$18,883.00

Tax

CLIENT ALLEGES HE WAS SOLD A VARIABLE LIFE INSURANCE POLICY WITHOUT FULLY UNDERSTANDING HOW IT WORKED. CLIENT IS REQUESTING THE FIRM TO CANCEL THE POLICY. DAMAGES UNSPECIFIED.

THE FIRM FOUND NO BASIS TO THE CUSTOMER'S COMPLAINT.

CLIENT ALLEGES THAT THE AGENT NEVER INFORMED HIM OF SURRENDER CHARGES INVOLVING THE SALE OF A VARIABLE ANNUITY. CLIENT IS REQUESTING THE FIRM TO WAIVE THE SURRENDER CHARGES.

$11,299.52

THE FIRM FOUND NO BASIS TO THE CUSTOMER'S COMPLAINT.

CLIENT ALLEGES THAT A 401K PLAN WAS ALREADY IN EXISTENCE WITH THE FIRM SINCE 1990 AND WHEN THE AGENT ASKED HER TO SIGN THE PAPERS FOR A NEW VARIABLE PRODUCT, HE EXPLAINED THAT THERE WOULD BE A 6% EARLY WITHDRAWAL FEE FOR ANYONE WHO HAD NOT BEEN IN THE PLAN FOR FIVE YEARS. CLIENT FURTHER ALLEGES THAT THE AGENT INFORMED HER THAT THIS WOULD NOT AFFECT MANY OF THE EMPLOYEES SINCE MOST EVERYONE HAD BEEN IN THE PLAN FOR FIVE YEARS. CLIENT ALLEGES SHE HAS SINCE BEEN INFORMED THAT THE 6% CONTINGENT WITHDRAWAL CHARGE WOULD APPLY TO ALL ASSETS IN THEIR 401 K PLAN. CLIENT IS REQUESTING THE FEE BE WAIVED FOR THOSE EMPLOYEES WHO HAVE HAD FUNDS WITH THE FIRM FOR OVER FIVE YEARS. DAMAGES ARE UNSPECIFIED.

THE FIRM FOUND NO BASIS TO THE CUSTOMER COMPLAINT.

MISREPRESENTATION IN THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THEIR 401K PLAN. DAMAGES ARE ALLEGED TO BE IN EXCESS OF $1 MILLION.

$1,000,000.00

$30,000.00

THE MATTER WAS SETTLED FOR AN AMOUNT OF $30,000.00. OR THAT AMOUNT I PAID $4,999.00. THE SUIT WAS TRIED IN THE US DISTRICT COURT OF MD AND THE COURT FOUND IN FAVOR OF THE DEFENDANTS. THE PLAINTIFF APPEALED AND THE INSURANCE COMPANY THOUGHT IT CHEAPER TO SETTLE FOR $30,000 THAN TO CONTINUE DEFENDING THIS ACTION. I OPPOSED THIS ACTION, BUT COULD NOT HAVE AFFORDED TO CONTINUE WITHOUT THE E & O COVERAGE.