If I am reading all of this correctly:
1. There were some refunds in the past over bad fills, based on prices from an LP that is no longer used. The LP has changed since then.
2. Any incidents should be reported. Some incidents may be due to bad LPs. Others may be due to bad liquidity (something that can easily happen around major news events). Thus, a refund due to slippage on one (or 3) prior orders does not automatically mean all instances of large slippage are due to a bad fill.
3. Several orders triggered at about the same time. One had much higher slippage than the others. Under normal market conditions, I'd agree that it was likely a bad fill. During a major news event, this much variation would be a little unusual, but far from impossible.
Overall, I don't see any of the supporting evidence as being sufficient to advance the case.
Thank you for your reply. As armada is ignoring our questions (and it didn't provide reports on previous cases), it's a good thing for me.
a )
So again I confirm that Sucden is one of the best if not the best LP-s out there.
As Armadamarkets said trading range was
50 pips. Sucden filled an order at a low(MT4 BID): 0.9426 and stopped out at a bit above of the high(ASK: 0.9477): 0.9478. This is
52 pips loss form Sucden's order.
b) 5 Identical orders on 5 other accounts filled with 0-7 pip slippage and stopped out with 0-1 pips slippage.
c) on LMAX chart trading range was up to 51 pips. Armadamarkets has no charts from Sucden. One important thing: trading range on LMAX could be from 0.9419 (BID) to 0.947 (ASK) - it is 51 pips and in that moment order couldn't fill below or above, there was no avaiable price outside and price clearly slowed down afterwards, it was the end of spike and start of the correction. Order filled inside this range: 0.9426 (OK) and stopped outside at 0.9478 (WRONG) as we said. It means "price/trading range" became 58 pips from sucden, also exceeding high of the day which was hit 8 seconds after that (on LMAX and SWFX).
So 52 pips loss an order had is different by location from 50 pips or so Armadamarkets is talking about. And 8 seconds is something I would pay attention to. During 8 seconds there was a sideways trading activity between 0.9455(BID) and 0.947(ASK) (including correction from initial spike).
0.9477 was hit (on LMAX) after these 8 seconds and how could Sucden (best LP out there) stop out an order at
0.9478 before these 8 seconds?
d) On SWFX price range also remained from 0.94199 (BID) to below 0.947 (ASK)
e) LMAX itself is an exchange providing prices from all over the World: Bank of America, BNP Paribas, citi, commerzbank, J.P. Morgan, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Nomura, Optiver, Royal Bank of Scotland and all trading actiities are shown on the chart from these price providers.
e) Order wasn't executed nor in SWFX, nor in Bank of America, BNP Paribas, citi, commerzbank, J.P. Morgan, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Nomura, Optiver, Royal Bank of Scotland but if Sucden is one of the best (if not the best) LP-s out there it:
1. Couldn't stop out an order at above HOD when like whole world traded
7 pips below during 8 seconds.
2. Should have more than 4/10 review on ratingfx.com, 3/10 on forex-broker-rating.com (hundreds of reviews).
3. It just picked a price.
I'm writing this post exclusively in answer to Pharaoh. If Armadamarkets want to discuss details, it can start by providing execution reports from previous errors we're talking about (being their normal practice) or respond to my question they're ignoring from the begining.
About their accusation:
In the very first post of first thread I wrote this:
Metatrader A/N: 2088529284
Account owner: ALFA
Order: 15414987 *
Lotsize: 18.23
Open Price: 0.9442
Stop Loss at: 0.9451 (-9 pips)
Stopped at: 0.9452 (-10 pips) (No slippage at all)
I said in the very beginning these numbers were no slippage for me for the various reason and I provided numbers. I said what I was thinking and about what I was thinking it in detail. Misleading someone is different in my opinion.
). 
