Now IG UK is also going after negative balances. I just received the below email today.
Everyone that has an IG ac and wants to join our group that coordinates the complains should email our group founder [email protected]
Apparently there 300 IG clients with negative ac balances!!
Dear XYZ,
Our records show that you have an outstanding debit balance of £XZY due on your account.
Please clear this balance in full as soon as possible.
You can add the necessary funds by logging in to our dealing platform and making a payment through the ‘my account’ section, or by calling us on 020 7633 5304 with your debit or credit card details.
You can discuss this debit balance with our Credit team by calling us on 020 7633 5304.
Kind regards
I thank you for your email of 20 January 2015 in regard to your account with CMC Markets UK plc. I'm sorry to learn about your situation and I can appreciate this must be very distressing for you.
I've had a look on our register and I can confirm that we do regulate and authorise CMC Markets UK plc. This means that if anything should go wrong, you will have access to the complaint and compensation arrangements available to UK consumers. You can view the details we hold on our register by clicking here. Having searched our website, I can confirm that we have not published any notices about this firm to date.
Because the firm is regulated by us there is a complaints process you can follow if you feel they have treated you unfairly. Start off by making a formal complaint to CMC Markets UK, making sure you specify that it's a complaint you're making. This gives the firm a chance to resolve it for you in the first instance, we would expect the firms we regulate to resolve your complaint within eight weeks. If this isn't done for any reason, or you're unhappy with their response, you can then contact the Financial Ombudsman Service (the Ombudsman Service), and ask them to look into your case.
This entire process is explained in more detail on our website, which you can access by clicking here. We don't resolve individual complaints ourselves, but we make sure the firms we regulate agree to this process. To see more about what we do as a regulator, click here.
I also recognise that you're worried about the negative balance on your account and being liable to pay this. You may also wish to speak to the Citizens Advice Bureau about this. They provide free and impartial advice and may be able to explain your legal position and where to seek further help. You can call them on 0345 404 0506, or visit their website here.
I hope this helps you, and thanks again for taking the time to contact us.
IG had suffered a loss of £35m ($45m) as a result of SNB decision.
This comes from a combination of £12m of IG's market exposure and £18m of client exposure - held by 327 customers.
IG does intend to recover as much of the £18m as it can by contacting all 327 customers.
Ironically they said yesterday for the half year to 30th November 2014, net trading turnover rose 8% to a record £197.4m and pre-tax profits for the period rose 2.8% to £101.4m
IG shares ended up at 1.9% at 730.50p
You would have thought with results like these, they would have forgiven the debts owed by the 327 customers, but that is not IG's style and probably explains why the share price went up!
MANY brokers " forgot " the negative balance, and cancelled it.....they are not charity , they know that it's impossible to get those money, so they show themselves with a smiling face
It's your broker's fault as he was the one providing you with all this leverage. And no one can sue no one...it's just some LP's/Brokers that trying to scary people to get some money back.... Bassically if any broker comes to any client asking for money, the client can sue the broker.
Ignored
Just because they provide you with leverage doesn't mean you are required or should use it. If you borrow a firearm at a shooting range, you are still held liable if you turn it on another person. I'm not saying everyone with massive negative balances should be required to pay them, but it's not fair to blame leverage provided by the broker for why an account was wiped out. People are more than welcome to trade with 1:1 leverage, if they so desire.
{quote} Just because they provide you with leverage doesn't mean you are required or should use it. If you borrow a firearm at a shooting range, you are still held liable if you turn it on another person. I'm not saying everyone with massive negative balances should be required to pay them, but it's not fair to blame leverage provided by the broker for why an account was wiped out. People are more than welcome to trade with 1:1 leverage, if they so desire.
Ignored
Yes, but that doesnt mean that they have the right to sue you because your account went negative....that's the loss that they have to deal with....And about the leverage, both parties have the risk...broker and client...
Be sure to go re-read the terms and conditions you agreed to when you opened your live account. I've read through 6 brokers legal documents (terms and conditions usually in the help section of the website) today and each of them were slightly different in sections and wording but the majority of them had the same result. No negative balance protection policy and the client was liable for paying any account deficit or negative balance upon request from the broker.
Some reserved the right to reset the trade under the force majeure event to 0 but also said they were not obligated to do so. In every case the customer agreement / terms and conditions absolved the broker of any liability in loss of service or profit or balance etc in a force majeure event such as no liquidity or platform failure etc.
It's different for every broker so if in doubt, go read your terms and conditions documents and know exactly what you signed up for. You may be shocked at what you find.
I know that in most of the cases same broker closed different EURCHF positions at different prices (same number lots). This means that traders working with that the same broker suffered different losses based on a criteria that in not clear to me. Why trader A position was liquidated at 1,00 and trader B position (same number lots) at 0,95? I understand market was not liquid but who decide which order is executed first (random broker software algorithm?) If my positions are on the top of the list and are the first to be liquidated my potential loss will be lower than the one of the trader whose positions are at the bottom of the queue. Is the broker free to decide this? Is the broker free to decide who will be liquidated first and who has to wait ?
to forexia's point ,, I think his concern was lack of any quotes for a period of time... and perhaps he would have been totally fine even if they were quoting price at 0.06 (the lowest proclaimed ) through this period ... well practically lack of quotes is understandable in this situation as nobody even the big banks were sure OF THE TRUE PRICE ( as there was no time to assimilate the news) -- perhaps would it have had less impact had SNB announced during the weekend .. (apparently they wanted to do this before 22nd so did not have this option)...
Ignored
Not just the artificially stopped liquidity for an extended period of time, but also actually even more shadier practices that I wasn't even aware of.
Massive requoting and in Saxo Bank's case revising quotes on trades that have been confirmed and closed for 12 hours
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.”
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’.
Once we are better able to establish the market liquidity, all executed fills will be revisited and amended to more accurate levels,” Saxo Bank said in a statement. “This may result in a worse execution rate than the originally filled level.
Creating massive slippages by providing quotes significantly below the market:
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, but often to levels below that of EBS’s low of the day.
You know I can be responsible for my trades and my losses/gains BUT I shouldn't have to deal with these kind of s*** that actually prevents me from "taking responsibility" for my trades. How am I supposed to close my positions when they stopped quoting and then quoting me a price massively below market and revising quotes on me 12 hours after my trades? The leverage on EURCHF was already reduced to 20:1 back from Dec. of 2014. They blame on us traders who are being the victim of their bullying when they are the ones who's dealing unfairly with us.
Be sure to go re-read the terms and conditions you agreed to when you opened your live account. I've read through 6 brokers legal documents (terms and conditions usually in the help section of the website) today and each of them were slightly different in sections and wording but the majority of them had the same result. No negative balance protection policy and the client was liable for paying any account deficit or negative balance upon request from the broker. Some reserved the right to reset the trade under the force majeure event to 0 but also...
Ignored
Yes, the problem is that from the time that they asking for money from traders...they will close down...because no one will stay in that brokerage and ....good luck for the broker to win the case in the courts after 3-4 years, also this will implicate the regulator a thing that brokers don't like....so basically brokers/clients/Liquidity providers got a huge loss and every one have not choice and just to accept it....
Dear client,
Following the recent shock to the market, led by the decision of the SNB to remove its EUR/CHF floor, we would like to reassure our clients that IronFX is unaffected and is continuing its business as usual. We are pleased to inform you that we fully covered all negative balances arisen from the recent SNB event and will continue offering negative balance protection.
Client fund protection is a core pillar of our operations, and we are working round the clock to maintain the highest possible levels of fund security and regulatory compliance, despite any turbulent market movements.
Traders with IronFX can be assured that their assets are protected.
We look forward to continuing offering you the very best trading environment that the forex industry can offer.
IronFX Global wishes you Solid Trading!
Kind Regards,
sweet iron fx Dear client, Following the recent shock to the market, led by the decision of the SNB to remove its EUR/CHF floor, we would like to reassure our clients that IronFX is unaffected and is continuing its business as usual. We are pleased to inform you that we fully covered all negative balances arisen from the recent SNB event and will continue offering negative balance protection. Client fund protection is a core pillar of our operations, and we are working round the clock to maintain the highest possible levels of fund security and...
Ignored
Yes,also Hot Forex covers negative accounts...That's nice...
Dear Client,
Following the Swiss National Bank’s decision yesterday to remove the Swiss Franc cap and the subsequent spike in volatility, the market experienced a period of extreme lack of liquidity for trading in CHF pairs. This led to significant losses for many market participants.
We would like to reassure you that HotForex is operating as normal, and was not affected in any material way. Our strict Risk Management procedures minimized the impact of this event.
Furthermore, we have stayed true to our motto of Honesty, Openness and Transparency. As testament to our commitment to fairness, all negative account balances have been reset to zero and any clients that bought CHF have been paid in full.
We are very proud of our reputation in the market and we are confident that after this event our reputation will grow even stronger. We would also like to take this opportunity to thank all of our clients and partners for their continued loyalty and we are looking forward to a strong 2015.
As a last note, please exercise extreme caution if entering the markets today as the volatility seems to be set to continue.
If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact our dedicated customer support team via myHotForex, live chat, or by telephone on +44 2033185978.
Dear xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Notice of formal demand for payment – read carefully
Saxo Bank A/S (hereafter “Saxo Bank”) refers to your transaction account at Saxo Bank (Account), which is governed i.a. by the terms of Saxo Bank's General Business Terms (Terms).
Unless stated otherwise in this notice, words which are defined in the Terms have the same meaning in this notice.
In accordance with the Terms, if a Client fails to provide any sums of money necessary to satisfy a margin requirement or other sum due under the Terms in respect of any transaction, Saxo Bank may reduce a Client's exposure by closing one or more of the Client's leveraged open positions with Saxo Bank without notice to the Client and apply any proceeds thereof to payment of any amounts due to Saxo Bank.
On 15 January 2015, due to adverse movements in the financial markets, Saxo Bank exercised its rights to close out all of your open positions. The Cash that was realised from closing out these positions was applied towards the amount owing on your Account.
As at 15 January 2015 end of day, there is an amount owing by you to Saxo Bank on your Account of USD xxxxx
Saxo Bank demands payment by you of the amount of USD xxxxxx by 4.00pm CET on Friday 23 January 2015.
If the above is not paid in full to Saxo Bank by 4.00 pm CET on Friday 23 January 2015, then Saxo Bank will take action to recover the money owed to it. The updated correct owed amount to Saxo Bank can always been seen on your online trading account.
Be sure to go re-read the terms and conditions you agreed to when you opened your live account. I've read through 6 brokers legal documents (terms and conditions usually in the help section of the website) today and each of them were slightly different in sections and wording but the majority of them had the same result. No negative balance protection policy and the client was liable for paying any account deficit or negative balance upon request from the broker. Some reserved the right to reset the trade under the force majeure event to 0 but also...
Ignored
A good rule of thumb is if on the first page the broker says you can lose all your deposit instead of more than the deposit, they probably won't sue you even if terms and conditions they write other things. I didn't see any broker until now that say on the first page you can lose all your investment and then tell clients to cover the losses.
and ...... saxo bank (you name them) Dear xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Notice of formal demand for payment – read carefully Saxo Bank A/S (hereafter “Saxo Bank”) refers to your transaction account at Saxo Bank (Account), which is governed i.a. by the terms of Saxo Bank's General Business Terms (Terms). Unless stated otherwise in this notice, words which are defined in the Terms have the same meaning in this notice. In accordance with the Terms, if a Client fails to provide any sums of money necessary to satisfy a margin requirement or other sum due under the...
Ignored
I was shocked by Dukascopy's decision to no go for the money owed by clients. If you trade with a bank 99% they will try to recover the debts from you. Banks don't forgive anything.
{quote} I was shocked by Dukascopy's decision to no go for the money owed by clients. If you trade with a bank 99% they will try to recover the debts from you. Banks don't forgive anything.
Ignored
Why do you think Dukascopy has decided to do so?
- they didn't suffer overall loss?
- they know it would be difficult to sue the clients?
- ?
{quote} I was shocked by Dukascopy's decision to no go for the money owed by clients. If you trade with a bank 99% they will try to recover the debts from you. Banks don't forgive anything.
Ignored
well this is obviously a marketing move. more clients, more profit in the long run.
also note that dukascopy is ECN but in the terms and condition they state that they can be counterparty of your trade, also from the FAQ:
Quote
Disliked
Are my trading orders going to the interbank market? Can Dukascopy Bank be the counterparty of my trades?
Notwithstanding the fact that the SWFX – Swiss FX Marketplace is an ECN, Dukascopy Bank is the counterparty of all its clients’ trades executed on the SWFX. Dukascopy Bank sends orders to the interbank market in its own name for its own needs such as hedging exposures and/or testing validity of prices received from liquidity providers. Not all clients’ trades necessarily result in hedging orders sent to the interbank market by Dukascopy Bank....
