GUILTY Case# 2012-024 | Raimundas vs www.fxdd.com www.fastbrokers.com
- Thread starter Raimundas
- Start date
Stormin_Norman
Private
- Messages
- 12
What EA were you running?
dbrawner
Private, 1st Class
- Messages
- 49
I am wondering if this is a specific situation rather than a blanket policy within FXDD. It also appears the civil action was against the introducing broker (FastBroker.com?). Did I miss something? Was FXDD included in the filing?
With respect to this particular case, I wonder whether the lack of comment from FXDD is due to this open litigation. Many (most) times legal counsel will restrict communications outside of the courtroom as it can impact a ongoing case or jeopardize confidentiality of sensitive information. Not saying this is what's going on here but it may explain FXDD's silence in this case.
As for the comment re: "bucket shops"; with the exception of special (high dollar) clients, all retail investment or trading accounts are fodder for the grist mill. From my short time on the inside of the industry, this is true at ALL financial institutions, not matter what the advertisements claim, and that goes for the supposed "good" ones too.
The small retail trader must understand their lack of influence when dealing with brokerage firms. Groups like FPA are the only leverage available. The bigger and visible this group gets, the more leverage can be applied.
All that being said, this case gets my vote of guilty because I feel the brokers in question are using "fine print" legalize to cover or justify someone's mistake. At least I hope that's what they're doing and that this is not a exposure of some deliberate "internal policy".
This was a tough one because of the heretofore reputation of the dealing broker (FXDD) and the apparent proper conduct of the plaintiff. This time I will error on the side of the trader.
With respect to this particular case, I wonder whether the lack of comment from FXDD is due to this open litigation. Many (most) times legal counsel will restrict communications outside of the courtroom as it can impact a ongoing case or jeopardize confidentiality of sensitive information. Not saying this is what's going on here but it may explain FXDD's silence in this case.
As for the comment re: "bucket shops"; with the exception of special (high dollar) clients, all retail investment or trading accounts are fodder for the grist mill. From my short time on the inside of the industry, this is true at ALL financial institutions, not matter what the advertisements claim, and that goes for the supposed "good" ones too.
The small retail trader must understand their lack of influence when dealing with brokerage firms. Groups like FPA are the only leverage available. The bigger and visible this group gets, the more leverage can be applied.
All that being said, this case gets my vote of guilty because I feel the brokers in question are using "fine print" legalize to cover or justify someone's mistake. At least I hope that's what they're doing and that this is not a exposure of some deliberate "internal policy".
This was a tough one because of the heretofore reputation of the dealing broker (FXDD) and the apparent proper conduct of the plaintiff. This time I will error on the side of the trader.
I have traded my own trading strategy, which was conducted manually.
No, FastBrokers isn't involved into this lawsuit. FXDD is a Plaintiff and my father is named Defendant (out of 10 other Defendants) to this Civil Case.
