Client alleged that financial advisor recommended energy investments not in line with its investment goals and risk tolerance. (9/30/2012-4/12/2016)

$100,000.00

$50,000.00

Client alleged his financial advisor recommended energy investments not in line with his investment goals and risk tolerance. (2/24/2014-4/12/2016)

$283,363.60

$153,000.00

Claimants allege that from 2012 through 2018, FA purchased unsuitable securities.

$100,000.00

Arbitration: Claimants allege that from October 2012 until September/October 2017, the FA recommended investments in a concentrated and unsuitable energy strategy. Complaint:Clients allege inappropriate investments for a conservative, low-risk portfolio and that FA ignored requests to sell energy positions. (5/20/2013-4/27/2016)

$130,000.00

Client verbally alleged her financial advisor recommended energy investments not in line with her investment goals and risk tolerance. (10/1/2013-4/12/2016)

$60,000.00

$31,295.00

Clients allege the financial advisor made inaccurate assurances regarding the risks associated with oil/energy investments. (8/29/2013-4/12/2016)

$80,000.00

FINRA

Without admitting or denying the findings, Lynch consented to the sanction and to the entry of findings that he recommended an investment strategy that was unsuitable for certain retail customers by recommending an over-concentration in energy-sector securities, some of which were speculative, resulting in significant customer losses. The findings stated that due to the speculative nature of the recommended securities, the volatility of the energy market, and the high level of concentration, this strategy exposed customers to significant potential losses. In many instances, Lynch failed to properly consider and failed to obtain accurate customer investment profile information to determine the suitability of his over-concentration strategy and the securities he recommended as part of that strategy. In this regard, Lynch recommended the strategy to customers without proper consideration of each customer's individual investment experience, risk tolerance, investment time horizon, net worth, liquidity needs, and income. Consequently, Lynch did not properly assess the significant potential risks associated with his recommended strategy for each of these customers. In certain instances, the potential risks were compounded because the over-concentration in speculative energy-sector securities exceeded 50% of the customer's net worth (exclusive of personal residence). In 2015, when the energy market began a downturn, Lynch unsuitably recommended that certain of his over-concentrated customers adhere to his strategy without regard to their particular situations or ability to continue to sustain losses. By following Lynch's recommendation, the customers suffered millions of dollars in aggregate losses.

Acceptance, Waiver & Consent(AWC)

Bar (Permanent)

All capacities

Indefinite

12/11/2017

Claimants allege that from October 2012, the FA made unsuitable and over-concentrated investment recommendations in the energy sector.

$110,000.00

Client complained of unsuitable and speculative trading in a small cap energy stock (HK), and failure to use techniques to stop loss. Issuer declared bankruptcy. (12/1/2013-4/12/2016)

$28,000.00

$13,500.00

Client's representative alleged that client's account was over-concentrated in oil and gas investments. (5/14/2015-4/12/2016)

$20,000.00

Bankruptcy

Discharged

Proceedings in FINRA Arbitration Case# 17-00779 against Charles Bernard Lynch were stayed by Bankruptcy proceedings in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California, case# 6:17-bk-12996-SC.

Client verbally alleged unsuitable investments in the energy sector and poor performance. (9/6/2013-4/12/2016)

$64,584.00

$125,000.00

Claimants allege in or around 2013 FA over concentrated their portfolio in unsuitable equities.

$205,000.00

Client verbally alleged losses from FA's recommendation to purchase securities in the energy sector. (7/22/2013-3/29/2017)

$750,000.00

Attorney for clients alleged suitability and concentration issues. (10/01/2013-4/12/2016)

$1,897,530.00

$575,000.00

Claimants allege misrepresentation by the FA.

$45,000.00

Claimants allege misrepresentation by the FA.

$125,000.00

Claimants allege in 2014 FA's over-concentrated their portfolio in unsuitable investments.

$166,315.00

$55,000.00

Claimant alleges that FA's engaged in excessive, unsuitable and unauthorized trading between October 2012 and April of 2016.

$120,000.00

Client verbally alleged losses in her account from investing too much in energy and oil securities. (8/2/2013-11/18/2016)

$70,000.00

$32,000.00

Claimant alleges that between January 2013 and April 2016, made unsuitable investments.

$121,948.00

$51,000.00

Client verbally complains that energy sector investments did not meet objective of account and were not appropriate. Client further claims the FA did not make suitable investment decisions. (05/14/2015-09/16/2016)

$35,000.00

Client verbally alleged that FA did not communicate with her regarding the status of her investments, resulting in substantial losses. (11/21/2012-4/12/2016)

$63,500.00

Claimants allege that between October 2012 and February 2016, their retirement portfolio suffered a devastating loss of principal because of the FA's unsuitable recommendations of concentrated positions in energy stocks.

$372,500.00

Claimants allege that between approximately between December 2013 to April 2016 FA recommended unsuitable, highly risky investments.

$33,000.00

Client claimed that her non-discretionary account was traded without her consent and that concentrations in individual equities and in sectors was unconscionable, and further that portfolio mix was not the investment strategy that was described. Demanded that account be made whole. (3/20/2013-8/13/2015)

$11,280.00

Arbitration:Claimants alleges unsuitable investment recommendations were made in accounts opened in or around 2012 and 2016.; Complaint:Client writes that funds were not supposed to be invested aggressively, but that client has lost $9000.00 in the past two weeks and additional funds prior to that. (10/22/2012-01/14/2016)

$160,000.00

Claimant alleges unsuitable recommendations were made with respect to their retirement accounts.

$95,000.00

Claimant alleges unsuitable recommendations were made with respect to her retirement accounts.

$225,000.00

Client verbally alleged her portfolio was unsuitable and risky, FA did unauthorized trades and overall mismanaged accounts. (6/1/2014-4/12/2016)

$411,115.00

$251,812.00

Clients claimed that their holdings were unsuitably concentrated in speculative oil and gas holdings, and that they were not liquidated timely; also alleged that account was opened without their permission. (11/9/2012-4/12/2016)

$5,000.00

Client wrote that she instructed FA to invest for long term and low to medium risk, but was invested in risky investments in oil related companies and lost 70%. (6/9/2014-4/12/2016)

$11,000.00

Gave FA money to invest conservatively, and yet funds were aggressively and negligently. (10/15/2014-6/6/2016)

$35,000.00

$20,000.00

Client verbally claimed that FA mismanaged his account, leading to large losses. (10/19/2012-4/12/2016)

$15,000.00

Client wrote that he wished to invest conservatively, and carefully. However, his funds were invested all in energy stocks, and he was not in agreement with that type of risk with unsuitable investments. (05/13/2014-05/05/2016)

$216,000.00

$175,000.00

Claimants allege between 2012 and 2016 FAs over-concentrated their portfolio in unsuitable energy investments.

$850,000.00

Clients complained that their funds were invested in unsuitable investments, and FA did not advise that investments were speculative. Clients stated that strategy employed reflected concentrations in a few equity stocks in selected market segments, and that their instructions to keep account from dipping below $1 million mark were not followed. (10/22/2012-02/02/2016)

$2,500,000.00

$800,000.00

Claimants alleges in or about 2013 their portfolio was over-concentrated in unsuitable oil and gas investments.

$125,000.00

Client wrote that she emphasized that she was not a risk taker, and although she was assured that her investments in energy securities were not risky, she lost substantial assets. (10/22/2012-04/13/2016)

$272,777.00

Client wrote that she wanted low risk stocks, and although she was assured that her investments in energy securities were not risky, she lost substantial assets. (10/19/2012-04/13/2016)

$173,227.00

Client writes that account was to be invested conservatively, but that negligent decisions were made that reduced portfolio by half. (03/08/2013-03/28/2016)

$500,000.00

$275,000.00

Clients state that they were put into risky speculative securities and over-concentrated investments in energy and commodities stocks, to which they never should have been exposed and were not suitable. (10/16/2012-07/23/2015)

$200,000.00

$109,000.00

Attorney for client claimed that transactions in Halcon, Magnum Hunter and other Energy Sector transactions were unsuitable and, pursuant to Illinois Securities Law, attorney demands that securities be repurchased at original prices paid. (10/12/2012-1/9/2016)

$317,656.00

$231,000.00

Client writes that investments are not in line with his conservative/low risk and diversified investment profile. (10/15/2012-01/12/2016)

$200,000.00

$50,000.00

Clients verbally claim that there was risk taken beyond what they wanted to take and they were not properly diversified; they further claim that they were told to stay the course with the portfolio. (10/11/2012-1/12/2016)

$62,500.00

Clients verbally alleged they are conservative investors and feel FA did not properly diversify portfolios nor make suitable investments and that they were advised to hold in declining market. (9/18/2013-1/5/2016)

$45,434.00

$23,000.00

Client verbally alleged the stocks purchased were high risk and he was not made aware he had energy exposure. (10/19/2012-10/2/2014)

$50,000.00

Client alleges the securities in his account were not suitable for him. (11/29/2012-12/04/2015)

$45,608.00

$16,000.00

Client alleges that the securities in his account were not suitable for him. (10/13/2012-10/05/2015)

$53,654.00

$16,000.00

Claimant alleges unsuitable investment recommendations were made in accounts opened in or around 2014.

$163,750.00

Client complained that exposure to speculative energy investments grew to 70% after portfolio moved to firm, and should have been reduced when the market value of securities declined. (03/20/2013-08/13/2015)

$48,720.00

Client writes that she is not happy with the energy heavy stocks she has been invested in given her financial state, and cannot continue to take a loss. (12/17/2013-11/02/2015)

$75,000.00

Client sends email stating that although he is not a high risk investor, he was invested in high risk small cap energy stocks, and his $200,000 investment declined to $78,000. Seeks reimbursement for all losses. (08/01/2014-09/29/2015)

$122,000.00

$90,000.00

Authorized third party alleges that FA misled, misrepresented, and was negligent with the account portfolio. (04/25/2014-06/12/2015)

$19,787.83

$19,787.83

Client alleges FA misled, misrepresented, and was negligent with the account portfolio. (02/19/2014-10/09/2015)

$250,000.00

$180,212.20

Clients email that, at their age and health, small cap and energy stocks were wrong in their accounts. (10/01/2012-10/01/2015)

Clients write that although they wanted their savings conservatively invested, the FA recommended holding energy stocks through a year-long decline. (01/31/2013-08/26/2015)

$95,000.00

CLIENTS WRITE THAT DESPITE EXPRESSING THAT PRESERVATION OF CAPITAL AND CURRENT INCOME WERE THEIR OBJECTIVES, INVESTMENTS IN ENERGY STOCKS CARRIED TOO MUCH RISK. THEY FURTHER WRITE THEY HAVE LOST PRINCIPAL AND RECEIVED NO INCOME. (07/23/2013-08/20/2015)

$1,200,000.00

$490,000.00

CLIENT ALLEGES UNSUITABLE CONCENTRATION IN SMALL CAP ENERGY SECTOR SECURITIES IN FA-MANAGED PORTFOLIO. (02/15/2013-01/29/2015)

$336,000.00

$195,000.00

CLIENT ALLEGES UNSUITABLE CONCENTRATION IN ENERGY SECTOR, PARTICULARLY HL, MHR, AND MHR PREFERRED DEBT, AND FAILURE TO REBALANCE AS AGREED, IN FA-MANAGED PORTFOLIO. (11/19/2012-01/29/2015)

$500,000.00

$87,800.00

CLIENT ALLEGED THAT RECOMMENDED INVESTMENTS WERE NOT IN LINE WITH CLIENT'S PHILOSOPHY AND RISK TOLERANCE AND WERE NOT APPROPRIATELY ALLOCATED OR BALANCED. (05/01/2014-09/10/2014)

$250,000.00

$334,000.00

IT IS CLAIMED THAT THE FINANCIAL ADVISOR INVESTED IN ALLEGEDLY UNSUITABLE INVESTMENTS BEGINNING IN OR AROUND FEBRUARY 2012.

$14,800.83