FPA Forums and Reviews Admin
A Binary Broker That Prefers Attacking Over Resolving Problems
A Binary Broker That Prefers Attacking Over Resolving Problems
FPA members Ruseneca, Tomjersey, and VicChan all reported issues with the GOptions.
GOptions doesn't seem to understand how the FPA works. When Ruseneca's Traders Court case about a dispute over a no-deposit bonus was filed, this is the response I got for inviting them to join the conversation...
I am William Simmons, Compliance and Dispute Officer at Goptions
We have posted on the subject
We are having our name tarnished for no evident reason
We provided ample evidence as to why the trader has no basis for such a claim
Our terms clearly state what is and what isn't permissible in this regard
If there is something we can do to provide a solution, let us know
We are unable to give someone free money, espeically when not not complying with our terms
The threats made against us by this customer are further confounding and again, we have no means of providing a solution to this request of documentation for tax purposes as this was a demo account and we can't and won't provide official correspondence or authorization for any authority for a demo account as it would. It would not be an official document
In any event, as stated above, we tried to help the customer out. We even offered to provide the alleged 45$ lost here back in a real account if he were to deposit. But this mail is costing us more to write than the $45 he is allegedly owed. So unless this whole thing is tossed, in which case, we would send him $45. Then I see no reason to do much. Again, if this post is removed in full – I will have finance send him $45 and that is just to get rid of this ridiculous claim – nothing more
Sorry William. The FPA doesn't remove complaints. The FPA's job is to resolve complaints. BTW – How can writing a simple email message cost the company $45?
I went ahead and tried to assist in an email negotiation between FPA member Ruseneca and GOptions. William decided to deal with this by emailing accusations about Ruseneca's mental health. This isn't what I would call a professional negotiating tactic or good customer service.
The posts by GOptions inside of Ruseneca's threads also failed to meet what I personally consider to be reasonable minimum standards of evidence. I believe their aggressive tone make readers less sympathetic to the broker's viewpoint and contributed to a guilty verdict. Had GOptions used a better representative and posted some convincing evidence, I believe it is possible that the case could have either been resolved or ended with a not-guilty verdict.
Instead, after the guilty verdict, the rep came back and posted this...
So long as we gaurantee pricing (where no other binary broker does) and guarantee same day withdrawals (where no other broker does) such claims will never stick as they are false through and through
The second Traders Court case was much more serious. Tomjersey reported that GOptions was not following their claimed same day withdrawal guarantee. Tomjersey said he'd put in £5000, made some profits, and then couldn't get any withdrawals processed.
I invited GOptions to discuss this in the forums or by email. Here's how the conversation went...
We've tried being very cooperative with your site in the past
We see no point
No matter what we say, prove, or explain we're labeled as a scam well before such issues are even brought to our attention
Furthermore, after we've proven that some allegations were complete fallacy or malicious intent to harm, you still labeled us a scam/guilty or what have you
We have no intention of discussing matter publicly on your site any longer
It's a waste of our time
So mark us as a scam and let's move in
Remove such threads UNTIL you get a response from the broker you are claiming has an issue
Leave the thread hidden from public view until a proper investigation was done
That would serve the interest of the broker. It would serve the interest of the customer with the issue as well
But this isn't what you will do as you don't care for the truth
You don't care for justice
You care for ratings
So tell that to your readers
We both know that the public will never see my rant
Let's see if you have the balls to put this public
Have a great day
VP of Support and Customer Service
Instead of immediately publishing Jim's tirade, I decided to try to reason with him and show him how the FPA could assist, if he could prove his case or resolve the issue.
Are you sure you are looking at the correct website? Do you see a SCAM label here?
GOptions | GOptions.com reviews and ratings by Forex Peace Army
At the moment, all you have is a small caution warning.
If it makes you happy, I will add your rant to the case thread and move it to the Open Cases folder. I think you would be better served to read the client's complaint in Scam Alerts carefully and address is in a professional manner.
The case thread for the current case is still hidden in a semi private folder. People can complain all they like in Scam Alerts and not much will happen. If the semi private Traders Court case thread moves to the Open Cases folder, that's when it can go to a vote. If enough guilty cases happen, that's when a company gets labelled as a scam.
The whole process is designed to slow down scam findings so that companies have a better chance to address issues. The title of that thread in Scam Alerts can be changed to start with "Resolved" if you can fix the issue. Here's a quick link to show you some of those resolved complaints...
Other edits are possible if you show that the client is somehow deliberately abusing the system. See these two threads for examples...
You can try to stand up for your company or you can sit there and hide your head in the sand. It would be unfortunate if your company got an undeserved scam finding. If it does happen, it won't be because I didn't personally give your company every possible chance to avoid it.
The choice is yours.
Jim didn't see things my way...
With all due respect, this was a crock:
Client didn’t win, didn’t trade the required volume, and didn’t even make a deposit so can’t even claim a loss - yet we’re guilty ?!
We will not help in any manner so long as this sort of thing is public and casts a false image of both the situation and the facts.
(This part was an image of Rusenca's review with a GUILTY label)
With all due respect...
1. Your representative did a very poor job presenting your company's side of the issue. The basic line of the final response was that the company wouldn't bother to continue the discussion or deal with any unanswered questions.
I suggest you carefully re-read both threads. Consider how a more professional response could have probably prevented the case thread from ever moving to Open Cases for comments and a vote...
2. Tomjersey (Tom Nxxxxxxx) has an issue which doesn't involve simple disputes over a bonus. He can't access his account and his money. Have you read the thread yet?
For the sake of argument, let's assume that Ruseneca's case should have gone the other way. Even if you did end up with an undeserved Guilty verdict, is that an excuse to not address a new and much more serious issue?
You don't have to post in the forum. I've already offered to mediate this by email. Tom's already tried to communicate with your company and can't get a response. Is Goptions going to let him have his money?
Or, should I tell people that Goptions and you personally feel justified taking thousands of Euros of Tom's money because you don't approve of the verdict on another trader's issue involving less than $100? If I do, I'll also be obligated to point out Goptions blocking Tom's access to his money began before the FPA was involved.
I prefer not to give scam findings. I don't even like taking Traders Court cases to a vote. Both of those processes require a lot of time and resources. I prefer to see clients and companies both end up happy, plus it is much easier to mark a thread as resolved. For companies that take money that is legitimately owed to traders, I'm willing to put in the work necessary to warn people.
Jim didn't bother to reply. I can only conclude that he thinks it was perfectly acceptable to keep Tomjersey's money, whether or not the FPA got involved.
When the third Traders Court case was filed, I invited the company again. Jim's reply was...
We will not discuss this while there's a public thread aimed at destroying our name. We've explained our position in 2 desperate ocassions where you found us "guilty" despite no evidence being provided. So pardon us and our lack of need or desire to discuss this publicly. Again, remove the thread and you have a deal. Keep it public and you can enjoy the yellow journalism based traffic. Regards
I'm sure Jim will read this sooner or later, so I saved my reply for now.
The FPA has every intention of helping to resolve each of the issues in a fair way. You and other employees of GOptions.com made sure this couldn't happen. The Scam Finding from the FPA is the direct result of a series of actions and inactions on the part of your company.
Instead of discussing things in a civilized manner, your representative in the first case decided that attacking the client in the forums and email. Assaulting anyone who disagrees with you isn't the way to get to the truth.
In the second case, you chose not even to examine the issue of a client who could not access his own deposit or profits. Instead, you threw a temper tantrum over how unfairly you felt the company was treated in the first case. I thought about pushing for a Scam Finding based on the extremity of the second case. Instead, I chose to give GOptions one more chance show that the company could fix issues instead of just attacking clients and the FPA.
Then a third case came up. When presented with that final chance to try to fix a client's problem, you decided that accusing the FPA of yellow journalism was better than trying to explain or resolve a client issue.
The FPA looks at available evidence. It is not the FPA's fault that you and others at your company chose to skip providing useful evidence. Members are instructed to vote based on available evidence.
Because of all of the above, you leave the FPA with no choice but to issue a Scam Finding against Goptions.com. I regret that you and your fellow employees at Goptions made this necessary.
The FPA now considers GOptions.com and all related companies and websites to be scams. If you don't have an account there, the FPA recommends against opening one. If you do have an account there, the FPA recommends trying to withdraw your funds as quickly as possible.
FPA Scam Finding Against GOptions.com
Ruseneca's original complaint against GOptions
Ruseneca's Traders Court case against Goptions.com
Tomjersey's original complaint against GOptions
Tomjersey's Traders Court case against Goptions.com
VicChan's original complaint against GOptions
VicChan's Traders Court case against Goptions.com
FPA Review Page for GOptions