Brokers chasing you for negative account balance | Page 8 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

Brokers with Negative Balance Protection 41 replies

Brokers that liquidate accounts at zero before negative balance occurs 22 replies

When would chasing a trade be worth it to you? 17 replies

What brokers would you want to use if you had 100k + million + account? 6 replies

Can someone answer question about Brokers chasing stops? 7 replies

Attachments: Brokers chasing you for negative account balance
Exit Attachments

Brokers chasing you for negative account balance

  • #141
  • Jan 19, 2015 10:23pm Jan 19, 2015 10:23pm
Quoting Razor_trader
{quote} You need to spend some time in the pit trading. Everyone in there wants someone else to fail. Everyone in there is after your money whether it be beg, lie or cheat. They don't go there to make friends. Trading is an individual venture with goals. If you want charity go and join a mission in Africa and find water and food for those in need of it. Charity doesn't come through the trading system. Professionalism, Play Fair and Profits don't belong together when money is to be made. Looking at lines or candles bobbing up and down is not a moral...
But there are RULES. You can be aggressive, ruthless, hungry, greedy but you are still expected to respect rules. I look at trading as it is and professionalism, play fair and profits DO and can belong together and it should belong together and when it can't, that's when the regulators come in.
Make your losses in demo. Earn your profits live.
  • #142
  • Jan 19, 2015 10:27pm Jan 19, 2015 10:27pm
Quoting Forexia
{quote} But there are RULES. You can be aggressive, ruthless, hungry, greedy but you are still expected to respect rules. I look at trading as it is and professionalism, play fair and profits DO and can belong together and it should belong together and when it can't, that's when the regulators come in.
Money Can't Buy Happiness. Poverty Can't Buy SHIT! You Choose!
  • #143
  • Jan 19, 2015 10:30pm Jan 19, 2015 10:30pm
Quoting Razor_trader
{quote} Ill use a real world example of a recent 'acquisition' a client of ours made from another party. They had a project in which a client required some plant (or equipment as it is sometimes known). A client of ours took the 'information' that was displayed to purchase the plant from interstate and chose not to inspect the plant at the time of purchase. After they had floated the plant from 1 side of the country to another it was picked up that the plant was useless and required major work which coupled with the freight costs would have warranted...
And if you read my posts correctly, I DIDN'T blame on the seller, the person who sold me the property. I blame on the future buyer who shunned away all my potential buyers to depress the price just so he/she can come back later to buy from me and even give me a bid even lower than other equally "worthless" properties. True my property might be "worthless" but it still should have a fair value but it was being allowed to be derived due to this future buyer's manipulations and this is similar to what these liquidity stoppers did after the SNB news.
Make your losses in demo. Earn your profits live.
  • #144
  • Jan 19, 2015 10:34pm Jan 19, 2015 10:34pm
rules? the rich/big made the rules and altered the rules in favour to themselves to flick the flock the sheep.

cute
  • #145
  • Jan 19, 2015 10:43pm Jan 19, 2015 10:43pm
Quoting wookey
{quote} Your stop is not guaranteed to be executed at the specified price (if your broker guarantees it they are fools and you can certainly get your moeny out of them). The stop order is in essense a delayed market order with stop price used as a trigger to send the order to the market. After that it behaves as normal market order. Market orders are executed at the best available price, but not only that since there were plenty of stop orders in that area they had to build a queue in order of reaching the market. If there was no matching orders...
Ok you are confusing liquidity "providers" with brokers. Liquidity providers is the broker of the broker and it's them that I have problems with for having exacerbated an already volatile market condition. I am NOT blaming the brokers here.

Well if you read this:

In effect, what has appeared to have taken place is a massive ‘requote’ in the market. Mostly known for taking place between retail brokers and their customers, the table has been turned with brokers receiving word from banks that some of their trades with them have been cancelled. A letter to clients from one of the largest primary bank reviewed by Forex Magnates, stated that “significant issues” took place during the price drop and actual executions may not match that which was reported by their electronic systems. The result is that brokers who had filled customers, may still be on the hook for those trades with their counterparties after seeing trades with banks repriced due to initial rates ‘being out of the market’.

http://forexmagnates.com/breaking-ig...tility-in-chf/

In this event, the brokers were actually relatively honest in honoring us retail traders' orders and executed our trades at our stop-loss levels. It's their broker, the liquidity "providers", the "Big Banks", like Deutsche, Citi, and etc. (you know those flashy logos that are displayed on those brokers' webpage boasting "deep liquidity") that's actually screwing the brokers by not honoring the brokers' trades with them.
Make your losses in demo. Earn your profits live.
  • #146
  • Jan 19, 2015 10:44pm Jan 19, 2015 10:44pm
Quoting zxdtrader
rules? the rich/big made the rules and altered the rules in favour to themselves to flick the flock the sheep. cute
Yup I agree and that's why it needs to be changed and stopped IF the regulators grow a pair and stand up to them instead of always clamping down on us little guys.
Make your losses in demo. Earn your profits live.
  • #147
  • Edited Jan 20, 2015 12:00am Jan 19, 2015 10:47pm | Edited Jan 20, 2015 12:00am
And since this is a thread about brokers' course of action regarding their clients' negative balances, I thought I share this following article regarding Dukascopy not only forgiving their clients' negative balances but actually reimbursing them:

http://forexmagnates.com/swiss-bank-...tive-balances/

So not all brokers are going after their clients for the negative balances. There are brokers who are choosing to forgive those negative balances. According to this article, Dukascopy is not the only one. There is hope!

In the article, it stated that:

Dukascopy Bank and Dukascopy Europe invite all the industry to follow the same approach to build up customers’ trust in the industry.”

Well Dukascopy, we do have trust in you and all the other non MM brokers, relatively speaking. It's the liquidity "providers", those "prime banks" with all the flashy logos that you display on your webpage to show the "deep liquidity" that I don't trust.
Make your losses in demo. Earn your profits live.
  • #148
  • Edited Jan 20, 2015 6:18am Jan 19, 2015 10:50pm | Edited Jan 20, 2015 6:18am
Quoting Forexia
{quote} And if you read my posts correctly, I DIDN'T blame on the seller, the person who sold me the property. I blame on the future buyer who shunned away all my potential buyers to depress the price just so he/she can come back later to buy from me and even give me a bid even lower than other equally "worthless" properties. True my property might be "worthless" but it still should have a fair value but it was being allowed to be derived due to this future buyer's manipulations and this is similar to what these liquidity stoppers did after the...
... as a result of rapid downward movements in stock or index futures, liquidity can decrease sharply and, in worst-case situations, dry up almost completely, significantly increasing the magnitude of the downturn, ...

Liquidity does not increase as stocks fall sharply; quite the opposite. In rapidly falling markets, liquidity can decrease significantly; the less liquid a stock or other financial instrument, the greater the negative effect this will have on its price.

- quotes from Contrarian Investment Strategies, David Dreman

Just another day at the office, unfortunately
  • #149
  • Jan 19, 2015 10:54pm Jan 19, 2015 10:54pm
Anyone who is serious about trading will trade through a separate legal entity, preferably one in a no audit jurisdiction (Belize, BVI, Samoa...). Not only do you remove the element of personal risk from the equation but you can also lower your tax burden and increase your "status" with your broker (for example, Oanda has a separate support line for corporate customers).
  • #150
  • Jan 19, 2015 11:28pm Jan 19, 2015 11:28pm
Forexia ...

I agree and i am with you on the requotes from the Banks.. is to be investigated .. Also the fact that who offered a price that low 0.065 and got it filled as obviously most of the stops had gone by then ........

But i think these are points for investigation and no regulation can help address these items .

...(for we got to know this in daylight due to the rare event , who knows similar things don't happen in a normal market ... but in smaller magnitude ,,, that is the risk we all carry and take while we chase our greed for more money !!)

Quoting Forexia
{quote} You didn't see in the article where it pointed out banks like Barclay, when they finally came back to the market, they quoted their prices 7.8K+ pips away from the EBS? In an extreme example (that affected at least two brokers), Barclays had filled EUR/CHF sell orders at 0.065 (no extra zero) while at the same time EBS was quoting its session low of 0.85. Technology providers that Forex Magnates spoke to corroborated with similar examples of their clients. Firms did state that Barclays and other banks ultimately did provide some price improvement,...
  • #151
  • Jan 19, 2015 11:43pm Jan 19, 2015 11:43pm
Quoting grin
{quote} I guess it would be some automated fill. Routine tasks such as stop losses are handled by computers. Market orders will take any bid in absence of anything better where human might think that it makes no sense and wait a bit for more real quote. Unless programmed computers would not do any better.

True ... but at that price ???( a buy at that price ...ridiculous) .no wonder why they halted as it could have meant a 0.0001 price for few seconds to create complete catatrophy 0.86 looks better in that case ...

I think all the auto software would have gone into Freeze mode post that huge movement ... and that brings up an interesting point on how those autobots performed or behaved /contributed in this situation .....

I am sure some of the automation failures will come out iff this is investigated and some of the banks might already know how it fared ....
  • #152
  • Jan 19, 2015 11:44pm Jan 19, 2015 11:44pm
Quoting Forexia
{quote} But there are RULES. You can be aggressive, ruthless, hungry, greedy but you are still expected to respect rules. I look at trading as it is and professionalism, play fair and profits DO and can belong together and it should belong together and when it can't, that's when the regulators come in.
So that it proves that they are not fair .. so would ban on retail trading be easiest step that regulators can take ??? to leave the sharks fight among sharks ??
  • #153
  • Jan 19, 2015 11:54pm Jan 19, 2015 11:54pm
Quoting connect_ananth
{quote} So that it proves that they are not fair .. so would ban on retail trading be easiest step that regulators can take ??? to leave the sharks fight among sharks ??
Well why ban us when we are the honest ones trading and the sharks are the ones that need regulating? LOL Banning retail trading because of unscrupulous liquidity "providers" screwing retail traders is like forbidding eating altogether just because you got food poisoning from this shady restaurant who chose to serve you rotten food. It's actually that restaurant that needed to be monitored and regulated and yet they choose to forbid you to eat and starve you to death just so you won't eat a piece of bad food again. LOL

I am not surprised some regulators who live in the pockets of those "Big Banks" will certainly take that view since the "Big Banks" always wanted forex trading to be an "exclusive club" to them.
Make your losses in demo. Earn your profits live.
  • #154
  • Jan 19, 2015 11:56pm Jan 19, 2015 11:56pm
Quoting connect_ananth
{quote} True ... but at that price ???( a buy at that price ...ridiculous) .no wonder why they halted as it could have meant a 0.0001 price for few seconds to create complete catatrophy 0.86 looks better in that case ... I think all the auto software would have gone into Freeze mode post that huge movement ... and that brings up an interesting point on how those autobots performed or behaved /contributed in this situation ..... I am sure some of the automation failures will come out iff this is investigated and some of the banks might already know...
Yeah sure when all else fails, blame it on the machine! It's the computers' fault. It's the programmers who didn't program it well. LOL
Make your losses in demo. Earn your profits live.
  • #155
  • Jan 20, 2015 12:01am Jan 20, 2015 12:01am
Quoting Forexia
{quote} Well why ban us when we are the honest ones trading and the sharks are the ones that need regulating? LOL Banning retail trading because of unscrupulous liquidity "providers" screwing retail traders is like stop eating altogether just because you got food poisoning from this shady restaurant who chose to serve you rotten food. It's actually that restaurant that needed to be monitored and regulated and yet you choose to starve yourself to death just so you won't eat a piece of bad food again. LOL I am not surprised some regulators who live...
it depends on where you look from ...

from their end if "retailers" cannot stomach these why do they even need to provide an entry to restaurant ,, when they have huge customers who are ready to provide business

From retail trader end , if you have a bad stomach why go to that restaurant where you know food is not to your taste or not agreeable for your health...there are many other restaurants ( money making avenues) open ...
  • #156
  • Edited 12:48am Jan 20, 2015 12:17am | Edited 12:48am
Quoting connect_ananth
{quote} it depends on where you look from ... from their end if "retailers" cannot stomach these why do they even need to provide an entry to restaurant ,, when they have huge customers who are ready to provide business From retail trader end , if you have a bad stomach why go to that restaurant where you know food is not to your taste or not agreeable for your health...there are many other restaurants ( money making avenues) open ...
LOL You are twisting my examples a bit. I DO have the stomach for any food at any restaurants and my stomach is fine LOL but I got food poisoning from this shady restaurant because they served rotten food which would endanger anybody's health regardless of their stomach. Our stomach is NOT made to digest bad rotten food; it's meant to digest healthy food whether you are "huge" or "small". And besides those liquidity "providers" didn't really treat their "huge" customers well either; they deployed the same shady practices against them as well. And they got screwed same as us retail traders during this SNB event and possibly even during their everyday trading:

Institutional traders and buyside members have seen an influx in banks using last look practises to overpower their clients. One trader who commented on the basis of anonymity said to Forex Magnates: “Quite simply Banks are having the biggest last look ever, typical of the market today, they enter a risk market and when it goes against them they fail to honour the trades.”

http://forexmagnates.com/banks-face-...mln-bloomberg/

Also all the other restaurants that are healthier weren't healthier to begin with either. There used to be a lot of problems in stock markets too up until recently, with front-running, cornering the market and etc.. It got "cleaned up" because regulators came in and said "you can't do that" and disciplined the firms that were dishonest. So the same thing can be done to the liquidity "providers" in the forex industry (IF the regulators have the guts to go against the "Big Boys") not just for retail traders' sake but for everybody's sake seeing that institutional traders got screwed just the same. Engaging in forex trading doesn't mean you have to deal with dishonest "prime banks". I want to trade whatever instrument I want but I shouldn't have to deal with unfair dealing. Just like I want to eat wherever I want but I shouldn't have to deal with restaurants that serve unclean food.

Just like in my example, eating isn't the problem; eating is fine and enjoyable just like forex trading is fine and enjoyable for me. It's those unscrupulous restaurants, those shady liquidity "providers" that need to be kept in line and honest from screwing customers. LOL
Make your losses in demo. Earn your profits live.
  • #157
  • Jan 20, 2015 12:24am Jan 20, 2015 12:24am
i usually enter market by placing my price between Bid/Ask price(Luckily i don't trade CHF pair), from my point of view i think some thing wrong with this ECN when SNB shocking move, in ECN not only bank that act as liquidity provider..... trader also act as small liquidity provider, if broker did their job well, then they must place market book order(close/hedge) at/before margin call, so before price hit 1.0xxxx they must hit this price first.....
someone please correct me if i'm wrong, i'm still newbee
No Pain, No Gain
  • #158
  • Jan 20, 2015 1:43am Jan 20, 2015 1:43am
Quoting Magix
{quote} Forexia, as a favor to the rest of Canada, can you please change your location in your profile. You are embarrassing the rest of us. Thanks.
Quoting teddybomber
{quote} Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I’m not sure about the universe! - Albert Einstein


Quoting Greeny
{quote} Really?! How do you get that from my comment, you obviously can't read either, that may just explain why you find yourself in the current predicament. Enough, I'm not going to waste any more time reading your inane, ultracrepidarian ( you will probably have to look that up) comments. Stop wasting everyone's time. Razor_trader, save your breath, he just aint going to get it.
All these same points had been pointed to him by many of us in his own thread "call for regulations......" but he just doesn't get it, as you've said, perhaps that's the reason he's in the situation that he's in.

Quoting Razor_trader
{quote} People talk like regulation is the answer. It isn't the answer, the answer is getting off ones arse and doing something for themselves and not relying on Tom, John and Dave to be 'honest' and 'forthcoming' in their dealings. Regulations just create another control which is managed by someone else and is only there so that people have another reason to be lazier than normal. I just shake my head. I shouldn't read too much into forums because people of different backgrounds and upbringings have a different view on things, but 1 thing is true...
This is what he doesn't seem to get, that ultimately, we, as traders have to take responsibility for our trading, including the losses incurred. Instead, he just accuses anybody that disagrees with him to be working for banks & LPs; & considering the number of people that have tried to talk sense into him, he probably thinks that most of the ForexFactory commenters work for banks & LPs

Quoting Magix
{quote} I'm not the enemy here dude, I just flat out don't agree with market regulation of any kind. We seen how well that worked out for the Yanks...don't wanna see it move north of the border. Don't care if it is broker, market nor trade related. I just flat out, don't wan't to see it.
Quoting connect_ananth
{quote} So that it proves that they are not fair .. so would ban on retail trading be easiest step that regulators can take ??? to leave the sharks fight among sharks ??
Regulators (& people in government in general) don't like to think a lot, they look for easy solutions & if enough people bitch about it then even a ban on retail forex could be considered as there are enough people out there already who have gotten used to hating words like "leverage", "trading", "speculation", etc; I'm sure people like Forexia will be "protected" by the regulators then!
  • #159
  • Jan 20, 2015 2:41am Jan 20, 2015 2:41am
RSMITH.......you find it scary that LMAX would chase you for the debt......but if you had been short and made thousands would you have offered it back ?
  • #160
  • Jan 20, 2015 4:38am Jan 20, 2015 4:38am
I got this message from my broker today (sorry if anyone already posted this for I didn't bother to read the entire thread):

Management of Dukascopy Group has decided to take an exceptional decision to cover negative balances on client accounts related to CHF move on SNB decision on 15.01.2015.
In spite of the fact that agreements and regulation allow Dukascopy to claim negative balances compensated by clients, it was decided to release customers from obligation to cover negative balance.
Dukascopy Bank has not canceled or negatively adjusted any trade concluded on 15.01.2015 with clients during the CHF move.
Dukascopy Bank and Dukascopy Europe invite all the industry to follow the same approach to build up customers trust in the industry.

Cheers
Be water, my friend
0 traders viewing now