Claimants allege unsuitable recommendations of alternative investments

$100,000.00

$27,500.00

Claimants allege unsuitable recommendations of multiple alternative investments, failure to supervise and breach of fiduciary duty for investments starting in 2015.

$100,000.00

$97,500.00

Unsuitable recommendations of alternative investments, including GPB.

$300,000.00

$60,000.00

Unsuitable recommendations of DPPs and REITs

$500,000.00

$425,000.00

Claimants allege unsuitable recommendation of GPB in 2015.

$200,000.00

$80,000.00

Claimants allege unsuitable recommendation of UDF IV in 2013.

$39,998.00

Claimants allege failure to conduct Due Diligence on several points, unsuitable recommendation, overconcentration, misrepresentations and omissions in violation of FINRA regulations in the sale of alternative investments.

$400,000.00

$135,520.72

Unsuitable investments and misrepresentation

$100,000.00

$70,000.00

Unsuitable investment recommendations

$65,000.00

Allegations listed on the Statement of Claim include the following: Fraudulent Concealment, Violation of Common Fraud, Violation of Common Law Negligent Misrepresentation, Breach of Fiduciary Duty and Negligence. No dates were listed on the Statement of Claim for the time period of these allegations. None of the alternative investments listed on the Statement of Claim were sold through Madison Avenue Securities, LLC.

$100,000.00

$35,000.00

Allegations listed on Statement Of Claim: Fraudulent Concealment, Violation of Common Law Fraud, Violation of Common Law Negligent Misrepresentation, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Negligence. No dates are listed on the SOC for these activities. Client is decease.

$100,000.00

$72,000.00

Claimant alleges issues with suitability and loss of principle pertaining alternative investment during the period 2008 through 2017.

$295,000.00

The firm maintains the claim is without merit. the firm and the RR deny any wrongdoing or having any liability with respect to the claims asserted and is vigorously defending this claim

Claimant Alleges misrepresentation and suitability issues with products purchased during the period 2009-2014.

$100,000.00

$125,000.00

The firm believes that allegations are without merit and intends to vigorously defend that matter

Claimant alleged suitability issues with a product they purchased in May of 2013 through another rep, not through Mr. Vincent who should not have been named in this case. Among other things, Claimant met the suitability requirement to purchase the product at issue, and Claimant signed the Subscription Agreement for the product. In addition, the product purchase was an alternative investment that performed to expectations, including paying dividends and going "full cycle," which means it ultimately went public and was listed on the NASDAQ. Claimants allegations and claims are baseless and without merit. There is no basis for allegations against the RR.

$50,000.00

$24,000.00

Mr. Vincent was dismissed from the Arbitration on July 25, 2018. Mr. Vincent was not the advisors for claimants. The firm maintains the allegations and claims are baseless and without merit. The parties agreed to resolve the matter via mediation and further agreed to the dismissal of all claims against Mr. Vincent in this matter.

Claimants alleged issues with suitability pertaining to alternative investment products, the majority of which were purchased over 10 years ago. Among other things, Claimants signed the Subscription Agreement associated with each product, and Claimants met the suitability requirements to invest in the products they brought at issue in the claim.

$35,000.00

The firm and the rep maintain the claim was baseless and without merit. Parties agreed to resolve the matter via mediation and the matter was resolved without any admission of fault or liability on the part of any of the parties.

Claimant purchased United Development Funding III and IV and claims inadequate due diligence, negligent misrepresentations and omissions of material facts.

$75,000.00

$19,000.00

Firm maintains claim was without merit and Mr. Vincent denies any wrongdoing or having any liability with respect to the claims asserted. Mr. vincent was not a named party in this matter. Matter was resolved via negotiated settlement to avoid further cost of litigation.

Claimants alleges negligence, misrepresentation, omission and breach of fiduciary duty related to the recommendation of and subsequent purchase of alternative investments during the period 2005 through 2008.

$500,000.00

the firm believes the claim is without merit.

$170,000.00

Tax

Mr. Vincent was made aware of the lien on Feb 8 2016 via a report from a credit reporting agency. However Mr. Vincent had never received an official lien notice from the IRS. A review of the recorder of deeds records for Harris County Clerk Office, TX did not reflect the existence of the lien on the date it was brought to Mr. Vincent's attention. therefore the validity of the existence of the Lien could not be verified.

SUITABILITY OF A SERIES OF INVESTMENTS MADE BETWEEN 2006 AND 2009.

$413,000.00

$125,000.00

Without any admission of fault or liability on the part of any of the parties a resolution was reached through mediation. All claims against respondents as it relates to this matter have been discharged.

ALLEGATIONS/BRIEF SUMMARY TAKEN FROM INVESTORS CAPITAL CORP U5 DTD 11/11/2013: SUITABILITY OF INVESTMENTS MADE IN 2007.

$190,000.00

$26,331.85

MADISON AVENUE SECURITIES, INC. BECAME AWARE OF THE UPDATED STATUS AND SETTLEMENT INFORMATION FROM THE FINRA FORM U5 FILING MADE BY INVESTORS CAPITAL CORP ON 09/24/2014.

CLIENT [CUSTOMER] FILED FINRA ARBITRATION AGAINST RESPONDENT INVESTORS CAPITAL CORP. ("ICC") ALLEGING SALE OF UNREGISTERED SECURITIES, FRAUD, VIOLATION OF THE TEXAS SECURITIES ACT, UNSUITABLE INVESTMENTS AND MISREPRESENTATION.

$638,000.00

$87,568.30

MADISON AVENUE SECURITIES, INC. BECAME AWARE OF THE UPDATED STATUS AND SETTLEMENT INFORMATION FROM THE FINRA FORM U5 FILING MADE BY INVESTORS CAPITAL CORP ON 09/24/2014.

MISREPRESENTATION, SUITABILITY.

$196,000.00

THIS CUSTOMER WAS NOT AND IS NOT A CLIENT OF NOEL VINCENT. THE CUSTOMER WAS A CLIENT OF A FORMER REPRESENTATIVE IN NOEL VINCENT'S OFFICE. THIS EVENT IS BEING REPORTED AS REQUIRED BY FINRA RULES.

LIQUIDITY, PERFORMANCE

$51,245.10

ON OCTOBER 3, 2011, FINRA NOTIFIED THE CLIENT VIA MAIL THAT THE INQUIRY INTO THE COMPLAINT WAS CLOSED AND NO ACTION WOULD BE TAKEN. A REVIEW OF THE CLIENTS ACCOUNT PAPERWORK DID NOT SUPPORT THIS. YOU MAY NOTE THAT THE CLIENT'S $75,000 DISPUTED AMOUNT REPRESENTS THE CLIENT'S ORIGINAL INVESTMENT, NOT ACTUAL LOSSES. AT THIS TIME, THERE ARE NO SUCH LOSSES AND ALL OF THE INVESTMENTS IN QUESTION ARE STILL PAYING THE EXPECTED DIVIDENDS AND/OR DISTRIBUTIONS. "THIS CUSTOMER WAS NOT AND IS NOT A CLIENT OF NOEL VINCENT. THE CUSTOMER WAS A CLIENT OF A FORMER REPRESENTATIVE IN NOEL VINCENT'S OFFICE.

CUSTOMER FILED COMPLAINT THROUGH FINRA (INQUIRY NUMBER 20100241489). THE CLIENT CLAIMS THAT THE INVESTMENTS WERE UNSUITABLE AND MISREPRESENTED

$75,000.00

ON OCTOBER 3, 2011, FINRA NOTIFIED THE CLIENT VIA MAIL THAT THE INQUIRY INTO THE COMPLAINT WAS CLOSED AND NO ACTION WOULD BE TAKEN. A REVIEW OF THE CLIENTS ACCOUNT PAPERWORK DID NOT SUPPORT THIS. YOU MAY NOTE THAT THE CLIENT'S $75,000 DISPUTED AMOUNT REPRESENTS THE CLIENT'S ORIGINAL INVESTMENT, NOT ACTUAL LOSSES. AT THIS TIME, THERE ARE NO SUCH LOSSES AND ALL OF THE INVESTMENTS IN QUESTION ARE STILL PAYING THE EXPECTED DIVIDENDS AND/OR DISTRIBUTIONS. " THIS CUSTOMER WAS NOT AND IS NOT A CLIENT OF NOEL VINCENT. THE CUSTOMER WAS A CLIENT OF A FORMER REPRESENTATIVE IN NOEL VINCENT'S OFFICE.

MISREPRESENTATION

CLIENT COMPLAINT FILED WITH SEC (FILE NO.: HO-00044735). THIS CUSTOMER WAS NOT AND IS NOT A CLIENT OF NOEL VINCENT. THE CUSTOMER WAS A CLIENT OF A FORMER REPRESENTATIVE IN NOEL VINCENT'S OFFICE. THIS EVENT IS BEING REPORTED AS REQUIRED BY FINRA RULES.

TEXAS

NOEL R. VINCENT FAILED TO HAVE ALL FORMS AND DOCUMENTS COMPLETED PRIOR TO OBTAINING A CUSTOMER'S SIGNATURE AND HAD AN ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT ADD MISSING INFORMATION TO INCOMPLETE FORMS WITHOUT A CUSTOMER'S AUTHORIZATION, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMTED TO INITIALING ON A CUSTOMER'S BEHALF.

Order

Civil and Administrative Penalty(ies)/Fine(s)

$25,000.00

NO OTHER SANCTIONS FOLLOW

PERCEIVED INVESTMENT LOSS, SUITABILITY

$20,000.00

CLIENTS FILED COMPLAINTS THROUGH THE TEXAS STATE SECURITIES BOARD AND FINRA (FINRA FILE NO. 200801278553) INDICATING THAT THEY BELIEVED THEIR VARIOUS DIRECT INVESTMENTS HAD SUFFERED PRINCIPAL LOSSES (THE ACCOUNT STATEMENTS DO NOT SUPPORT THIS ASSERTION). THE CLIENTS REQUESTED A RETURN OF THE SURRENDER CHARGES INCURRED (APPROXIMATELY $20,000 IN TOTAL) DUE TO ELECTING TO SELL OTHER SECURITIES TO FUND THESE INVESTMENTS. CLIENTS ARE NOW CLAIMING TO HAVE NOT UNDERSTOOD THAT THEY WOULD INCUR SURRENDER CHARGES AND THAT THE CURRENT INVESTMENTS ARE UNSUITABLE. THESE CLAIMS ARE REFUTED BY THE RR'S STATEMENT, NOTES FROM THE MULTIPLE MEETINGS HELD WITH THE CLIENT, AND THE ACCOUNT PAPERWORK WHICH CONTAINED SIGNED AND INITIALED DISCLOSURES. THE RECORD REFLECTS THAT THE CLIENTS SOUGHT AND AUTHORIZED THESE INVESTMENT CHANGES (BOTH SELLING THEIR THEN-CURRENT HOLDINGS AND PURCHASING THE CURRENT INVESTMENTS). ACCORDINGLY, THE COMPLAINT HAS BEEN DENIED.