GUILTY Case# 2013-051 | Zakirussen vs instantpip.com

[outis]

Ineptitude and lies is not a good model. Guilty!

 

[fxgermany]

I do understand Zakirussen's frustration, but some parts of the case description are simply beside the point.

The actual case is: "I had recently suffered by huge lost due to a signal provider name Instantpip.com had traded one position GBP/USD without put stop loss in my MT4 account by trade copier."

Instantpip already conceded that they didn't place an SL on the trade in question. It would be nice to know if an SL would have changed anything, e.g. if they usually use a safety SL of 100 pips, but hotforex would have cancelled the bonus but closed the position at a floating loss of say 50 pips, this whole case is pointless.

Also, I think watching an open trade for several days while this trade is eating up the account balance is quite careless by the client at best. At least it has been my understanding that this wasn't a managed account, but a signal service, so the client could have added funds, closed the trade or placed an SL by themselves.

 

[ike7771]

They take his money and trade with no s/l? And do they do that with there money? Any one knows small accound large positions=0. Some one try to show quik results with your money, sorry to hear that. I vote scam

 

[deadant]

This is where I would want a third option "Suspect" or similar. I have not seen enought "evidence" to vote either way (thus I won't vote on this unless more is presented) but here is my view of it;

- In the screenshot I can only see a couple of 0.1 lots, where is the 10 lot trade?

- They DID break their word when playing without stop loss. We know this since one of their reps (or at least claiming to be, is that somehow verified?) have admitted it. Still, what if they had provided a stop only too far away to make any difference? That way they would have kept their promise but the client would still have lost all the same..

- As for not refunding, the only thing I've seen is a statement that the subscription fee should be returned. Whatever this has happened or not we realy don't know, but I assume not since I would have excpected the rep to show some sort of prof that is had been done otherwise.

Now in my opinion there is no question that the have neither taken enough care of their signals/clients nor handled the issue in a proffesinal way, but is that enough for a scam rating? Sorry but I just don't know...

 

[Sector]

How come they opened a trade with such a massive lotsize of 10? Does it mean they don't have any
money management orientation?
They where contacted during the drawdown which they caused, but still they did nothing.
This is a completely dishonest company and should not be allowed to continue deceiving the public.
Worst of all, they are not responding to queries.

 

[Sector]

This is where I would want a third option "Suspect" or similar. I have not seen enought "evidence" to vote either way (thus I won't vote on this unless more is presented) but here is my view of it;

- In the screenshot I can only see a couple of 0.1 lots, where is the 10 lot trade?

- They DID break their word when playing without stop loss. We know this since one of their reps (or at least claiming to be, is that somehow verified?) have admitted it. Still, what if they had provided a stop only too far away to make any difference? That way they would have kept their promise but the client would still have lost all the same..

- As for not refunding, the only thing I've seen is a statement that the subscription fee should be returned. Whatever this has happened or not we realy don't know, but I assume not since I would have excpected the rep to show some sort of prof that is had been done otherwise.

Now in my opinion there is no question that the have neither taken enough care of their signals/clients nor handled the issue in a proffesinal way, but is that enough for a scam rating? Sorry but I just don't know...

Hello Deadant, I think that the accusation about the large lot size is evident in his MT4 screenshot.
The lots where opened as an accumulation several trades of 0.1lot sizes. Each opened in addition
to an already existing trade thereby forming a kind of martingale since all are sell trades.
If he has open positions of 0.1lot size up to 10 places or even more, he 'Zakirussen' is damn right
that 10lot sized position was opened in his account.
Personally, I think Instantpip tried to use martingale strategy where a new position is not doubled but
nevertheless entered to make up for an already loosing position should there be a minor reversal.
And due to carelessness, they carried out such stunt on such a small account and failed
woefully as expected of the killer martingale style system.

 

[AsstModerator]

This case is now about more than the original complaint. Read the thread in Scam Alerts. InstantPip promised to take steps to correct the issue and broke the promise. Read it here...

https://www.forexpeacearmy.com/fore...er/25147-not-resolved-www-instantpip-com.html

 

[UncleSteve]

The only thing you can accuse them of , is commision hunting .

AND promising stop losses and not following through

 

[AsstModerator]

And publicly promising to fix the issue, then cutting off contact.

 

[Master Yoda]

AND promising stop losses and not following through

They promised you a stop loss under all conditions?