COMPLAINING ABOUT PERFORMANCE OF INVESTMENTS, CLAIMING LOSSES OF 160K. ALLEGING THAT HE TOLD THE FA TO PLACE STOP ORDERS PLACED ON ALL TRADES OF 10-15% LOSS BEFORE EXECUTION. THE CLIENT ALSO STATES THAT HE HAD CONCERNS WITH "CHURNING", BUT DOES NOT GIVE SPECIFICS. THE CLIENT FURTHER ALLEGES THAT THE LEHMAN NOTE HE PURCHASED WAS SUPPOSED TO BE 100% PRINCIPAL PROTECTED AND THAT THE FA MISREPRESENTED THAT RJ WOULD GUARANTEE ANY LOSSES. CLIENT FEELS THERE WAS A BREECH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY, THE FA MISREPRESENTED HIMSELF, AND THAT HIS ACCOUNTS WERE NOT CORRECTLY OVERSEEN BY HIMSELF OR HIS SUPERVISOR.

$160,000.00

$55,000.00

FRAUD; MISREPRESENTATION; BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY; SUITABILITY; CHURNING

$25,000.00

$14,000.00

ROBERT LIPKA WAS NOT NAMED IN THE COMPLAINT. FURTHERMORE, THE ALLEGATION OF "CHURNING" IS FRIVOLOUS AS THE CUSTOMER WAS IN A FEE-BASED ACCOUNT. AS EVIDENCED BY THE CUSTOMERS ACCOUNT LOG-IN HISTORY, THE CUSTOMER MONITORED THEIR ACCOUNT ON A DAILY BASIS AND AT NO TIME THAT MR. LIPKA WAS MANAGING THEIR ACCOUNT DID THEY RAISE THE ISSUE OF SUITABILITY.