PERIOD 2001. Alleges misrepresentations and omissions, breach of fid duty, breach of contract,unsuitable investment recommendations, fraud, negligence

$235,000.00

$15,000.00

The profile of the client was oriented to Growth and Income, not Conservative. The client was a sophisticated investor, Certified Public Accountant and was former Vice president of a very important newspaper in Puerto Rico. The client used to purchase different Stocks and Preferred Stocks in a speculative fashion and concentrated many times. Mostly all the trades were Unsolicited. I never offered recommendation to purchase those PR Closed End Funds because those funds mentioned by the Claim were purchased in another Brokerage House in Puerto Rico, and they were transferred to the client account in Smith Barney via ACAT in some time after he purchased in 2001. During my custody the client was very aware about the risks and lack of liquidity of those CEF and collected and received the Dividends of 6% for more than 12 years.

CUSTOMER ALLEGES SHE GAVE FINANCIAL CONSULTANT INSTRUCTIONS ONLY TO INVEST IN PRINCIPAL PROTECTED INVESTMENTS. SHE CLAIMS RESTITUTION OF $115,000.

$115,000.00

AT THE MOMENT OF THE CLAIM THE CLIENT HAD RECEIVED DURING THE 3 YEARS THAT THE ACCOUNT WAS MAINTAINED $18,000 IN DIVIDENDS AND INTERESTS. THE UNREALIZED LOSS AS OF 11-7-2013 IS $29,129.81. THESE ACCOUNTS WERE ESTABLISHED AS MODERATE RISK. THIS ACCOUNTS WERE INVESTED IN FIXED INCOME SECURITIES. THE CLIENT WAS VERY HAPPY WITH THE ACCOUNTS PERFORMANCE AND REVIEWS WERE CONDUCTED ALMOST EVERY 2 QUARTERS. THE CLIENT HAD EXPERIENCE IN FIXED INCOME SECURITIES SINCE SHE HELD AN ACCOUNT WITH ANOTHER BROKER AT SMITH BARNEY IN 2004. THE LAST INVESTMENT PLAN ESTABLISHED HER INVESTMENT TIME HORIZON UP TO 2018.

BENEFICIARY ALLEGED INVESTMENTS WERE NOT CONSISTENT WITH REQUESTED RISK TOLERANCE, INSTRUCTIONS TO LIQUIDATE WERE NOT FOLLOWED & GROSS NEGLIGENT MGT OF ACCT [ACCOUNT NUMBER]

$35,000.00

AFTER FURTHER REVIEW IT WAS DETERMINED THAT CASARES WAS NOT INVOLVED IN THE ACCOUNT ACTIVITY THAT WAS THE SUBJECT OF THE COMPLAINT.[THIRD PARTY] FROM CITI EMAILED THE SITUATION AND IN JULY 2008 THE U-5 WAS AMENDED BY THEIR STAFF.