CLAIMANT, A CORPORATION WITH ITS PRINCIPAL OFFICES IN NEW JERSEY, ALLEGES THAT THE FEBRUARY 2008 PURCHASES OF AUCTION RATE SECURITIES WERE NOT AUTHORIZED. CLAIMANT FURTHER ALLEGES MATERIAL OMISSIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PURCHASES AND FAILURE TO SUPERVISE. CLAIMANT SEEKS RESCISSION, COMPENSATORY, CONSEQUENTIAL AND PUNITIVE DAMAGES, INTEREST, ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS. (02/01/2008-02/14/2008)

$40,000.00

THIS CASE SETTLED FOR $40,000.00. RESPONDENTS DENIED ALL ALLEGATIONS OF WRONG DOING.

NEW JERSEY CLIENT CLAIMED THAT ON JUNE 15, 2004 THE FA RECOMMENDED THAT HE AND HIS WIFE PURCHASE AN EVERGREEN NEW SOLUTIONS VARIABLE ANNUITY, OFFERED THROUGH AMERICAN ENTERPRISE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, FOR EACH OF THEIR IRAS AND FOR THEIR NON-RETIREMENT JOINT ACCOUNT. THE CLIENTS INVESTED AN AGGREGATE AMOUNT OF $247,401.23 IN THE THREE ANNUITIES. THE CLIENT FURTHER CLAIMED THAT HE AND HIS WIFE WERE RETIRED, THAT THEY HAD SHORT-TERM LIQUIDITY NEEDS AND THAT ALL OF THEIR INVESTABLE ASSETS WERE PUT INTO THE ANNUITIES. THE CLIENT FURTHER CLAIMED THAT THE PREMIUM PAYMENTS FOR ALL THREE ANNUITIES WERE ALLOCATED TO THE SAME THREE SUB-ACCOUNTS IN EACH OF THE ANNUITIES. THE CLIENT CLAIMED THAT HE AND HIS WIFE LIQUIDATED THE ANNUITIES (FEBRUARY 2006) AND RECEIVED NET SURRENDER PROCEEDS OF $244,144.99. THE CLIENT CLAIMED THAT THE FA GAVE THEM POOR ADVICE; FURTHER, THAT THE ANNUITIES WERE UNSUITABLE. THE CLIENTS DEMAND COMPENSATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $20,000 BASED ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT IF THEY HAD INVESTED IN A 3 MONTH CD THAT WAS CONTINUOUSLY ROLLED-OVER FROM JUNE 2004 TO DECEMBER 2005 THEIR INVESTMENT OF $247,000 WOULD HAVE GROWN TO $264,000. IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THE CLIENT TOOK TWO DISBURSEMENTS (WITH NO SURRENDER CHARGES ASSESSED ON THE DISBURSEMENTS) IN THE AGGREGATE AMOUNT OF $14,367.84 FROM HIS IRA ANNUITY IN JANUARY 2005 AND JUNE 2005; THEREFORE, THE CLIENTS REALIZED A NET GAIN OF APPROXIMATELY $11,111.60 ON THEIR INVESTMENTS IN THE ANNUITIES AFTER ALL SURRENDER FEES AND/OR OTHER CHARGES.

$20,000.00

THE FIRM DENIED THE COMPLAINT ON MAY 16, 2006. THE FIRM DID NOT DETECT ANY IMPROPRIETIES WITH RESPECT TO THE FA'S RECOMMENDATION TO THE CLIENTS THAT THEY PURCHASE THE EVERGREEN NEW SOLUTIONS VARIABLE ANNUITIES AND/OR THE SALE OF THE ANNUITIES TO THEM BY EITHER THE FIRM OR THE FA. THE CLIENTS INVESTED ONLY A PORTION OF THEIR AVAILABLE LIQUID ASSETS IN THE NON-RETIREMENT JOINT OWNERSHIP ANNUITY. ADDITIONALLY, THE MONIES THAT THEY INVESTED IN THE IRA ANNUITIES CAME FROM THEIR EXISTING IRA ACCOUNTS THAT WERE HELD AT ANOTHER FIRM. WITH RESPECT TO THE INVESTMENT SUB-ACCOUNT ALLOCATIONS THAT THE CLIENTS SELECTED, THOSE ALLOCATIONS WERE CONSISTENT WITH THEIR GROWTH AND INCOME INVESTMENT OBJECTIVES AND RISK TOLERANCE. THE CLIENTS' INVESTMENT IN THE THREE EVERGREEN ANNUITIES RESULTED IN AN AGGREGATE NET GAIN (AFTER ALL SURRENDER FEES AND CHARGES) OF $11,111.60 DURING THE PERIOD OF TIME JUNE 2004 THROUGH FEBRUARY 15, 2006. THIS REPRESENTED A TOTAL RETURN OF 4.9132% OVER 20 MONTHS ON THE CLIENTS' ORIGINAL INVESTMENT OF $247,401.23.

CLIENT, A NEW JERSEY RESIDENT, CLAIMED THAT THE FA'S RECOMMENDATION THAT SHE PURCHASE A TRANSAMERICA PREFERRED SELECT VARIABLE ANNUITY WAS UNSUITABLE BASED UPON HER AGE, INVESTMENT EXPERIENCE, INVESTMENT GOALS AND RISK TOLERANCE. THE CLIENT PURCHASED THE ANNUITY IN AUGUST 2000. THE CLIENT INVESTED $200,000 IN THE ANNUITY. THE CLIENT IS SEEKING TO RECOVER HER INITIAL PREMIUM PAYMENT LESS WITHDRAWALS/DISBURSEMENTS TO DATE. DAMAGES ARE BELIEVED TO BE APPROXIMATELY $82,175.00.

$82,175.00

A LETTER WAS SENT TO THE CLIENT ON JULY 1, 2004 DENYING THE COMPLAINT. BASED UPON A REVIEW OF ALL RELEVANT DOCUMENTATION PERTAINING TO THE CLIENT'S PURCHASE OF THE ANNUITY IN AUGUST 2000 AND, ALSO, UPON INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE FA, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE ANNUITY WAS SUITABLE FOR THE CLIENT BASED UPON HER AGE, INVESTMENT EXPERIENCE, INVESTMENT GOALS AND RISK TOLERANCE.