Problem Profits are a sign of cheating

[Scam Investigations Committee]

Be warned, this company doesn't just decide to not pay money owed. They also seem to think that profitable trading is a sign of cheating.


The original Scam Finding against PoltekFX was on July 17, 2008. On July 24, 2008, the manager of PoltekFX posted this in Amin’s original scam complaint thread...


I'm the official representitive of PoltekFx.
I was absent and wasn't able to control our support.
Now I'm here and ready to give comments on this situation.

FPA, edit our review, please, we are not scammers.


After weeks of ignoring all attempts to negotiate, this Committee was not going to lift a scam finding until there was some sort of resolution. Since the FPA strives to be fair, we asked Lt. Ken to discuss this issue with the manager of PoltekFX. We asked him to see if there was a way to reach an outcome that was fair to all parties involved.

Ken informs us that Tim (the manager of PoltekFX) again asked for the scam finding to be lifted before any more information was forthcoming. When Ken restated the Committee’s position that the scam finding could not be lifted without some evidence, Tim’s next line of argument was that Amin and his group were “cheaters”.

When asked for proof of this, Tim showed were a single trade had been reversed since it had not been help long enough. There was nothing in the customer agreement that Tim sent to Ken about minimum time for a trade, but since that trade had been reversed previous to PoltekFX failing to honor withdrawals, it was not part of the issue.

Further inquiries by our investigator determined that Amin and his trading group had been making short duration trades that were against some “minimum trade duration” policy that didn’t seem to be written down anywhere. All of those trades had been reversed long ago, and Amin’s group had been trading within the rules that PoltekFX had emailed to them ever since. All of the money under dispute was for trades that were done within those rules that PoltekFX had sent to Amin. Many of the trades placed by Amin and his group were hedge trades placed before any news events, which are well within even the strictest trade rules.

Tim’s next argument was that Amin and his group must be cheating and the proof was that they had been very profitable. We find the fact that Tim would try to make this argument to be compelling evidence that PoltekFX is an unethical bucketshop of the worst sort.

Tim then asked if he could post his own poll on the FPA and other websites to prove that most traders support his position. He also asked if he could speak to Ken on the phone.

Ken told Tim that FPA negotiations only take place through email so that no one can later dispute what was said. The only time the FPA will make a phone call to a party involved in a dispute is if a contact number needs to be verified to work.

Ken also told Tim that any poll would have to only be on the FPA site so that the FPA could monitor it to prevent vote fraud. He also told Tim that the wording would need to be fair. In order to make the poll fair, Ken offered these terms...

Both Amin and Tim would have to agree in advance to a poll to decide the final outcome of the case.

Tim would agree that if Amin won, all disputed money would be turned over immediately. Once the money was turned over, the FPA would lift the scam finding. Amin agreed that if Tim won, the only money to be returned would be any remaining initial deposits and the scam finding would be lifted.

If any money was to be transferred, it would be done by Western Union or another method that allows a third party to track the transfer online. Transfer information would be given to the FPA so that all transfers could be verified. This would remove any chance of either party lying about sending or receiving money.

Amin and Tim would have to both agree in advance which accounts were affected.

Both Amin and Tim would have to agree on the exact wording of the poll.

After the poll was posted, but before an email was sent out to FPA’s membership, both Amin and Tim would have several hours to post arguments in the poll thread. Both would be allowed to state their cases and dispute what the other said in a civil fashion.


Even though he already had an FPA ruling in his favor, Amin agreed to all of these terms.

Tim never would say if he agreed or not. The terms of the offer were sent to him more than once. He ignored them and then tried to post his own poll that was written like this:


Subject: VotingoltekFX vs Cheaters

Poll question

We offer to answer the following questions:

_ Should we deteriorate rules for all traders for cheating protection purposes?
_ Should we continue offering good trading conditions to customers and just return funds to cheaters?

Attention! Dear traders!
In July on many forums there was the information about unconscientiousness of PoltekFX. Probably you received such information by email too. The administration of the company would like to clear this situation.
Amin Hakim and his group of traders used arbitrage methods of FOREX cheating on our broker. These methods enabled them to make the profit of around 100% during short period of time. Amin Hakim himself and his group of traders admitted their actions as cheating.
Such method is dangerous for traders, as brokers can see cheating and most often delete such orders. In this case most of brokers return initial deposit, some delete only positive orders,thereby zeroizing an account, and deposit is not paid back.
We did not delete profits of the customer,all the orders were saved. We paid not only the deposit but a part of profit too.
At present we’ve got a question: how should we act in the same situations in the sequel?
The most effective way of struggle against cheaters is introducing various limitations on trading for ALL traders. For example:
- spreads widening during news
- Mounting large slippage for all traders
- Enlargment of order execution time, right up to manual execution.
- Prohibition of orders modification on news and so on.

However, it is honest traders who suffer from introducing such limitations directed against cheating. We do not strive for taking excess pip from our customers,that’s why we decided to carry out the survey. Your opinion is important to us.We offer to answer the following questions:
1. Should we deteriorate rules for all traders for cheating protection purposes?

2. Should we continue offering good trading conditions to customers and just return funds to cheaters?


This was clearly a very biased poll question, was posted without any warning being given to Amin to have a response ready, and was a total violation of the terms offered to PoltekFX. Somehow, the poll ended up in the postings moderation queue. One of the forum moderators caught it and kept it from being posted in the public areas of the FPA’s forums.

Ken wrote to Tim and told him that his poll was not being posted. Ken also told him to make no more attempts to post unfair materials during negotiations since this could be considered to be an ethics violation. Ken once again laid out the terms under which a poll could be held.

Tim wrote back saying...


Yesterday we posted a topic (but it has not appeared yet) containg poll in
order to know public opinion about this situation. On basis of it there will
be decision about payment. We hope that it will give clear conception who is
right indeed.


After pounding his head on a wall for 10 minutes, Ken wrote a long message back that included this.


Would you consider it fair if Amin posted a poll like this?

a. PoltekFx should return money stolen from traders
b. PoltekFx should keep money stolen from traders

Obviously, that would be biased and you would not accept it. Amin and the FPA do NOT accept the wording of your poll any more than you would accept the wording above.

As I have already written to you several times, if you want a poll, it will be written fairly - I or another committee member will write the text and both you AND Amin will agree on the wording before the poll is posted. Both of you will agree to abide by the results. I will attach the terms again. Please READ ALL OF them this time.


Tim’s response was to start posting his poll and insulting comments about Amin on other forums. Ken wrote to him, told him that doing this while negotiating with the FPA on this issue was unethical, and that to continue would risk another scam finding against PoltekFX. Ken gave him a deadline to respond. Tim’s only response was to continue posting on other forums.

Ken then turned all the information over to the Scam Investigations Committee. You may see our ruling here…
EDIT: Link removed. PoltekFx was bought out. Tim was fired. Amin was paid. Case resolved.

 

[ernest8fingers]

is this a Japanese game show?

I have to say that it is this very forum that exposes the good or bad in a Brokerage. The resolution offered by FPA seems generous considering what a scam rating can do to your bottom line. I hope the Trader gets his money and the Broker gets his medicine. Cant wait for the outcome.

 

[COB]

Good work

I would just like to say good work to FPA, for getting hold of these dodgy brokers and ringing their necks.
Trading is hard enough with all the emotions going through our heads, without having to worry about if your broker is going to screw you over.

Keep up the good work FPA

 

[lazycat]

SO POLTEKFX is in business and not making a profit, or are they cheating to make a profit ?
they think we are all stupid.

 

[ABDULAZEEZ I.T.AFOLABI]

Tim from all his reactions has exhibited that his is a man of opaque character judging from the strong stench that keeps on ozoing from his body. If not, why has he been so sly and slimy in his approach to simply arbitrational resolution between him and Amin? This implies that he has avalanche of skeletons in his cupboard and these skeletons includes those of many voiceless which are not known to the FPA and they will be exhumed sooner or later.

FPA has been fair enough while Amin has demonstrated sense of maturity either,despite the fact that all odds are against Tim. I want to believe that the blacklisting of his pseudo company is a tight noose on his neck and I'm advocating that this noose must be further tightened to a level of suffocation.

Well done FPA.

Best regards,

AbdulAzeez I.T.Afolabi.

 

[Pharaoh]

Does this mean I should cheat more to make my trading more profitable?


I can't believe any broker would be stupid enough to try to tell the FPA that profits are a sign of cheating. This Tim guy must be one first class idiot.

 

[Andres Leiva]

Strongest Rules is what all brokers need.

In this case a Great job have been done by Ken and the FPA.
I personally encourage to all soldiers here to take action to rule "Forex" all around the world. Since I’ve seen by my own experience and the forums opinion, we need to take action confronting the institutional governments and demanding the following:
-The Brokers must act as "agents" and/or "principals" for the customer only.
-Each broker must legally represent only one side on each transaction and its inherit interests must be stated in the "Costumer Agreement Contract". The agreement must be worded as a contract to represent "You" (his/her client). Instead of destroy and ruin in you; as it’s been till today. We have the right to be treated in an equal position.
-All broker's "Costumer Agreement Contract" must be worded the same way. The Government must take action in standardizing this.
-Brokers can't act anymore as a counter party against the costumer’s positions.
-Brokers must be paid for services only by the costumers, through spread and/or commission.
-Brokers must be ruled to avoid adjudication of any "rollover fees", partial or total.
-The term "Arms be ware" and its definition must be included in the contract with IB's and Brokers.
-IB's that bring advisory to his/her costumers must be ruled to be paid only in the costumers closed winning positions. That is to avoid churning. It could motivate IB's to be the best traders allies at all times. Costumers must receive from time to time a statement with all monies received by the IB from the broker, on the specific account.
-"Slippage" must be ruled as a major deceptive industry practice, with zero tolerance, by regulating financial government institution in each country. License will be suspended.
-Licensing must be mandatory to all Forex brokers and IB's, as wheel as a maintaining of a clean record requirements to each person licensed as a broker or an IB.
-Continuing Education must be implemented to each scope of job (IB or Broker). A bunch of money deserves that kind of studying sacrifice, right or not?
- A central government data price must be recorded and it will be available to compare prices in every dispute. Not to be used in regular daily trading, but it’s necessary because the whole industry needs to have a patron where every Forex Institutional or Individual will count in arising disputes.
My plan of action is:
1-Write to your Local and State Department of Financial Services about your concerns.
2-Encourage your politicians to take action on your side. Show them how a big capital is drained for letting Forex brokerage, without any strict and enforceable regulations. Show how Local and States governments could benefit through the new system of regulations for brokers (for example: Broker fines must be huge amounts of money and new jobs must be created to regulated the industry).
3-Ask to Local Schools that make Licensing Test in other regulated industries, how to encourage and involve the government in regulating the Forex industry, with Licensing and Continuing Education.
4-Write to the best allies of the Forex Brokers (the NFA and CFTC) about your concerns and for the needs of strongest regulations in the USA. Write to those organizations, that you do not agree with "Forex Casinos" in the USA.
5-Write to CEO’s of the greatest U.S banks, about what we all Traders want access to the open "Interbank". Competition between banks for the new industry will be reward to every one.

To all my folks here,

Andres Leiva
Miami, FL. USA

 

[NZ Chris]

cheating, Blimey

I am at a loss. If the broker does their Job and the trader does their's there is no cheating. If the Broker chooses to keep the trades in house and is wrong, tough. Can't blame the trader for being right.

There was me thinking this wasn't a rigged as the casinos. Doh.

to the broker

 

[PipMonger]

WoW!
Eyes opened wide!!:shocked:

Thanks, FPA.

 

[Carlos]

No Good Idea

In this case a Great job have been done by Ken and the FPA.
I personally encourage to all soldiers here to take action to rule "Forex" all around the world. Since I’ve seen by my own experience and the forums opinion, we need to take action confronting the institutional governments and demanding the following:
-The Brokers must act as "agents" and/or "principals" for the customer only.
-Each broker must legally represent only one side on each transaction and its inherit interests must be stated in the "Costumer Agreement Contract". The agreement must be worded as a contract to represent "You" (his/her client). Instead of destroy and ruin in you; as it’s been till today. We have the right to be treated in an equal position.
-All broker's "Costumer Agreement Contract" must be worded the same way. The Government must take action in standardizing this.
-Brokers can't act anymore as a counter party against the costumer’s positions.
-Brokers must be paid for services only by the costumers, through spread and/or commission.
-Brokers must be ruled to avoid adjudication of any "rollover fees", partial or total.
-The term "Arms be ware" and its definition must be included in the contract with IB's and Brokers.
-IB's that bring advisory to his/her costumers must be ruled to be paid only in the costumers closed winning positions. That is to avoid churning. It could motivate IB's to be the best traders allies at all times. Costumers must receive from time to time a statement with all monies received by the IB from the broker, on the specific account.
-"Slippage" must be ruled as a major deceptive industry practice, with zero tolerance, by regulating financial government institution in each country. License will be suspended.
-Licensing must be mandatory to all Forex brokers and IB's, as wheel as a maintaining of a clean record requirements to each person licensed as a broker or an IB.
-Continuing Education must be implemented to each scope of job (IB or Broker). A bunch of money deserves that kind of studying sacrifice, right or not?
- A central government data price must be recorded and it will be available to compare prices in every dispute. Not to be used in regular daily trading, but it’s necessary because the whole industry needs to have a patron where every Forex Institutional or Individual will count in arising disputes.
My plan of action is:
1-Write to your Local and State Department of Financial Services about your concerns.
2-Encourage your politicians to take action on your side. Show them how a big capital is drained for letting Forex brokerage, without any strict and enforceable regulations. Show how Local and States governments could benefit through the new system of regulations for brokers (for example: Broker fines must be huge amounts of money and new jobs must be created to regulated the industry).
3-Ask to Local Schools that make Licensing Test in other regulated industries, how to encourage and involve the government in regulating the Forex industry, with Licensing and Continuing Education.
4-Write to the best allies of the Forex Brokers (the ) about your concerns and for the needs of strongest regulations in the USA. Write to those organizations, that you do not agree with "Forex Casinos" in the USA.
5-Write to CEO’s of the greatest U.S banks, about what we all Traders want access to the open "Interbank". Competition between banks for the new industry will be reward to every one.

To all my folks here,

Andres Leiva
Miami, FL. USA

Are you sure you know What are you talking about it? You have some issues that we live every day in our lives, This broker is out side of the Country . Regulations will cost a lot more money to the end user, (The trader, means us) that will be almost impossible to trade. I don't think that will be good idea to be regulated, be regulated, be regulated . right here in America we already have NFA and CFTC as you say, We also we have FOREX PEACE ARMY as you can see. I think that will be enough protection for us, any ways the bad brokers will lose their costumers eventually and their business will be shrink and may be end.