$50,000.00

Tax

I had a financial crisis that let up to the lien. I was diligent paying it off, but the fines/penalties were too much for me which rendered it over 50k. Still, I pay it off month to month but it was been a financial burden for some time. Everything I do, in my financial life, is used to pay off that lien. It is much responsibility and I am taking care of it.

The customer claims the financial advisor placed her joint account in an unsuitable investment. They requested to be placed in a fixed rate CD, instead they were placed in a structured note.

Firm Statement: After a review of the customer's account paperwork and a statement from the FA's supervisor, the customer was provided with account disclosures and acknowledgements at the time of the investment.

THE CLIENT CLAIMS WHEN HE WAS GOING TO TRANSFER OUT OF ONE LORD ABBETT FUND INTO ANOTHER HE ASKED THE FINANCIAL ADVISOR IF THERE WOULD BE ANY CHARGE FOR THE TRANSFER AND STATES HE WAS TOLD THERE WOULD NOT BE. THE CLIENT STATES WHEN HE RECEIVED HIS CONFIRMATION HE WAS SHORT $9,648. THE CLIENT STATES THE FINANCIAL ADVISOR EXPLAINED THIS WAS PART OF THE FEE AND REDUCTION OF MARKET VALUE. THE CLIENT STATES HAD HE HAD KNOWLEDGE OF THE COST HE WOULD HAVE NOT ACCEPTED THE TRANSFER. THE CLIENT IS REQUESTING THE RETURN OF $9648.

$9,648.00

AT THE TIME OF INTIAL PURCHASE OBTAINING A HIGHER YIELD WAS IMPORTANT TO THE CLIENT. IT WAS EXPLAINED THAT ALONG WITH THE HIGHER YIELD THERE WOULD BE INCREASED VOLATILITY. THE DETAILS OF THE INVESTMENT ALONG WITH THE 3.97% SALES CHARGE THAT WOULD BE TAKEN FROM THE INVESTMENT WAS DISCUSSED AND WAS ALSO DISCLOSED IN THE PROSPECTUS AND ON THE TRADE CONFIRMATION. AFTER THE SECOND DIVIDEND CHECK THE CLIENT WAS CONCERNED AND HAD DETERMINED THAT HE WANTED A MORE CONSISTENT DIVIDEND. AS A RESULT, IT WAS SUGGESTED THE POSSIBILITY OF EXCHANGING INTO A FUND WHICH MAY PROVIDE A MORE CONSISTENT DIVIDEND, SUCH AS LORD ABBETT INCOME FUND. IT WAS EXPLAINED THAT ALTHOUGH THERE WOULD BE NO ADDITIONAL COST FOR THE EXCHANGE AS IT WAS WITHIN THE SAME FUND FAMILY, THE ORIGINAL SALES CHARGE OF 3.97% WOULD STILL NEED TO COME OUT. IT WAS ALSO EXPLAINED THAT ALTHOUGH THE FULL INITIAL AMOUNT INVESTED WOULD BE EXCHANGED, THERE WOULD BE SOME MARKET LOSS AS WELL. THE FA WAS COMFORTABLE THAT THE CLIENT UNDERSTOOD THE EXCHANGE . OUR RECORDS INDICATE THAT THE CLIENT DID AN EXCHANGE WITHIN THE FRANKLIN FUNDS IN MARCH 2011 SO IT WAS BELIEVED HE WAS AWARE OF HOW THE EXCHANGE WOULD WORK. OUR REVIEW HAS REVEALED THAT THE EXCHANGE WAS THOROUGHLY DISCUSSED WITH, AND AUTHORIZED BY, THE CLIENT. DURING THE INVESTIGATION THE CLIENT WAS GIVEN THE OPPORTUNTIY TO MOVE BACK INTO THE ORIGINAL INVESTMENT, HOWEVER, THE OFFER WAS DECLINED AS THE CLIENT STATED HE WANTED TO RETAIN THE CURRENT INVESTMENT. CLAIM DENIED.