SUITABILITY OF INVESTMENTS MADE 6 - 10 YEARS AGO

$499,999.00

$140,000.00

THIS CLAIMED WAS FILED OVER 7 YEARS AFTER THE INVESTMENTS WERE MADE. THE CLAIM WAS INITIATED DUE TO PRODUCT FAILURE AS A RESULT OF THE GREAT RECESSION OF 2008-2009. UNFORTUNATELY, MANY REAL ESTATE BASED INVESTMENTS DURING THIS PERIOD SUCCUMBED TO THE MASSIVE AND PROLONGED DOWNTURN IN THE ECONOMY. THERE WAS NO WAY TO KNOW THE FUTURE OF THE ECONOMY AT THE TIME THE INVESTMENTS WERE MADE. I WAS NOT NAMED AS A RESPONDENT IN THIS CLAIM.

SUITABILITY OF INVESTMENTS MADE APPROXIMATELY 6-9 YEARS AGO.

$350,000.00

$132,000.00

CLAIM STEMS FROM INVESTMENTS MADE 6-9 YEARS AGO. INVESTMENTS WHICH, AT THE TIME OF RECOMMENDATION, WERE DOING QUITE WELL. UNFORTUNATELY, THE GREAT RECESSION OF 2008-2009 CAUSED MANY COMPANIES TO FAIL. THIS CLAIM WAS FILED AGAINST THE FIRM AND NOT ME. I LEFT THE FIRM OVER 3 YEARS BEFORE THE CLAIM WAS FILED. THEY DID NOT CONSULT ME AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THEY SETTLED AND I HAD NO FINANCIAL PARTICIPATION IN THE SETTLEMENT.

ALLEGED UNSUITABILITY OF VARIOUS ALTERNATIVE INVESTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS MADE TO MULTIPLE CLAIMANTS BY THE REGISTERED REP. BETWEEN APPROXIMATELY JUNE 2005 AND AUGUST 2006

$350,000.00

$115,000.00

THE CLIENT FILED AN ARBITRATION AGAINST THE FIRM OVER TWO YEARS AFTER I LEFT. THE ARBITRATION WAS INITIATED DUE TO PRODUCT FAILURE AS A RESULT OF THE GREAT RECESSION OF 2008-2009. CLIENT WAS INVESTED IN WHAT WAS A VIABLE COMPANY BEFORE THE ECONOMIC COLLAPSE. UNFORTUNATELY, BEING A REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT COMPANY THEY SUCCUMBED TO THE MASSIVE, PROLONGED DOWNTURN IN REAL ESTATE. THE FIRM DID NOT CONSULT ME IN THIS MATTER AND APPARENTLY MADE A BUSINESS DECISION TO SETTLE THE CLAIM. I WAS NOT NAMED AS A RESPONDENT IN THE CLAIM.

SUITABILITY OF 2008 PURCHASE OF SCI CAPITAL GROUP MEZZANINE FUND

$70,000.00

$32,372.11

THE CLIENT FILED AN ARBITRATION AGAINST THE FIRM OVER A YEAR AFTER I LEFT. THE ARBITRATION WAS INITIATED DUE TO PRODUCT FAILURE AS A RESULT OF THE GREAT RECESSION OF 2008-2009. CLIENT WAS INVESTED IN WHAT WAS A VIABLE COMPANY BEFORE THE ECONOMIC COLLAPSE. UNFORTUNATELY, BEING A REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT COMPANY THEY SUCCUMBED TO THE MASSIVE, PROLONGED DOWNTURN IN REAL ESTATE. THE FIRM DID NOT CONSULT ME IN THIS MATTER AND APPARENTLY MADE A BUSINESS DECISION TO SETTLE THE CLAIM. I WAS NOT NAMED AS A RESPONDENT IN THE CLAIM.

UNSUITABLE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE PURCHASE OF NON-TRADED REITS, DPPS AND HIGH YIELD CORPORATE DEBT.

$325,000.00

$230,478.86

THE CLIENT FILED AN ARBITRATION AGAINST THE FIRM OVER A YEAR AFTER I LEFT. THE ARBITRATION WAS INITIATED DUE TO PRODUCT FAILURE AS A RESULT OF THE GREAT RECESSION OF 2008-2009. CLIENT WAS INVESTED IN WHAT WAS A VIABLE COMPANY BEFORE THE ECONOMIC COLLAPSE. UNFORTUNATELY, BEING A REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT COMPANY THEY SUCCUMBED TO THE MASSIVE, PROLONGED DOWNTURN IN REAL ESTATE. THE FIRM DID NOT CONSULT ME IN THIS MATTER AND APPARENTLY MADE A BUSINESS DECISION TO SETTLE THE CLAIM. I WAS NOT NAMED AS A RESPONDENT IN THE CLAIM.

ALLEGED UNSUITABILITY OF INVESTMENTS MADE BY TWO CLAIMANTS THROUGH TWO REPS IN 2007.

$191,000.00

$40,589.18

SETTLEMENT AS TO CLAIMANT [THIRD PARTY]. SETTLEMENT AS TO CLAIMANT [CUSTOMER], A CUSTOMER OF ANOTHER REPRESENTATIVE, WAS REPORTED ON THE FORM U5 OF THAT OTHER REPRESENTATIVE, [OTHER FIRM EMPLOYEE].

MULTI-CLAIMANT ACTION, CLAIMANTS ALLEGE THAT INVESTMENTS PURCHASED BETWEEN 2004-2008 WERE UNSUITABLE.

$683,000.00

$261,450.00

NOTE THAT THE SETTLEMENT AMOUNT ABOVE IS THE TOTAL SETTLEMENT OF THIS MULTI-CLAIMANT MATTER; WITH $1,167.60 OF THIS AMOUNT ATTRIBUTABLE TO AN INVESTMENT MADE THROUGH ANOTHER REGISTERED REPRESENTATIVE.

UNAUTHORIZED SALE & SUITABILITY

$13,140.00

CLAIMANT ALLEGES UNSUITABLE INVESTMENTS COMMENCING IN 2005.

$448,056.31

$145,525.33

STATEMENT OF CLAIM CONTAINS ALLEGATIONS OF UNSUITABLE INVESTMENTS IN THE TIME PERIOD 2006-2008.

$265,000.00

$82,318.45

INVESTMENT LOSSES

$261,272.04

$105,000.00

ACCORDING TO THE RR, THE INVESTMENTS RECOMMENDED IN 2006-2008 HAD GONE THROUGH VARIOUS DUE DILIGENCE FILTERS AND SCREENING PROCESSES AND, AT THE TIME, WERE CONSIDERED TO BE RELIABLE AND SUITABLE FOR CLIENT. UNFORTUNATELY, THE GREAT RECESSION OF LATE 2008 AND 2009 CAUSED MANY BUSINESSES TO STRUGGLE AND FAIL. THE CLIENT IS CLAIMING A TOTAL LOSS ON 3 OF HER INVESTMENTS. HOWEVER, TWO OF THEM REMAIN VIABLE GOING CONCERNS WHILE THE THIRD IS IN REORGANIZATION DUE TO A DIFFICULT U.S. ECONOMY AND STRUGGLING REAL ESTATE MARKET, FACTORS OUTSIDE OF THE REP'S OR FIRM'S ABILITY TO CONTROL. THE PRINCIPALS OF THAT COMPANY ARE OPTIMISTIC OF A WORK OUT AMONG CREDITORS GIVEN ENOUGH TIME. THEREFORE, CLIENT'S CLAIMS OF TOTAL LOSS ARE INFLATED AND INACCURATE.

FOLLOWING A RECENT SUSPENSION OF DIVIDENDS AND BANKRUPTCY FILING BY OIL AND GAS COMPANY, PROVIDENT ROYALTIES, CUSTOMER FILED A COMPLAINT ALLEGING THAT THE PRODUCT WAS UNSUITABLE AT THE TIME OF SALE IN 2008.

$50,000.00

$35,000.00

TO AVOID THE TIME AND EXPENSE OF CONTINUED LITIGATION, A BUSINESS DECISION WAS MADE TO SETTLE THIS CASE. SETTLED IN PRINCIPAL ON OCTOBER 13, 2010. AWAITING EXECUTION OF SETTLEMENT DOCUMENTS.