On March 18, 2003, the Banking Commissioner issued an Order to Cease and Desist, Notice of Intent to Fine and Notice of Right to Hearing (Docket No. CF-2003-6511-S) against The Marketrack Investment Club, a partnership whose last known address is P.O. Box 11303, Waterbury, Connecticut. The action alleged that from at least November 2000 forward, The Marketrack Investment Club sold unregistered, non- exempt partnership units to at least 86 investors through its Internet website in violation of Section 36b-16 of the Connecticut Uniform Securities Act. The action also alleged that The Marketrack Investment Club violated Section 36b-6(b) of the Act by employing one Karl Ramonas, its general partner, as an unregistered agent of issuer. The action also claimed that the respondent violated the antifraud provisions of the Act by 1) falsely representing to investors that their funds would be invested in securities for the benefit of the partners when, in reality, such funds were never so invested, and at least $94,500 in investor monies were used by Karl Ramonas to cover his personal expenses; and 2) failing to disclose that there had been a material change in the number of partnership units available to the investing public and the maximum number of partners allowable under the partnership agreements.

The respondent was afforded an opportunity to request a hearing on the Order to Cease and Desist. A hearing on the Notice of Intent to Fine is pending.

Karl Ramonas Ordered to Cease and Desist From Regulatory Violations; Notice of Intent to Fine Issued

On March 18, 2003, the Banking Commissioner issued an Order to Cease and Desist, Notice of Intent to Fine and Notice of Right to Hearing (Docket No. CF-2003-6511-S) against Karl Ramonas, now or formerly of 69 Morris Street, Naugatuck, Connecticut and 23 Schroback Road, Plymouth, Connecticut. Respondent Ramonas was the sole general partner of The Marketrack Investment Club, a partnership whose last known address is P.O. Box 11303, Waterbury, Connecticut. The Order to Cease and Desist and Notice of Intent to Fine claimed that from at least November 2000 forward, respondent Ramonas sold unregistered, non- exempt partnership units in The Marketrack Investment Club to at least 86 investors through the issuer's Internet website in violation of Section 36b-16 of the Connecticut Uniform Securities Act. The action also alleged that respondent Ramonas violated Section 36b-6(a) of the Act by transacting business as an unregistered agent of issuer.. In addition, the action also claimed that the respondent violated the antifraud provisions of the Act by 1) falsely representing to investors that their funds would be invested in securities for the benefit of the partners when, in reality, such funds were never so invested, and at least $94,500 in investor monies were used by respondent Ramonas to cover his personal expenses; and 2) failing to disclose that there had been a material change in the number of partnership units available to the investing public and the maximum number of partners allowable under the partnership agreements.

The respondent was afforded an opportunity to request a hearing on the Order to Cease and Desist. A hearing on the Notice of Intent to Fine is pending.

Discovery Capital Group, Inc. (CRD # 29355) - Broker-dealer Registration Revoked

On March 4, 2003, the Banking Commissioner entered an Order revoking the broker-dealer registration of Discovery Capital Group, Inc. (Docket No. NR-2002-6626-S) The firm maintains its principal office at 2768 North University Drive, Coral Springs, Florida. The revocation order incorporated as findings the allegations in the Commissioner's December 18, 2002 Notice of Intent to Revoke Registration as Broker-dealer and Notice of Right to Hearing against the firm. The revocation action was based on the October 24, 2002 entry of a permanent injunction against the firm by the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Securities and Exchange Commission v. Discovery Capital Group, Inc. et al., Case No. 02-60363 CIV-HUCK, 3/14/2002) prohibiting the firm from violating the antifraud provisions in Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 as well as Sections 10(b), 15(c) and 17(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Discovery Capital Group, Inc. did not contest the revocation of its broker-dealer registration.

John Patrick Abresch (CRD # 2280271) - Agent Registration Revoked

On March 4, 2003, the Banking Commissioner entered an Order revoking the registration of John Patrick Abresch as an agent of Discovery Capital Group, Inc. (Docket No. NR-2002-6626-S). The respondent's last known address is 6261 NW 125th Avenue, Coral Springs, Florida. The revocation order had been preceded by a December 18, 2002 Notice of Intent to Revoke Registration as Agent which stated that the respondent was the subject of an October 24, 2002 permanent injunction entered by the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Securities and Exchange Commission v. Discovery Capital Group, Inc., Erik Walsh and John Abresch, Case No. 02-60363 CIV-HUCK, 3/14/2002). The injunction prohibited the respondent from violating the antifraud provisions in Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Respondent Abresch did not contest the revocation of his agent registration.

Erik Baxter Walsh (CRD # 2589145) - Agent Registration Revoked

On March 4, 2003, the Banking Commissioner entered an Order revoking the registration of Erik Baxter Walsh as an agent of Discovery Capital Group, Inc. (Docket No. NR-2002-6626). Respondent Walsh, the president of Discovery Capital Group, Inc., maintains an address at 4450 NW 95th Avenue, Coral Springs, Florida. The revocation order had been preceded by a December 18, 2002 Notice of Intent to Revoke Registration as Agent and Notice of Right to Hearing which recited that the respondent was subject to an October 24, 2002 permanent injunction entered by by the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Securities and Exchange Commission v. Discovery Capital Group, Inc., Erik Walsh and John Abresch, Case No. 02-60363 CIV-HUCK, 3/14/2002). The injunction prohibited the respondent from violating the antifraud provisions in Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Respondent Walsh did not contest the revocation of his agent registration.

Tri-West Investment Club Ordered to Cease and Desist From Allegedly Fraudulent Sales of Membership Units; Notice of Intent to Fine Issued

On January 23, 2003, the Banking Commissioner issued an Order to Cease and Desist, Notice of Intent to Fine and Notice of Right to Hearing (Docket No. CF-2003-6319-S) against Tri-West Investment Club of 160 North Front Street, P.O. Box 354, Belize City, Belize. The action alleged that from at least June 2000 to December 2001, the firm violated Section 36b-16 of the Connecticut Uniform Securities Act by selling unregistered membership units through its Internet website at www.triwestinvest.com. The action also alleged that, in connection with the offering, the respondent violated Section 36b-4 of the Act by making false statements and omissions in connection with the offering. Specifically, the Order to Cease and Desist and Notice of Intent to Fine claimed that the respondent stated that it was selling memberships in a club that invested membership money in Prime Bank Notes, Prime Bank Debenture Forfeitures, Leveraged Bond Purchases and Bank Debentures when, in reality, 1) the respondent made no such investments; and 2) Prime Banks did not exist and, accordingly, could not issue any type of note, debenture or bond. The action also alleged that the respondent represented that 1) membership investments were of minimal risk, when such investments were highly risky; and 2) respondent would pay a ten percent rate of return per month, when, in actuality, the respondent never paid such returns to investors.

The respondent was afforded an opportunity to request a hearing on the Order to Cease and Desist. A hearing on the Notice of Intent to Fine is pending.

Foundation Worldwide, Inc. Permanently Barred from Securities Activity in Connecticut; Order to Cease and Desist Made Permanent

On March 17, 2003, the Banking Commissioner entered a Consent Order with respect to Foundation Worldwide, Inc. of 151 New Park Avenue, Hartford, Connecticut (Docket No. CF-2002-6582-S). The Consent Order had been preceded by a November 22, 2002 Order to Cease and Desist, Notice of Intent to Fine and Notice of Right to Hearing (Docket No. CF-2002-6582-S) alleging that, from at least April 2002 forward, Foundation Worldwide, Inc. conducted an unregistered common stock offering through its Internet web site at www.foundationworldwide.com in violation of Section 36b-16 of the Connecticut Uniform Securities Act. The action had also alleged that the respondent violated the antifraud provisions in Section 36b-4 of the Act by falsely representing on the respondent's web site that: 1) the respondent's directors had major portions of their net worth invested in the respondent at a time when the respondent had no directors and only one investor; 2) the respondent had long- term shareholders at a time when it had only one shareholder; 3) the respondent had undistributed earnings, when the respondent never had any earnings; 4) the respondent's common stock had a book value of $5.47 per share and a market value of $12 per share, when, in actuality, the shares had no value; 5) the respondent had income from its businesses, when in fact those businesses had never generated income; and 6) the respondent was a holding company owning subsidiaries engaged in a number of diverse business activities, when none of those subsidiaries had clients nor had they generated income. In addition, the action claimed that the respondent, through an employee, posted on an Internet message board that the respondent had a 63% return on equity for 2001 when in actuality the respondent had no earnings during that period and its return on equity was zero.

The March 17, 2003 Consent Order resolved the allegations in the November 22, 2002 Order to Cease and Desist and Notice of Intent to Fine. Acknowledging that the respondent had demonstrated in writing its inability to pay the administrative fine sought by the Commissioner, the Consent Order permanently barred the respondent from acting as a broker-dealer, issuer or investment adviser in Connecticut and from selling a "business opportunity" as defined in the Connecticut Business Opportunity Investment Act. In addition, the Consent Order rendered the November 22, 2002 Order to Cease and Desist permanent as of March 17, 2003 and withdrew the Notice of Intent to Fine.

Germaine Ryan (CRD # 2768219) Barred from Securities Activity in Connecticut for Five Years; Order to Cease and Desist Made Permanent

On March 17, 2003, the Banking Commissioner entered a Consent Order (Docket No. CF-2002-6582-S) with respect to Germaine Ryan of 22 Morris Street, #302, Hartford, Connecticut. Respondent Ryan had been the subject of a November 22, 2002 Order to Cease and Desist, Notice of Intent to Fine and Notice of Right to Hearing (Docket No. CF-2002-6582-S) alleging that, from at least April 2002 forward, respondent Ryan, acting on behalf of Foundation Worldwide, Inc., created and posted a multi-paged Internet website offering unregistered common stock to the public in violation of Section 36b-16 of the Connecticut Uniform Securities Act. The action had also alleged that the respondent violated the antifraud provisions in Section 36b-4 of the Act by falsely representing on the web site that: 1) the Foundation Worldwide, Inc.'s directors had major portions of their net worth invested in the corporation at a time when the corporation had no directors and only one investor; 2) Foundation Worldwide, Inc. had long-term shareholders at a time when it had only one shareholder; 3) Foundation Worldwide, Inc. had undistributed earnings, when it never had any earnings; 4) Foundation Worldwide, Inc.'s common stock had a book value of $5.47 per share and a market value of $12 per share, when, in actuality, the shares had no value; 5) Foundation Worldwide, Inc. had income from its businesses, when in fact those businesses had never generated income; and 6) Foundation Worldwide, Inc. was a holding company owning subsidiaries engaged in a number of diverse business activities, when none of those subsidiaries had clients nor had they generated income. In addition, the action had claimed that the respondent posted on an Internet message board that Foundation Worldwide, Inc. had a 63% return on equity for 2001 when in actuality the corporation had no earnings during that period and its return on equity was zero.

The March 17, 2003 Consent Order resolved the allegations in the November 22, 2002 Order to Cease and Desist and Notice of Intent to Fine. Acknowledging that the respondent had demonstrated in writing his inability to pay the administrative fine sought by the Commissioner, the Consent Order barred the respondent for five years from acting as a broker-dealer, agent, investment adviser or investment adviser agent in Connecticut and from selling a "business opportunity" as defined in the Connecticut Business Opportunity Investment Act. In addition, the Consent Order rendered the November 22, 2002 Order to Cease and Desist permanent as of March 17, 2003 and withdrew the Notice of Intent to Fine.

RBC Dominion Securities Corporation (CRD # 6579) Fined $1,000 for Unregistered Branch Office Activity

On January 2, 2003, the Banking Commissioner entered into a Stipulation and Agreement (No. ST-02-6680-S) with RBC Dominion Securities Corporation, a Connecticut-registered broker-dealer having its principal office at One Liberty Plaza, New York, New York. The Stipulation and Agreement alleged that, commencing in October 2002, the firm transacted business from One East Weaver Street, Greenwich, Connecticut prior to that location being registered as a branch office under the Connecticut Uniform Securities Act. The Greenwich site has since been registered as a branch office in Connecticut.

Pursuant to the Stipulation and Agreement, the firm agreed to pay a $1,000 fine to the agency and to implement revised supervisory and compliance procedures designed to prevent and detect violations of Connecticut branch office registration requirements.

Access Financial Group, Inc. (CRD # 33065) Fined $1,500 for Unregistered Branch Office Activity

On January 2, 2003, the Banking Commissioner entered into a Stipulation and Agreement (No. ST-02-6685-S) with Access Financial Group, Inc., a Connecticut-registered broker-dealer having its principal office at 118 North Clinton Street, Suite 250, Chicago, Illinois. The Stipulation and Agreement claimed that, commencing in October 1995, the firm transacted business from 241 Cedar Lane, Torrington, Connecticut prior to that site being registered as a branch office under the Connecticut Uniform Securities Act. The Torrington location has since been registered as a branch office in Connecticut.

Pursuant to the Stipulation and Agreement, the firm agreed to pay a $1,500 fine to the agency and to implement revised supervisory and compliance procedures designed to prevent and detect violations of Connecticut branch office registration requirements.