GUILTY - Case# 2011-015 | traderforliving vs www.fantasydreamteam.com/ea.html
- Thread starter traderforliving
- Start date
Richard should refund the money. Although it is true that the agreement stated that d product purchased through the discount link has no guarantee, but it is the vendor's fault for failing to specify things/conditions clearly, and thus created a misunderstanding between the vendor and customer. The vendor cannot blame customers for not reading the terms and conditions.
In fact, all vendors should assume that their customers did not read the terms and conditions, and should be obliged to clearly state out the terms to their potential customers, especially in conversations, because it is in these conversations that the customers will hold the vendor's to.
Since it is the vendor's fault for failing to specify clearly the terms and conditions, and hence, make it appear that the vendor contradicted his own terms and conditions, thus it is right for the vendor to refund, and not repeat this mistake ever again in future businesses.
In fact, all vendors should assume that their customers did not read the terms and conditions, and should be obliged to clearly state out the terms to their potential customers, especially in conversations, because it is in these conversations that the customers will hold the vendor's to.
Since it is the vendor's fault for failing to specify clearly the terms and conditions, and hence, make it appear that the vendor contradicted his own terms and conditions, thus it is right for the vendor to refund, and not repeat this mistake ever again in future businesses.
DennisTheLion
Recruit
- Messages
- 2
Interpol Should be brought in to investigate...
I think After Interpol Investigates The International Fraud you have committed, I think you will have plenty of time sitting in jail dreaming up an EA to get you out of there.
I think After Interpol Investigates The International Fraud you have committed, I think you will have plenty of time sitting in jail dreaming up an EA to get you out of there.
claretblue
Private, 1st Class
- Messages
- 91
Having read the "Terms & Conditions" at the website, I noticed one thing is missing.
I don't know about the rest of the world, but in the UK there should be another phrase right at the bottom - "These terms and conditions DO NOT AFFECT YOUR STATUTORY RIGHTS".
It seems Richard (?) needs to brush-up on Consumer Law.
I don't know about the rest of the world, but in the UK there should be another phrase right at the bottom - "These terms and conditions DO NOT AFFECT YOUR STATUTORY RIGHTS".
It seems Richard (?) needs to brush-up on Consumer Law.
Last edited:
Stormin_Norman
Private
- Messages
- 12
I bought two months ago (maybe 3?) and saved the webpage, as I always do for record keeping and the discount refund was not on there. It was added sometime after my purchase, probably to fight this exact case.
claretblue
Private, 1st Class
- Messages
- 91
UPDATE: In UK Consumer Law, there are three major points coverd by the term "Statutory Rights", which overrule ALL Terms & Conditions. I think two of them apply to this case.
2-IT IS WHAT YOU EXPECTED?
Secondly, if you have bought something on the basis of the seller’s description or a sample, you should expect the item to conform exactly to that description or sample. If it does not, you have the right to reject the goods, demand a full refund and possibly claim damages. This is still the case even where you have selected or examined the items for yourself before buying them.
3-SATISFACTORY QUALITY
Satisfactory quality is defined as what a ‘reasonable person’ would regard as acceptable, and takes into account factors such as price paid, fitness for purpose specified, appearance and finish, freedom from minor blemishes, safety and durability. If it becomes apparent that an item is not of the quality you were led to expect, you were not aware of any such defect when you bought it, and you bought from a seller acting ‘in the course of a business’ (i.e. not an informal sale), you are quite within your rights to go back to the retailer, even after some months of use. If a product develops a fault within the first 6 months, the assumption will be that this defect was present at the time of purchase and you will not have to prove anything. If you are returning an item after this 6 month time period, this automatic assumption does not apply, and it may be up to you to prove the fault did not occur through misuse. You should also consider aspects of durability and acceptance.
So, basically, Richard's (?) obsession with his Terms & Conditions means nothing.
2-IT IS WHAT YOU EXPECTED?
Secondly, if you have bought something on the basis of the seller’s description or a sample, you should expect the item to conform exactly to that description or sample. If it does not, you have the right to reject the goods, demand a full refund and possibly claim damages. This is still the case even where you have selected or examined the items for yourself before buying them.
3-SATISFACTORY QUALITY
Satisfactory quality is defined as what a ‘reasonable person’ would regard as acceptable, and takes into account factors such as price paid, fitness for purpose specified, appearance and finish, freedom from minor blemishes, safety and durability. If it becomes apparent that an item is not of the quality you were led to expect, you were not aware of any such defect when you bought it, and you bought from a seller acting ‘in the course of a business’ (i.e. not an informal sale), you are quite within your rights to go back to the retailer, even after some months of use. If a product develops a fault within the first 6 months, the assumption will be that this defect was present at the time of purchase and you will not have to prove anything. If you are returning an item after this 6 month time period, this automatic assumption does not apply, and it may be up to you to prove the fault did not occur through misuse. You should also consider aspects of durability and acceptance.
So, basically, Richard's (?) obsession with his Terms & Conditions means nothing.
Even his terms and conditions contradict the law in the UK, as you perfectly showed everybody in your comment.
Richard is obsessed with one thought:
"The customer wants to cheat me. He only tries to get a refund because he wants to use my EA for free."
The only solution to this paranoid obsession is the protection of his EA.
But Richard is either too lazy, too greedy, too stupid or too poor to implement a software protection.
Therefore his own "solution" to protect himself against the "free lunchers" is to lie, to change his terms, to stall, to make up "justifications" for refusing the due refund.
It is obvious from his victim´s trade statements that his EA is not profitable, even when the victim does use the recommended broker and the recommended settings.
Richard ignores all the evidence and claims that his EA is profitable, which is a lie.
Guilty of course and hopefully the UK authorities and/or the FBI will stop this scammer.
Equalizer
Private, 1st Class
- Messages
- 45
From: https://www.forexpeacearmy.com/fore...ng_vs-www-fantasydreamteam-com-ea-html-3.html
"A lot of reading there, but, I believe what happened can be summarized in 7 events. And a definite pattern is found.
1. December 10th - Richard offers 20% discount and 60 day guarantee.
2. January 15 - EA not performing, buyer requests refund. (Well within 60 day refund period).
3. January 17 - Richard does not deny that guarantee is still in effect, but requests "more time to get the EA to work". As an incentive he offers to "renew" the guarantee 60 days from today, or to expire some time in March.
4. February 5 - EA still losing money, buyer makes a SECOND request for refund (Which is still "within" the First 60 day guarantee period AND the SECOND 60 day guarantee period).
5. February 5 - Richard promises refund will be available on February 25, after PayPal account is unfrozen.
6. February 15 - Richard agrees to "immediately" send refund, without waiting for PayPal to unfreeze funds.
7. February 17 - Richard "announces" that he has decided to not issue any refund, and that he never agreed to any refund.....
Seems like an open and shut case to me......." :nerd:
"A lot of reading there, but, I believe what happened can be summarized in 7 events. And a definite pattern is found.
1. December 10th - Richard offers 20% discount and 60 day guarantee.
2. January 15 - EA not performing, buyer requests refund. (Well within 60 day refund period).
3. January 17 - Richard does not deny that guarantee is still in effect, but requests "more time to get the EA to work". As an incentive he offers to "renew" the guarantee 60 days from today, or to expire some time in March.
4. February 5 - EA still losing money, buyer makes a SECOND request for refund (Which is still "within" the First 60 day guarantee period AND the SECOND 60 day guarantee period).
5. February 5 - Richard promises refund will be available on February 25, after PayPal account is unfrozen.
6. February 15 - Richard agrees to "immediately" send refund, without waiting for PayPal to unfreeze funds.
7. February 17 - Richard "announces" that he has decided to not issue any refund, and that he never agreed to any refund.....
Seems like an open and shut case to me......." :nerd:
Simon Edwards
Corporal
- Messages
- 90
Stag
Sergeant
- Messages
- 206
Clearly guilty. The name of the EA speaks for itself. If this program is really so good, why does Richard keep on selling this "Holy Grail"? "
Two Percent Daily" - think about it.
Just one another thing: I'm new a trader on the forex market but has a background on the stock market and have a strong technical background in terms of MT4 programming skills. Last year when I decided to take an excursion to the forex market, one of the first thing was to give a try to the EAs. After having tested a few I decided to write my own. After the first test results I was shocked and if I had not been an experienced trader, I woluld have been fooled by my results (pls see attached pic with a two month backtest results where an initial 5000 USD deposit went up to nearly 200 000 within 2 months).
I would never sell this EA - and which is worse - would never use my own EA on a live account despite the results and I have good reason to say that.
Just wanted to add my two cents to this thread and warn you all that long term success comes from your investment into yourself, not from the EAs. Learning is short term pain, but long term gain.
All the best.
Two Percent Daily" - think about it.
Just one another thing: I'm new a trader on the forex market but has a background on the stock market and have a strong technical background in terms of MT4 programming skills. Last year when I decided to take an excursion to the forex market, one of the first thing was to give a try to the EAs. After having tested a few I decided to write my own. After the first test results I was shocked and if I had not been an experienced trader, I woluld have been fooled by my results (pls see attached pic with a two month backtest results where an initial 5000 USD deposit went up to nearly 200 000 within 2 months).
I would never sell this EA - and which is worse - would never use my own EA on a live account despite the results and I have good reason to say that.
Just wanted to add my two cents to this thread and warn you all that long term success comes from your investment into yourself, not from the EAs. Learning is short term pain, but long term gain.
All the best.
