GUILTY - Case# 2011-015 | traderforliving vs www.fantasydreamteam.com/ea.html

[Pharaoh]

So you clearly tell him a refund is available more than once when he's asking about it, but make sure to send him a link that wipes out any chance of a refund?

Hey Richard,

I've got a deal for you. I've got a 100% iron-clad money back guarantee on a product, plus I'll offer you a discount (not mentioning that additional terms apply if you take it - you need to read all the other info on the website for that) while still saying the guarantee applies (but not to your purchase). Care to take me up on the offer?

Richard, if that's your logic, you are pathetic.

Any chance of taking this one to a vote soon? I think Richard needs another lesson in basic ethics.

 

[vincam]

If the logic of the FPA is that "it does not matter what the terms say", then anyone could put a claim against anyone else! Infact, I may just open an account with every single broker and blow all the accounts. I will then blame the brokers who will refer me to their terms that state "we are not responsible for your losses". But wait, not a problem, I know how to get my money back! I will open a case on the FPA and you will have to give me back all the losses because what you say in your T&C's means absolutly nothing. Will you guys back me?

I'll tell you what Richard, if you e-mail the account manager at these brokers, ask them if they will guarantee your losses for 60 days and they say yes we will, here is the link to open an account. Then you blow the accounts and they say oh well you don't get that guarantee if you used that link, it was the no guarantee link, we never said you would get it if you used THAT link, you had to use the link over here, it's in our terms. If that happens to you, I'll back you.

 

[f-man]

How scammers think

I said the guarantee was available, but I did not state that it was available for the discount link! Nor was I applying that it was. This is against the terms. Nino should have read those terms before buying, it is not my responsibility to constantly remind customers of the terms, I have a page on my site for that. I am sorry if Nino was confused and perhaps the language barrier led to a misunderstanding, but I am standing firmly behind my terms and I have every right to. If he wanted the 60 day guarantee that I said was available then he should have used the full price payment link on the site.

He asked if the guarantee was still available. The answer to his question is yes, it was still available. He then used the discount link, which the terms state is not covered in the guarantee. SO, the guarantee was still available, but the buyer was not covered as they were using a discount link. Call it a misunderstanding, communication breakdown or language barrier, at the end of the day, I am standing firm to my terms.

Now please move on to the real scammers, this is wasting everybodys time.

Well we have to admit that according to Richard's terms, he is not obliged to pay the money back guarantee.
Congratulations Richard! You succeeded in making Nino think he can have the money back guarantee and got his $400.
Please don't answer that you could not know that when Nino asked you if the guarantee was still available it was not meant for the link that you gave him. If you couldn't understand that, it means your IQ had a higher high, when you needed it (To trick him) and a lower low when you didn't need it (Not to understand the obvious).

It is really a very good example how a trader can be tricked!
I will suggest the Moderator to make a new thread in the Scam Alert Folder and name it "How Scammers Think" and put your statement on the top and make it sticky!

And Richard suggest we move on to the real scammers. Who are the real scammers Richard?

 

[richard swaby]

I was told by Bill to come in here and explain how my wording about the availability of a refund wasn't deceptive and about what happened to the refund I was discussing with Nino.

Wording of refund availability:

1. Nino asked for a discount and I gave it to him

Hi Nino,

I have been considering your offer and I am happy to tell you that I will take you up on it.

Here is your exclusive payment link with 20% discount: paypal.com/cgi-bin/websc...=JF6YJTL9BHTEY

Best Regards,
Rich.

2. Nino asked if the refund was still available. He did not ask if the refund was still available for discount purchases. I replied that "Yes the 60 day guarantee is still available", as it was. I did not state that "Yes the 60 day guarantee is still available even if you use the discount link". I was not even thinking refund at this point as you can see from my comment "But with this performance you will not need it". To say I was being deceptive is incorrect and not based on any facts, it is pure speculation. The facts are that had Nino gone to the terms page and read that he was entering an agreement where refunds are not covered with discount link he would not have purchased. Or, he may have emailed me and asked "Will I be able to get a refund if I use the discount link", to which my answer would have been "no".

Hi Nino,

No problem! Yes the 60 day guarantee is still available. But with this performance you will not need it ;-)

Your link: paypal.com/cgi-bin/websc...=JF6YJTL9BHTEY

Best Regards,
Rich.

3. Refund I was discussing with Nino. So Nino came to me after a while and asked for the refund. I initially offered help and support - I assume that anyone who pays $400 for an EA really wants to get the good results, so I did my very best to help him. I recoded aspects of the EA that forward testing had showed needed touching up. I then sent Nino the new version and encouraged him to test it. Nino again came back asking for a refund (despite the EA making 33%+ for me during that time) and sent me his order. I checked his order and saw that it was for $400. I then asked Nino if he had read the terms - which he clearly had not. I broke the news to him that discount links are not covered in the guarantee. At the same time he saw what was happening here at the FPA with Galina and began threatening me to "refund or I will go the FPA!". I told him that Galina paid full price and was entitled to a refund.

Like it or not, I was not being deceptive and I did not once put in writing that a refund was available for the discount link. Nino did not even ask me if it was, he just asked me if the guarantee was available. Some people find that hard to accept, but it is the truth and those are the facts. My terms are there for a reason and I never intended or implied that I would go against them. If Nino (and everyone else here for that matter) feels otherwise then that is their choice.

If you are going to throw me in the scam folder and put a scam by my name just do it. I do not need the death threats and unfair abuse that come with a public vote. If you all at the FPA believe that I am wrong and it does not matter what my terms say, if you are accusing me of intentionally being deceptive/lying, then there is no need for a public vote. It's your site, your rules, your decision. Just move me right into the scam folder and put a big SCAM by my name. My opinion is not important. No matter how right I am, this site will still burn me at the stake. So just get it over and done with. I know you guys want all the attention and all the traffic that comes with a public vote, but if you all here (in this thread) decide that I am a big time scammer and dont care about my opinion or my terms, then just put the nail in the coffin and get me in the scam folder right away.

Real scammers? People who run off with millions of $ never to be heard from or seen again. I am in here, putting my point across, referring to the terms of my site, explaining what happened, explaining how and why I am in my rights and yet I am considered one of those guys. Regarding the example of the watch in a shop and a sign behind the counter, you could not put a case against the shop owner because it was in his terms. But if you must do all you can to tarnish my name even more than you have already done, then dont go to a public vote, just put me right in the scam folder, because no matter how strong my defense is or what evidence I have to back me up, the customer is always right! Why do you guys even bother with a public vote when you know all those angry traders are going for the throats of vendors?!

Whatever I say on here is used as ammo to fire back at me. Perhaps I will stop coming here. I have spoken to the owner and told him about my terms and that I was not trying to deceive the buyer. If that is not enough, then dont even bother with a public vote. I must be a scammer and deserve to be put in the scam folder. The credibility of this site has to be questioned.

The irony of it all! The EA is up over 33% in the last 3 weeks! So, should I start calling the buyer a scammer who is trying to rip me off, because he wants a refund even though the EA is performing as advertised.

Does anyone know who "Felix" is? There are a ton of scam complaints against the FPA. And you guys are trying to pull me up on a $400 refund that's not even covered in my terms or agreed on in writing.

forexjustice.com/Review_Section/Forex_Signal_Reviews/Forex_Peace_Army.html
pipwizard.com/forexbastards
answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071228203505AAlJyT7

moneymakergroup.com/Forexpeacearmy-Scam-Warni-t193018.html&p=4794818
felixbastard.com/
peterbainscam.com
setbb.com/forexjudge/
talkgold.com/forum/r107900-.html
answers.yahoo.com/question/in...4031358AAzgRif
talkgold.com/forum/r107900-.html
talkgold.com/forum/newrep...te=1&p=2204436
talkgold.com/forum/r104801-.html
pipwizard.com/forexbastards
forexnews.com/fxforum/for...?TID=1248&PN=1
scam.com/showthread.php?t=10263
talkgold.com/forum/showth...=104801&page=2
forexscammer.com/
moneytec.com/forums/f14/f...-arrest-23688/
scamfraudalert.com/f49/wh...rds-com-10999/
http://[media=youtube]Zb5rQ...eature=related[/media]
answers.yahoo.com/question/in...8203505AAlJyT7
answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qi...14031358AAzgRif
talkgold.com/forum/r107900-.html
talkgold.com/forum/newreply.php...1&p=2204436
talkgold.com/forum/r104801-.html
forexnews.com/fxforum/forum/for...D=1248&PN=1
scam.com/showthread.php?t=10263
talkgold.com/forum/showthread.p...4801&page=2
forexscammer.com/
moneytec.com/forums/f14/forexba...d-arrest-23688/
scamfraudalert.com/f49/whois-re...ards-com-10999/
answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qi...28203505AAlJyT7
forex-tsd.com/187466-post1374.html
advisor.fxstreet.com/2008/01/recap-of-intrad.html
scam.com/showthread.php?t=10263
soulcast.com/post/show/96768/Fo...ders,-Watch-Out!

forex-tsd.com/metatrader-broker...e-too-late.html
forexnewstrade.com/forum/king-f...et-program.html
currencysecrets.com/category/forex-broker/page/2/
forexbastards.blogspot.com/
google.com/search?hl=en&q=forexpeacearmy+scam

 

[vincam]

You are right Richard, you could would not have a case against the shop owner as you are not obliged to refund in this case because you covered yourself in the terms. All I can say is there is no point in anyone asking you any questions about your refund policy. Just point them to the terms and if they ask for clarification just tell them to read the terms again and interpret it as they see fit. He was clearly asking for clarification and your answer was misleading in the least. I am not Felix nor is anyone in here you have talked to, you can look up my post history and see how I got here, I got scammed and came here to help others.

The point is not that your butt is covered by your terms it is that when asked for clarification you mislead. Okay you can't sue the watch shop, but you would tell others don't go in there, he will mislead you about his refund policy, and that is my stance on this case with you, yes you covered yourself but I would not recommends others do business with you as you are misleading. That is my take on it.

 

[richard swaby]

You are right Richard, you could would not have a case against the shop owner as you are not obliged to refund in this case because you covered yourself in the terms. All I can say is there is no point in anyone asking you any questions about your refund policy. Just point them to the terms and if they ask for clarification just tell them to read the terms again and interpret it as they see fit. He was clearly asking for clarification and your answer was misleading in the least. I am not Felix nor is anyone in here you have talked to, you can look up my post history and see how I got here, I got scammed and came here to help others.

The point is not that your butt is covered by your terms it is that when asked for clarification you mislead. Okay you can't sue the watch shop, but you would tell others don't go in there, he will mislead you about his refund policy, and that is my stance on this case with you, yes you covered yourself but I would not recommends others do business with you as you are misleading. That is my take on it.

I did not intentionally mislead as you are suggesting.
Clear no refund policy now to avoid any confusion.

 

[vincam]

I did not intentionally mislead as you are suggesting.
Clear no refund policy now to avoid any confusion.

But you don't see it? Even if not intentional, do you not see why Nino filed the case?

It's like the guy in the watch store saying "Oh I forgot to tell you that watch was not covered. Sorry, can't help you" It sucks Richard, you would never go into that store again.

 

[Pharaoh]

How is this not misleading:

No problem! Yes the 60 day guarantee is still available. But with this performance you will not need it ;-)

Your link: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/websc...=JF6YJTL9BHTEY

60 day refund is available - here, use this link.

I see Richard is also silly enough to dig up a bunch of old BS, mostly posted by ForexGen and a couple other scam companies. Maybe you should watch this updated video and note the text overlay:




It's obvious that Richard isn't capable of seeing how he deceived this trader. Let's take this to a vote.

 

[AsstModerator]

Does anyone know who "Felix" is? There are a ton of scam complaints against the FPA. And you guys are trying to pull me up on a $400 refund that's not even covered in my terms or agreed on in writing.

The FPA goes after scam of all sizes. You said the refund was available in the same email where you gave a link that would conveniently invalidate it.

If you really believe all those links to libel that you posted, I'd like you to explain why Felix isn't rotting in prison. The truth is that Felix has never been charged with anything. His one close encounter with the law was not forex related, resulted in no charges against him and was fully disclosed right here in the FPA's forums. Most of those sites you posted can be linked back to a couple of companies that the FPA properly labeled as scams.

 

[DeltaSeven]

Simple fact.

Richard, in his email exchange with the buyer, has agreed that the buyer was not aware of the terms and conditions before he purchased. In fact, the vendor did actions with intent to communicate a concept that was significantly different to the facts that he knew existed in the T&C's that he further knew the buyer was unaware of.

Therefore, and on the above fact alone, I consider the vendor to have behaved in an unconscionable manner, at the least. At worst, intentionally defrauded the buyer/victim.