4/8/04-12/18/08; CLIENT AND HER DAUGHTERS INDICATE CONCERN REGARDING LONG TERM CORPORATE BONDS WHICH WERE PURCHASED IN THE MOTHER'S ACCOUNT. THEIR LETTER INDICATES THE MOTHER WILL BE ALMOST 100 YRS OLD AT MATURITY. THE LETTER ALSO STATES A $200,000 INVESTMENT IS NOW WORTH $4,500 AND THEY BELIEVE THE INVESTMENTS WERE TOO RISKY AND NOT INSURED.

$5,000.00

ACCORDING TO FA, CLIENT INQUIRED ABOUT TRANSFERRING HER ACCOUNT TO THE FA'S BRANCH AND THE ACCOUNT TRANSFERRED ON 6/5/02. OVER THE YEARS, FA HAS STATED SHE CONTACTED CLIENT ABOUT BOND OR CD RATES, BUT IT WAS NOT UNTIL APRIL OF 2004 THAT CLIENT DECIDED TO PURCHASE AN INVESTMENT WITH HER. FA HAS INDICATED DURING THIS CONVERSATION, THE DETAILS OF THE LEHMAN BOND WERE REVIEWED (INCLUDING INTEREST RATE, MATURITY DATE, CALL DATE AND ESTATE FEATURE). FA STATED SHE INFORMED CLIENT THE LEHMAN BOND WAS NOT INSURED, BUT BACKED BY THE GOOD FAITH AND CREDIT STRENGTH OF THE COMPANY. AT THE TIME THE CLIENT PURCHASED THE LEHMAN BOND, THE COMPANY WAS A RATED BY S&P. IT IS OUR UNDERSTANDING THE INTEREST PAYMENTS WERE DISCUSSED AND CLIENT ULTIMATELY MADE THE DECISION TO INVEST $200,000. FA INDICATED SHE REVIEWED CLIENT'S NET WORTH DURING THIS TRANSACTION AND IT APPEARS THE BOND WAS NOT OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF THE STATED INVESTMENT OBJECTIVES THE ACCOUNT. ACCORDING TO FA, SHE SPOKE WITH CLIENT SHORTLY AFTER LEHMAN BROTHERS FILED BANKRUPTCY (9/08) AND EXPLAINED THE DEVELOPMENTS WERE CERTAINLY A SURPRISE TO MANY IN THE FINANCIAL INDUSTRY. SINCE CLIENT'S ACCOUNT WAS ESTABLISHED, SHE HAS RECEIVED ACCOUNT STATEMENTS WHICH PROVIDE INFORMATION REGARDING THE INVESTMENTS HELD IN HER ACCOUNT. IT IS OUR OPINION THE FA PROVIDED THE DETAILS OF THE LEHMAN BOND AND CLIENT AUTHORIZED THE PURCHASE. CLAIM DENIED.