTOMER'S] DESIRE TO GENERATE HIGH CURRENT INCOME. ALL WERE APPROPRIATE FOR HER IN LIGHT OF [CUSTOMER'S] FINANCIAL CONDITION AND GOALS. ALL INVESTMENTS WERE REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY [CUSTOMER], WHO WAS QUITE HAPPY WITH THE PERFORMANCE OF HER PORTFOLLO AT LAST REVIEW. I WAS NOT ASKED TO CONTRIBUTE TO ANY PART OF THE SETTLEMENT.

CLAIMANT ALLEGED MISREPRESENTATION, BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY AND UNSUITABLE INVESTMENTS OF TWO LIMITED PARTNERSHIPS PURCHASED IN 1990 BY HER DECEASED MOTHER. SOUGHT DAMAGES IN THE AMOUNT OF $144,363.

$144,363.00

$23,000.00

THIS MATTER WAS SETTLED IN THE AMOUNT OF $23,000 TO AVOID THE COST OF LITIGATION. CLAIM BROUGHT BY DAUGHTER OF DECEASED CLIENT WHO PURCHASED A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP WHICH DID NOT PERFORM WELL. CLIENT NEVER COMPLAINT ABOUT THE INVESTMENTS DURING HER LIFE. CLIENT DIED SUDDENLY, LEFT INVESTMENTS TO HER DAUGHTER AND SON. I WAS NOT ASKED TO CONTRIBUTE TO ANY PART OF THIS SETTLEMENT.

ALLEGED CLAIMS OF MISREPRESENTATION AND UNSUITABLE INVESTMENT RECOMMENDATION REGARDING A "GUARANTEED FUTURES FUND". ALLEGED DAMAGES OF $500.00.

$500.00

$500.00

I WAS ASKED NOT TO CONTRIBUTE TO THIS SETTLEMENT.