Arbitration: Claimants allege that in February 2019, the FA's recommendations were unsuitable. Complaint:Client complained that he is not willing to take big risks and his investments are down more than the percentage stated by the financial advisor. (2/7/2019-9/6/2019)

$400,000.00

This matter was settled for $400,000.00. The FA did not contribute to the settlement amount.

CLAIMANT ALLEGES THAT RESPONDENTS INAPPROPRIATELY REPEATEDLY RECOMMENDED THE PURCHASE OF MULTIPLE SHARE OF AN INVERSE-LEVERAGED ETF AND THEN LIQUIDATED THE ENTIRE POSITION IN THE ETF WITHOUT HER AUTHORIZATION. TIME FRAME: JULY 2008 TO JANUARY 2010.

$277,180.00

$220,000.00

UBS FINANCIAL SERVICES INC.

Voluntary Resignation

WHETHER EMPLOYEE WORKED CLIENT ORDERS INCONSISTENT WITH FIRM POLICY AND/OR INDUSTRY RULES AND/OR KNEW AND/OR REASONABLY SHOULD HAVE KNOWN IF TWO CLIENTS USED CREDIT LINE TO PURCHASE SECURITIES; NO CUSTOMER COMPLAINT RELATED TO EITHER OF THESE ISSUES.

CLAIMANT ALLEGES UNSUITABILITY IN THAT RESPONDENTS RECOMMENDED THE PURCHASE OF MUTUAL FUNDS, INDIVIDUAL STOCKS AND LEVERAGED ETFS' THAT WERE INCONSISTENT WITH CLAIMANTS INVESTMENTS OBJECTIVES AND FINANCIAL CIRCUMSTANCES. TIME FRAME: MAY 2008-OCTOBER 2010

$200,000.00

$95,000.00

CLIENT FULLY UNDERSTOOD THE RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH THE INVESTMENTS. IN FACT, THE CLIENT EVEN WANTED ME TO MAKE "QUICK TRADES" AND I TRIED TO DISCOURAGE HIM FROM DOING SO. I NEVER MISLED THE CLIENT IN ANY WAY. THE FIRM (UBS) TOLD ME I HAD TO MOVE THE SECURITY (FAZ) INTO ANOTHER ACCOUNT AND NOT DISCUSS THE PRODUCT EXCEPT TO SAY THAT THE FIRM DOES NOT RECOMMEND IT ANYMORE. THE CLIENT RECEIVED LETTERS FROM THE FIRM STATING ITS POLICY CONCERNING THE PRODUCT AND STATING THE FIRM'S POSITION. FURTHERMORE, THE CLIENT SPOKE WITH MANAGEMENT REGARDING THE FIRM POSITION ON A CALL WITH MY MANAGER AND HE ASKED IF HE UNDERSTOOD WHAT HE OWNED IN WHICH HE REPLIED "YES". AS FOR THE PENNY STOCK, IT WAS NOT MY RECOMMENDATION TO PURSHASE THE SECURITY, BUT RATHER HIS FRIEND'S; IT WAS AN UNSOLICITED INVESTMENT BY HIM, NOT ME.

TIME FRAME: JULY 2008 - JANUARY 2010 CLAIMANTS CLAIM THAT FINANCIAL ADVISOR RECOMMENDED UNSUITABLE INVESTMENTS, INCLUDING BOTH AGGRESSIVE MUTUAL FUNDS AND LEVERAGED ETF'S. AND ENGAGED IN UNAUTHORIZED TRADING IN CLAIMANTS' ACCOUNTS.

$6,520,000.00

$2,500,000.00

FA DENIES ANY WRONG DOING. CLIENT WAS INVOLVED IN ALL TRANSACTIONS AND AUTHORIZED ALL TRADES. CLIENT FULLY UNDERSTOOD THE NATURE OF THE INVESTMENTS. FA DID NOT PARTICIPATE IN SETTLEMENT.

TIME FRAME: APRIL 10, 2007 THE CLIENT ALLEGES THAT HIS FINANCIAL ADVISOR PURCHASED A SECURITY WITHOUT HIS AUTHORIZATION. THE ESTIMATED ALLEGED DAMAGES ARE IN EXCESS OF $5000

TIME FRAME: APRIL 29, 2009 - MARCH 2, 2010 THE CLIENT ALLEGES THAT HIS FINANCIAL ADVISOR MISREPRESENTED HIS TRIPLE LEVERAGED SHORT EFT INVESTMENTS. THE ESTIMATED ALLEGED DAMAGES ARE IN EXCESS OF $5000

CLAIMANT ALLEGES THAT RECOMMENDATIONS OF LEVERAGED ETFS IN EARLY 2009 WERE UNSUITABLE.

$240,000.00

$175,000.00

THIS COMPLAINT LACKS ANY MERIT WHATSOEVER. ABOUT 85-90% OF THE CLIENT'S ASSETS WITH UBS WERE HELD IN TAX FREE BONDS. WHILE THE COMPLAINT STATES THAT SHE WAS DEPENDENT ON FIXED INCOME, SHE COMMITTED OVER $9 MILLION TO MADOFF WHO WAS AN EQUITY INVESTOR. THE CLIENT WAS IN CONSTANT COMMUNICATION WITH HER ACCOUNT AND EVEN SOLICITED ME TO DO DAY TRADES TO "BUY A HANDBAG" FOR $8,000 DOLLARS, AND I DISCOURAGED HER. I DID EXPLAIN THE CHALLENGED INVESTMENT AS WELL AS MY RATIONALE FOR THE RECOMMENDATION AND SHE AGREED. DISCRETION WAS NEVER USED. IN FACT, WHEN SHE COMPLAINED TO MANAGEMENT SHE NEVER CLAIMED DISCRETION WAS USED! THIS IS A CASE OF "SOUR GRAPES": BECAUSE SHE LOST MILLIONS WITH MADOFF SHE IS NOW REACHING FOR DEEP POCKETS.

THE CLIENT ALLEGES THAT HIS FINANCIAL ADVISOR PLACED TRADES IN HIS ACCOUNT WITHOUT HIS AUTHORITY. THE CLIENT FURTHER ALLEGES THE TRADE WAS UNSUITABLE FOR HIS INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO.

$5,000.00

CLAIMANT DEFINED BENEFIT PLAN ALLEGES THAT RECOMMENDATION OF LEVERAGED ETF IN APRIL 2009 WAS UNSUITABLE AND UNAUTHORIZED.

$230,750.00

$135,000.00

CLAIMANTS ALLEGE UNSUITABLE INVESTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS IN BOTH OF TWO (2) ACCOUNTS (EVEN THOUGH ONE OF THESE ACCOUNTS WAS PLACED WITH A THIRD-APRTY MONEY MANAGER). FINANCIAL ADVISOR WUHL VEHEMENTLY DENIES THESE ALLEGATIONS AND INTENDS TO VIGOROUSLY DEFEND AGAINST THESE CLAIMS

$200,000.00

$50,000.00

ALLEGED UNAUTHORIZED AND UNSUITABLE PURCHASE OF STOCK

$15,000.00

$11,500.00

THIS MATTER IS SETTLED.

CLIENT ALLEGES THAT WUHL ENGAGED IN TRANSACTIONS AND FACILITIES, THE TRANSFER OF TRUST ASSETS WITHOUT THE KNOWLEDGE AND CONSENT OF CO-TRUSTEE [TRUSTEE] DAMAGES ALLEGED IN EXCESS OF $800,000

$800,000.00

$400,000.00

CLIENT, [CUSTOMER] ALLEGED UNAUTHORIZED AND UNSUITABLE TRADING IN HER ACCOUNT.

$100,000.00

$38,000.00

THIS CLAIM HAD NO MERIT. THE FIRM DECIDED TO SETTLE BECAUSE OF THE COST OF LITIGATION. I DID NOT PARTICIPATE IN SETTLEMENT WHATSOEVER. I AM INNOCENT OF THIS CLAIM.

ALLEGES 1997 TERM TRUST, PURCHASED IN 1992, WAS UNSUITABLE & THAT IE MISREPRESENTED THE INVESTMENT. DAMAGES UNSPECIFIED.

Not Provided Not Provided

THE CLAIMANTS ARE ALLEGING MISREPRESENTATION BASED ON THEIR ENTERING INTO A PRIVATE BUSINESS INVESTMENT BASED SOLELY ON THE INCORRECT EXPECTATION THAT MR. WUHL WAS TO BE AN INVESTOR IN THE DEAL.

$100,000.00

THIS MATTER WAS SETTLED FOR $100,000.00. MR. WUHL WILL BE CONTRIBUTING 4,999.99 TO THE SETTLEMENT. THE AMOUNT OF MONEY GIVEN BY MR. WUHL WAS TO ALLEVIATE UNNECESSARY COSTS & NUISANCE VALUE. [CUSTOMER] WAS NOT EVEN A CLIENT & WAS NOT EVEN PERSONALLY KNOWN TO MR. WUHL.

CLAIMANT ALLEGES EXCESSIVE TRADING,UNAUTHORIZED USE OF DISCRETION, MISREPRESENTATION AND BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY. CLAIMANT ALLEGES DAMAGES OF $90,831.28.

$86,831.00

$43,000.00

SMITH BARNEY SETTLED THIS ATTER FOR $43,000.00.