WASHINGTON

ON OCTOBER 18, 2012, THE SECURITIES DIVISION ENTERED A FINAL ORDER TO DENY FUTURE REGISTRATIONS (THE "FINAL ORDER") AGAINST JEROME J. STELLICK ("STELLICK"). THE SECURITIES DIVISION HAD PREVIOUSLY ENTERED A STATEMENT OF CHARGES AND NOTICE OF INTENT TO DENY FUTURE REGISTRATIONS AGAINST STELLICK ALLEGING THAT STELLICK, WHILE REGISTERED AS A SECURITIES SALESPERSON AND INVESTMENT ADVISER REPRESENTATIVE OF THREE DIFFERENT FIRMS IN WASHINGTON, BORROWED $326,000 FROM CUSTOMERS AND ADVISORY CLIENTS. THE STATEMENT OF CHARGES ALSO ALLEGED THAT STELLICK OPENED AN OPTIONS ACCOUNT FOR A CUSTOMER AND EXERCISED TRADING DISCRETION IN THAT ACCOUNT WITHOUT OBTAINING THE CUSTOMER'S WRITTEN CONSENT TO DO SO. THE STATEMENT OF CHARGES FURTHER ALLEGED THAT THIS CONDUCT VIOLATED THE SECURITIES ACT OF WASHINGTON. THE FINAL ORDER ORDERS THAT ANY SECURITIES SALESPERSON OR INVESTMENT ADVISER REPRESENTATIVE REGISTRATIONS THAT STELLICK MAY SEEK IN THE FUTURE BE DENIED. STELLICK HAS THE RIGHT TO REQUEST JUDICIAL REVIEW OF THE FINAL ORDER ON SEPTEMBER 21, 2012, THE SECURITIES DIVISION ENTERED STATEMENT OF CHARGES AND NOTICE OF INTENT TO ENTER ORDER TO DENY FUTURE REGISTRATIONS (THE "STATEMENT OF CHARGES") AGAINST JEROME J. STELLICK ("STELLICK"). THE STATEMENT OF CHARGES ALLEGES THAT STELLICK, WHILE REGISTERED AS A SECURITIES SALESPERSON AND INVESTMENT ADVISER REPRESENTATIVE OF THREE DIFFERENT FIRMS IN WASHINGTON, BORROWED $326,000 FROM CUSTOMERS AND ADVISORY CLIENTS. THE STATEMENT OF CHARGES ALSO ALLEGES THAT STELLICK OPENED AN OPTIONS ACCOUNT FOR A CUSTOMER AND EXERCISED TRADING DISCRETION IN THAT ACCOUNT WITHOUT OBTAINING THE CUSTOMER'S WRITTEN CONSENT TO DO SO. THE STATEMENT OF CHARGES ALLEGES THAT THIS CONDUCT VIOLATED THE SECURITIES ACT OF WASHINGTON AND GIVES NOTICE OF THE SECURITIES DIVISION'S INTENT TO DENY ANY SECURITIES SALESPERSON OR INVESTMENT ADVISER REPRESENTATIVE REGISTRATIONS STELLICK MAY SEEK IN THE FUTURE. STELLICK HAS THE RIGHT TO REQUEST A HEARING ON THE STATEMENT OF CHARGES.

Order

Denial

ANY SECURITIES SALESPERSON OR INVESTMENT ADVISER REPRESENTATIVE REGISTRATIONS IN THE FUTURE WILL BE DENIED.

violation of securities regulatory requirements; breach of fiduciary duty; violation of the Washington State Securities Act; negligence, violation of the Washington Consumer Protection Act; unjust enrichment

FINRA

NASD RULES 2110, 2310, 2370, 2510, 3050: STELLICK COMPLETED AN ONLINE APPLICATION TO OPEN A BROKERAGE ACCOUNT FOR A CUSTOMER AT A FINRA MEMBER FIRM WITH WHICH HE WAS NOT ASSOCIATED AND COMPLETED THE APPLICATION BY OBTAINING THE CUSTOMER'S SIGNATURE ON A SEPARATE PAGE AND SUBMITTING IT TO THE EXECUTING MEMBER. STELLICK EFFECTED OPTIONS TRANSACTIONS IN THE CUSTOMER'S ACCOUNT AT THE EXECUTING MEMBER, BUT IN LIGHT OF THE CUSTOMER'S STATED RISK TOLERANCE, STELLICK DID NOT HAVE REASONABLE GROUNDS FOR BELIEVING THAT SUCH TRANSACTIONS WERE EITHER QUALITATIVELY OR QUANTITATIVELY SUITABLE FOR THE CUSTOMERS. STELLICK EXERCISED DISCRETION WITH RESPECT TO THE OPTIONS TRANSACTIONS EFFECTED IN THE CUSTOMER'S ACCOUNT AND HE NEVER RECEIVED WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM THE CUSTOMER, NOR DID HE RECEIVE WRITTEN APPROVAL FROM THE EXECUTING MEMBER, TO EXERCISE DISCRETION. STELLICK NEVER NOTIFIED HIS EMPLOYER MEMBER FIRM, EITHER ORALLY OR IN WRITING, ABOUT THE ACCOUNT HE OPENED AT THE EXECUTING MEMBER, OR ABOUT ANY TRANSACTIONS HE EFFECTED IN THAT ACCOUNT; AND STELLICK NEVER INFORMED THE EXECUTING MEMBER ABOUT HIS CONTROL OVER THE CUSTOMER'S ACCOUNT AND HIS STATUS AS AN ASSOCIATED PERSON OF HIS FIRM. STELLICK BORROWED $326,000 FROM HIS CUSTOMERS IN VIOLATION OF THE WRITTEN PROCEDURES OF FIRMS' HE WAS ASSOCIATED WITH.

Acceptance, Waiver & Consent(AWC)

Bar (Permanent)

All Capacities

3/25/2010

WITHOUT ADMITTING OR DENYING THE FINDINGS, STELLICK CONSENTED TO THE DESCRIBED SANCTION AND TO THE ENTRY OF FINDINGS; THEREFORE, HE IS BARRED FROM ASSOCIATION WITH ANY FINRA MEMBER IN ANY CAPACITY.

THE CLAIMANT ALLEGES THAT IN AUGUST 2005, AMPF FORMER ADVISOR CONVINCED HER TO LEND HIM $70,000 WHICH HE PROMISED TO PAY WITH INTEREST. SHE FURTHER CLAIMS THAT TWO WEEKS LATER HE LEFT AMPF FOR OTHER FIRMS WHERE HE ALSO OBTAINED LOANS FROM CLAIMANT. CLAIMANT ALLGES SHE LOANED THE ADVISOR $250,000 IN TOTAL, OF WHICH ONLY $40,000 WAS REPAID. CLAIMANT REQUESTS $210,000 IN TOTAL, $58,800 FROM AMPF.

$58,800.00

$65,694.90