CLIENT ALLEGES THAT GIVEN HER AGE, INSURABLE INTERESTS, RETIREMENT GOALS, AND OVERALL FINANCIAL SITUATION THAT THE SALE OF A 2003 VARIABLE LIFE INSURANCE POLICY WAS NOT A SUITABLE INVESTMENT FOR HER. CLIENT ALLEGES THAT POLICY WAS SOLD AS A SOURCE OF RETIREMENT FUNDING. CLIENT IS REQUESTING TO TRANSFER HER CASH VALUE TO A LESS CASH INTENSIVE POLICY AND LOWER THE FACE AMOUNT OF THE POLICY WITHOUT INCURRING THE APPLICABLE SURRENDER CHARGES.

$10,930.00

THE FIRM FOUND NO BASIS TO THE CUSTOMER COMPLAINT. BASED ON APPEAL RECEIVED 2/6/07, THE FIRM AGREED TO WAIVE THE PRO-RATA SURRENDER CHARGE APPLICABLE TO SURRENDERING THE POLICY. LOSS TO FIRM: $10,930. APPEAL CLOSED DATE: 4/24/07.

THE CLIENT ALLEGES THAT THE INVESTMENT ALLOCATIONS THAT THE REPRESENTATIVE SUGGESTED DURING THE JUNE 2000 SALE OF HER VARIABLE ANNUITY CONTRACT WERE INAPPROPRIATE. THE CLIENT FURTHER ALLEGES THAT, KNOWING THE CLIENT'S FEARS, THE REPRESENTATIVE DID NOTHING TO PROTECT THE CLIENT'S INVESTMENT. THE CLIENT SEEKS REIMBURSEMENT OF THE $153,614.00 IN LOSSES THAT SHE INCURRED.

$153,614.00

$66,000.00

WITHOUT ADMITTING ANY LIABILITY BUT TO TERMINATE FURTHER CONTROVERSY RESPECTING ALL CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT, THE FIRM AGREED TO SETTLE THIS MATTER. I DID NOT CONTRIBUTE ANY MONEY TOWARD THE SETTLEMENT.