1/08-1/09; CLIENT CLAIMS HE SPOKE WITH FA IN EARLY 2008 AND ASKED TO SELL OF HIS STOCKS AND CLAIMS FA TALKED HIM INTO HOLDING A WHILE LONGER. CLIENT CLAIMS WHEN HE FINALLY SOLD HIS STOCKS THE FA MANAGED TO TALK HIM INTO KEEPING HIS BONDS WITH LEHMAN BROTHERS. CLIENT CLAIMS THE FA GAVE HIM VERY POOR ADVICE AND KEPT HIM IN USELESS BONDS. CLAIM EXCEEDS $5,000.

$5,000.00

FA STATED CLIENT WAS ALWAYS SATISFIED WITH ACCOUNT UNTIL EARLY MONTHS OF 2008. FA INDICATED HE MADE FREQUENT PHONE CALLS TO CLIENT DURING THIS TIME AND IN MARCH 2008 MUTUAL FUND EXCHANGES WERE MADE TO ATTEMPT TO REDUCE THE VOLATILITY OF ACCOUNT. ACCORDING TO FA CLIENT CONTACTED HIM IN MAY 2008 AND STATED, AS A RESULT OF CONCERNS INVOLVING U.S. ECONOMIC SYSTEM AND THE NEED TO ASSIST HIS DAUGHTERS, CLIENT WANTED TO SELL ALL MUTUAL FUNDS. FA STATED HE UNDERSTOOD AND PLACED THE ORDERS AS REQUESTED AND SUGGESTED CLIENT CONTINUE TO HOLD THE LEHMAN BOND AS, WHILE IT WAS DOWN IN VALUE, WAS "A" RATED, AND STILL PROVIDED AN ATTRACTIVE RATE OF INTEREST. FA INDICATED CLIENT AGREED WITH HIS SUGGESTION. ON 9/15/08, FA STATED HE CONTACTED THE CLIENT TO DISCUSS THE SITUATION WITH THE LEHMAN BOND AND THE IMPACT THE SITUATION COULD HAVE ON CLIENT'S INVESTMENT. WHILE WE UNDERSTAND CONCERN WITH THE LEHMAN BOND, THE SUGGESTION FROM FA TO HOLD THE BOND WAS BASED ON INFORMATION KNOWN AT THAT TIME AND THE DEVELOPMENTS WITH LEHMAN WERE CERTAINLY A SURPRISE TO MANY IN THE FINANCIAL INDUSTRY. AS PART OF THE BANKRUPTCY, LEHMAN WILL BE WORKING WITH A COURT-APPOINTED TRUSTEE WHO WILL OVERSEE THE REORGANIZATION OR SALE OF LEHMAN'S BUSINESSES AND ASSETS. IDEALLY, THEY'LL WORK TO COMPLETE THE PROCESS AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE, BUT WE EXPECT THAT IT WILL TAKE AN EXTENDED PERIOD OF TIME BECAUSE THE SITUATION IS SO COMPLEX. ASSET SALES WILL BE USED TO SETTLE UNPAID LIABILITIES. ANY REMAINING ASSETS WILL BE USED TO PAY BONDHOLDERS PRIOR TO STOCKHOLDERS. HOWEVER, IF SUFFICIENT ASSETS AREN'T AVAILABLE, WHICH IS LIKELY IN THIS CASE, BONDHOLDERS COULD RECEIVE SIGNIFICANTLY LESS THAN THE FULL VALUE OF THEIR BONDS. EDWARD JONES WOULD RESPECTFULLY DENY A REQUEST FOR THE REIMBURSEMENT OF LOSSES ASSOCIATED WITH THE LEHMAN BOND INVESTMENT.