UBS FINANCIAL SERVICES INC.

Discharged

MR. SQUELLATI'S EMPLOYMENT WAS TERMINATED BECAUSE MANAGEMENT LOST CONFIDENCE IN HIS ABILITIES TO PERFORM THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF HIS ROLE FOR REASONS INCLUDING (1) HE ENTERTAINED A CLIENT, WHO WAS ALSO A PERSONAL FRIEND, AT AN INAPPROPRIATE VENUE AND THEN SOUGHT REIMBURSEMENT OF THE EXPENSE FROM THE FIRM AND (2) HE ENTERED A DULY-AUTHORIZED CLIENT TRADE ORDER CONTRARY TO A STANDING INSTRUCTION FROM BRANCH MANAGEMENT NOT TO TRANSACT IN THAT PARTICULAR SECURITY.

REASON NUMBER 1: THE CLIENT HAD BEEN A LONG TIME PERSONAL FRIEND OF MINE FOR MORE THAN 15 YEARS AND SPECIFICALLY REQUESTED THAT WE GO TO THIS VENUE. WE DID NOT DISCUSS BUSINESS AT THIS VENUE AND I MISTAKENLY USED MY UBS AMEX CREDIT CARD, INSTEAD OF A PERSONAL AMEX CREDIT CARD, TO PAY THE BILL IN AN AMOUNT LESS THAN $100. I WAS UNAWARE THAT THE CHARGE HAD BEEN SUBMITTED TO UBS AND DID NOT INTENTIONALLY SEEK REIMBURSEMENT. I FULLY EXPLAINED THIS MATTER TO BOTH FIRM COMPLIANCE AND TO MY BRANCH MANAGER, AND WAS ASSURED THAT MY EMPLOYMENT WAS NOT IN JEOPARDY. REASON NUMBER 2: I WAS INSTRUCTED BY MY CLIENT TO SELL THE STOCK AT ISSUE. FOLLOWING RECEIPT OF MY CLIENT'S SELL INSTRUCTION, I CONTACTED COMPLIANCE AND OBTAINED APPROVAL FOR THE STOCK SALES AT ISSUE. BOTH COMPLIANCE AND THE HEAD OF OPERATIONS ASSISTED IN EFFECTUATING THE SUBJECT STOCK SALES OVER A 30 DAY PERIOD. NEITHER COMPLIANCE NOR OPERATIONS INDICATED TO ME OR TO MY SALES ASSISTANT THAT THERE WAS ANY RESTRICTION REGARDING THE STOCK SALES AT ISSUE. NO RESTRICTION OF ANY KIND WAS PLACED UPON THE SUBJECT STOCK IN THE CLIENT'S ACCOUNT. THE SALES WERE ENTERED OVER THE FIRM'S SYSTEM AND HARD TICKETS WERE ISSUED. APPROXIMATELY 30 DAYS AFTER THE SALES WERE EFFECTUATED, I WAS NOTIFIED BY BRANCH MANAGEMENT THAT AN EMAIL HAD BEEN SENT TO ME 4 YEARS EARLIER STATING THAT THE STOCK AT ISSUE IN THIS CLIENT'S ACCOUNT SHOULD NOT BE SOLD. I HAD NO MEMORY OF THE REFERENCED 4 YEAR OLD EMAIL AND, HAVING OBTAINED APPROVAL FOR THE STOCK SALE DIRECTLY FROM COMPLIANCE BEFORE EFFECTUATING THE SALE, I HAD NO REASON TO BELIEVE THAT THERE WAS ANY RESTRICTION APPLICABLE TO THE SALE. IN EFFECTUATING THE STOCK SALES AT ISSUE, I DID NOT DISREGARD INSTRUCTIONS FROM BRANCH MANAGEMENT - I RELIED UPON THE APPROVALS FROM BOTH COMPLIANCE AND THE HEAD OF OPERATIONS.

PLAINTIFF ALLEGES MISREPRESENTATION, BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY, FRAUD AND CONVERSION BY SEVERAL DEFENDANTS, INCLUDING THE BROKER, IN CONNECTION WITH A HEDGE FUND THAT SHE INVESTED IN OUTSIDE OF BEAR STEARNS BETWEEN AUGUST 2000 AND JUNE 2001. PLAINTIFF DID NOT HOLD A BEAR STEARNS ACCOUNT IN HER NAME.

$425,000.00

$6,500.00

I DID NOT HAVE ANY RELATIONSHIP WHATSOEVER WITH THE CLAIMANT. I WAS NOT INVOLVED IN ANY OF THE ALLEGED CONDUCT RELATED TO THE ALLEGATIONS IN THE COMPLAINT . I DID NOT PAY NOR WAS I ASKED TO PAY ANY OF THE DIMINIMUS SETTLEMENT WHICH WAS PAID EXCLUSIVELY BY JPM.

PRUDENTIAL SECURITIES

Discharged

TRADING WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION AND MARKING "SOLIICITED" TRADES AS "UNSOLICITED".

THE CLIENT AUTHORIZED THE USE OF DISCRETION IN THE ACCOUNT BUT DID NOT SIGN DICRETIONARY PAPERS. I MARKED THE TICKETS UNSOLICITED AT MY MANAGER'S DIRECTION. THE CLIENT NEVER COMPLAINED BUT ACCEPTED A SETTLEMENT WHEN IT WAS OFFERED BY THE FIRM WITHOUT MY KNOWLEDGE, PARTICIPATION OR CONTRIBUTION.

PSI MANAGER CONTACTED CLIENT REGARDING ACTIVE ACCOUNT REVIEW AND LEARNED THAT CLIENT WAS NOT AWARE OF ALL OF THE TRADES IN THE ACCOUNT.

$100,000.00

$61,000.00

CLIENT AUTHORIZED THE USE OF DISCRETION IN THE ACCOUNT BUT DID NOT SIGN DISCRETIONARY PAPERS. CLIENT NEVER COMPLAINED BUT ACCEPTED A SETTLEMENT WHEN IT WAS OFFERED BY THE FIRM WITHOUT MY KNOWLEDGE, PARTICIPATION OR CONTRIBUTION.

DEPT. OF INSURANCE/STATE OF CA

OMITTED DISCLOSURE OF MISDEMEANOR CRIMINAL CONVICTION ON INSURANCE LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION.

Order

Monetary/Fine

$100.00

EXAMINATION FEE OF $266.50 ASSESED. PLUS MONETARY FINE OF $100, TOTALLING $366.50. FINES AND FEES PAID ON/ABOUT 10/2000.

DURING COLLEGE A NO-CONTEST PLEA WAS ENTERED ON MY BEHALF ON A MISDEAMEANOR DISORDERLY CONDUCT CHARGE. BELIEVING THAT THE CONVICTION HAD BEEN ERASED AND/OR THAT IT WAS MERELY CONSIDERED AN INFRACTION, I DID NOT INCLUDE IT IN MY INSURANCE RENEWAL APPLICATION. I PAID A $100 FINE AND AN EXAMINATION FEE TO RESOLVE THE MATTER.