Brokers chasing you for negative account balance | Page 35 | 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

  • #681
  • Mar 20, 2015 6:09am Mar 20, 2015 6:09am
Quoting mojo123
{quote} Agree, but do it in a way that you dispute the balance. Unless you dispute the negative balance, after few weeks (3 weeks I think) they can claim the debt and sell it to the debt collector. If you do that they will have to go to court. They are not going to do that straight away, they will try to negotiate first. But, if you dispute it you will be on the safe(er) side.
If I understood the latest update correctly, KPMG have already assigned these claims to a debt collection agency:

"The Joint Special Administrators have appointed CCI Legal to assist them in recovery of the debts due from clients with negative balances. Please accept this notice as confirmation that CCI Legal are formally authorised to act on behalf of the Company and the Joint Special Administrators and to accept payments due to the Company.
CCI Legal will contact clients directly. You should raise any questions or queries with them in the first instance and they will liaise with the Company and the Joint Special Administrators as appropriate."

Also, there is nothing to dispute until you get a document from your local court or government authority stating that someone says you owe them money, then you have a number of days to reply before an automatic title is granted.

There isn't much they can do beyond calling, emails and letters as their claim cant be enforced until they've proven there is a debt. And a debt can only be proven via the client's home country's legal system. So there is no obligation to deal with any of them and you are free to treat them like any other person off the street that says you owe them money.
  • #682
  • Mar 20, 2015 6:26am Mar 20, 2015 6:26am
Quoting Ed-Forex
{quote} Ofcourse dispute, by the "piss off"the client giving the brokers tracking negative balances a final reply........Go to court if you can and after that tell me how the judge decision(if against client) can be applied ?? hahahaha Guys, those idiot brokers can do nothing especially when the client is in another country that applies to most those bucketshop brokers!!! For example FXCM was trying to steal money from clients as soon as possible asking them to deposit money or they'll charge them, when FXCM don't have money to charge them and FXCM...
Agreed, not much they can do until they have legally proven their allegations, which is highly doubtful.
  • #683
  • Mar 20, 2015 6:47am Mar 20, 2015 6:47am
Hi guys, anybody been chased by FXDD?
  • #684
  • Mar 21, 2015 12:55pm Mar 21, 2015 12:55pm
Quoting Silver777
There isn't much they can do beyond calling, emails and letters as their claim cant be enforced until they've proven there is a debt. And a debt can only be proven via the client's home country's legal system. So there is no obligation to deal with any of them and you are free to treat them like any other person off the street that says you owe them money.
Minor correction there. Opening an account with a broker you agree to treat any legal cases by the laws of the country where the broker is located. Moreover this type of prosecution is not a test case, their ToS embraces all necessary facets of the matter to resolve a case in their favor. In any country and by any legal system. IMO, traders in corrupted countries are in high-risk group as the only law that works there is "the law of sufficient bribe (that triggers the process)"

Binding yourself by any legal contract it is essential to be aware what risks you're exposed to. Glad that don't have this hellish clause at Tickmill, but nevertheless, managed to wade through their ToS while signing up with them, particularly on trader liabilities..
  • #685
  • Mar 21, 2015 5:59pm Mar 21, 2015 5:59pm
Quoting leebsurag
{quote} Minor correction there. Opening an account with a broker you agree to treat any legal cases by the laws of the country where the broker is located.
Wrong. When a broker takes on retail clients, they agree that their ToS is superseded by the consumer and retail investor protection laws in the client's home country. This is why brokers don't accept clients from certain countries.

Quote
Moreover this type of prosecution is not a test case, their ToS embraces all necessary facets of the matter to resolve a case in their favor. In any country and by any legal system.

Wrong again. EU and UK law states that companies must sue private persons in the person's home country and abide by its laws/regulations where as the person can choose whether to sue a company in his/her own country or in the company's country.

Quote
Binding yourself by any legal contract it is essential to be aware what risks you're exposed to.

I suggest you read up on terms like full disclosure as well as what consumer protection regulations say about standard (non-negotiable) contracts vs negotiated contracts.
  • #686
  • Mar 22, 2015 6:47pm Mar 22, 2015 6:47pm
I am a little curious how a company like Interactive Brokers is not being considered for breaking front running laws. Wikipedia explains front running as: "Front running is the illegal practice of a stockbroker executing orders on a security for its own account while taking advantage of advance knowledge of pending orders from its customers."

It seems that Interactive brokers is not willing to honor liquidation stops at whatever level would put its customers in breach of maintenance margin requirements (ie: where Interactive Brokers advertises it liquidates customer positions). If that is the case, it would seem that the company was in possession of a large number of market orders (or at a minimum pending customer orders - as it would force liquidate) for some period of time. If internal desks transacted in these securities (spot currency or futures) or sufficiently related securities (etfs, derivatives, contracts for difference, arguably any euro currency product), it would seem they were in blatant violation of front running laws.

As is probably obvious by my citation of Wikipedia, I am not a lawyer; but could anyone possibly help explain how this law may not apply? Or are we simply to believe that Interactive Brokers / Timber Hill did not access these markets over the course of the day for the firm account?

Thanks in advance for any and all help.
  • #687
  • Mar 23, 2015 4:55am Mar 23, 2015 4:55am
Quoting slater12
I am a little curious how a company like Interactive Brokers is not being considered for breaking front running laws. Wikipedia explains front running as: "Front running is the illegal practice of a stockbroker executing orders on a security for its own account while taking advantage of advance knowledge of pending orders from its customers." It seems that Interactive brokers is not willing to honor liquidation stops at whatever level would put its customers in breach of maintenance margin requirements (ie: where Interactive Brokers advertises it...
Front running is not applicable for CFDs. They're traded OTC and in no way affect price of exchange traded security/other instrument as don't change supply/demand on it.
If they offer exchange traded securities (I tend to think CFD is the only type they offer) doubt their clients' volume reach levels sufficient for having appreciable impact on price of security/currency. Front running is basically impossible for most currencies, but quite feasible on ill-liquid or small markets.
  • #688
  • Mar 25, 2015 10:57am Mar 25, 2015 10:57am
Quoting fred3
Hi guys, anybody been chased by FXDD?
I have a small neg with FXDD, so far I have disputed the balance twice, I do not know what comes next but the cost of litigation in my country can excede by far my neg balance. I will only accept payment if they agree to close again a the high of the day wich reduces my negative to less than half. There was plenty of liquidity then but they chose to close my positions at the end of the day wich more than doubled the neg, showing no interest at all for my account once it entered margin call. What ever the outcome I will never refund this account or trade with this firm again.
  • #689
  • Mar 25, 2015 11:57am Mar 25, 2015 11:57am
Quoting Silver777
{quote} And a debt can only be proven via the client's home country's legal system. So there is no obligation to deal with any of them and you are free to treat them like any other person off the street that says you owe them money.
To be honest, I respect any other person on the street and never the scam brokers asking for money to cover negative balances, worse are the others proudly advertising that they covered negative balances from their own money as the market maker hotforex said when their policy say that the broker is responsible for negative balances coverage.

The only brokers(that are very few) to respect are the ones that state in its policy that losses can exceed deposit and client responsible of covering it, and those brokers then announced that they'll not track clients negative balances.
  • #690
  • Mar 25, 2015 12:06pm Mar 25, 2015 12:06pm
Guys, ask the scam brokers running after clients negative balances, why don't they go sue the liquidity providers(17 big banks) instead of clients!?! when they claim there was no liquidity!!!

And the ones that are market makers, tell them to piss off, they had bet like retail clients on Longs after believed the SNB, imagining that if SNB intervened they'll win with their clients instead of loosing.

They changed their strategy from taking opposite trades of their clients to trading in same direction, so let them pay for their gambling far of clients money.
  • #691
  • Mar 25, 2015 11:11pm Mar 25, 2015 11:11pm
Quoting hornsant
{quote} I have a small neg with FXDD, so far I have disputed the balance twice, I do not know what comes next but the cost of litigation in my country can excede by far my neg balance. I will only accept payment if they agree to close again a the high of the day wich reduces my negative to less than half. There was plenty of liquidity then but they chose to close my positions at the end of the day wich more than doubled the neg, showing no interest at all for my account once it entered margin call. What ever the outcome I will never refund this...

Did they replay on your dispute?
  • #692
  • Mar 26, 2015 5:30am Mar 26, 2015 5:30am
Is there anyone who used IG and is not part of an action group yet?
  • #693
  • Mar 26, 2015 5:36am Mar 26, 2015 5:36am
Quoting Ed-Forex
Guys, ask the scam brokers running after clients negative balances, why don't they go sue the liquidity providers(17 big banks) instead of clients!?! when they claim there was no liquidity!!! And the ones that are market makers, tell them to piss off, they had bet like retail clients on Longs after believed the SNB, imagining that if SNB intervened they'll win with their clients instead of loosing. They changed their strategy from taking opposite trades of their clients to trading in same direction, so let them pay for their gambling far of clients...
IG Index claim to use 12 tier one liquidity providers.....however they could not get any bids until 09:41 GMT whilst others did. Is best execution what price they get from their LPs and not what was available in mkt (EBS, etc). Does anyone have a list of their Liquidity Providers?
  • #694
  • Mar 26, 2015 7:58am Mar 26, 2015 7:58am
Quoting igeurchfloss
{quote} IG Index claim to use 12 tier one liquidity providers.....however they could not get any bids until 09:41 GMT whilst others did. Is best execution what price they get from their LPs and not what was available in mkt (EBS, etc). Does anyone have a list of their Liquidity Providers?
The Tier 1 liquidity providers are well known, not hidden, some 17 banks, who tells you that they get special prices and cant reveal LPs names like scammer hotforex claim are BIG LIARS, they sure have a dealing desk and plugin software, worse than actual market makers.

When EBS had prices running in seconds all the way down from 1.20095 to 1.1445 and when Dukascopy prices were running normally too, nearly all prices available with rare cuts, then other brokers are just market makers, the worse are who reversed clients orders prices, among the others who left clients accounts to negative balances without respecting any margin policy as scammer hotforex had done to my account, then they make an excuse "hey look there was no liquidity, it was black swan, black thursday blah blah, all these broker useless words have no legal value, go bring your liquidity providers prices at that time.

Any idea what legal points IG.com relying on to take action against clients of negative accounts??!!
  • #695
  • Mar 26, 2015 8:30am Mar 26, 2015 8:30am
IG just using their terms and conditions and saying they did everything according to the rules.
  • #696
  • Mar 26, 2015 8:54am Mar 26, 2015 8:54am
Does anyone know what spread betting negative balance actually is under law?

Borrow money to buy a house = mortgage agreement gets signed
Borrow money to buy a car = loan agreement gets signed
Get a credit card = credit agreement gets signed

So for negative balance which turns to debt....is there anything in law that governs what is right/wrong/fair/unfair ?
  • #697
  • Mar 26, 2015 9:00am Mar 26, 2015 9:00am
Quoting Eurchfloser
IG just using their terms and conditions and saying they did everything according to the rules.
What does their terms and conditions say? What clauses in it they based on?

All Scam brokers or at least the ones running away of responsibility and putting blame on clients use same words of "we work according to the rules, no fake spikes it's valid, no freeze of platform, we can't see any technical error from our side, no manipulating of prices, we are a regulated broker"

You'll hear and read all that and more as excuses for scam brokers to run with clients money.

I advice wait for them to make an official complain and when you receive legal paper to your home, start replying legally.

From now till then(if ever), tell scam brokers to piss off.
  • #698
  • Mar 26, 2015 11:05am Mar 26, 2015 11:05am
Whilst I do appreciate the advice...I don't think that approach will put me in any more favourable position than I am now. I am facing complete ruin for myself and my family.

There is nowhere to turn to. FOS can only try to help with up to £150k. FCA don't care about individuals...and lawyers will cost a fortune anyway.

If anyone has strong legal arguments or cases from the past that can help....then it would be much appreciated.
  • #699
  • Mar 26, 2015 11:46am Mar 26, 2015 11:46am
http://forexmagnates.com/alpari-uk-s...e-etx-capital/

Seems to me that all Al Pari clients, including ones with the negative balance, are sold to ETX Capital. Not sure does this change anything though...
  • #700
  • Mar 26, 2015 12:04pm Mar 26, 2015 12:04pm
Quoting mojo123
{quote} Did they replay on your dispute?
No, they did not.
1 trader viewing now