Problem IronFx : Whistleblower corner

[IronFX Officer]

Dear MC (name hidden to protect confidentiality),

Thank you for your comments, none of which is factually correct.

You chose not to disclose critical information in this public forum in order to create false and defamatory allegations.

The facts are as follows: you chose to refer your case to the FOS on 24 November 2015 and a decision was issued AGAINST you on 8 August 2017. Below you can find a relevant extract of the said decision which is self-explanatory.

Please state the correct facts and full facts when making allegations against the company

For any further information please refer to this link the “IronFX – Falsely Accused Broker” thread: https://www.forexpeacearmy.com/community/threads/ironfx-falsely-accused-broker.54115/

We consider this false allegation now closed.

addition: Please find attached the full FOS decision

Regards,

AsstModerator Note: The attachment to this post has been removed, The client's full name was exposed in this attachment. Posting it was unethical and may also have been illegal.

 

[IronFX Officer]

It looks as all Iron clients are on the losing side, kind of alarming…..hum

Nether the less, any phrasings paragraphs of Brokers Terms& Conditions may be disputed in front of legal instances, it doesn’t matter even if they have hundreds of Top British Scam Lawyers, we seen what happened to the last crook.

Also refereeing to our Taiwan member’s FOS decision, rather very clear to understand.

Dear oscarra,

Please refer to our answer to BinaryLad above (https://www.forexpeacearmy.com/community/threads/ironfx-whistleblower-corner.53703/page-7).

For any other issues or repeated defamatory commentary or false allegations you want to post on the FPA site please refer to the “IronFX – Falsely Accused Broker” thread: https://www.forexpeacearmy.com/community/threads/ironfx-falsely-accused-broker.54115/

Thank you.

 

[marc56]

I find scandalouse this type of answer and to say that my accusation are defamatory, I find scandalouse to see written “we consider this false allegation now closed”

I wrote that my withdrawal is in pending from maech 2015, is it not true ????

I wrote that none of addresses which I write don t respond, is it not true ???

I sent my case to FO in November 2015,right. The FO had 6 months for respond, more 3 months at max, for resolve the complaint, they replied to me about after 2 years ,why you don t write that this is outlawed ??

In the sentence of FO there is written that I deposit 47023 usd and whithdrawal 29731 usd, I never deposit in usd (liar) the amount is wrong…
I send to FO a table where I highlighted the correct amounts,with all proofs of wire bank, but they have not considered anything ... WHY ???

My net capital is 17292 usd,but this is reset by the “net loss” of 26953 usd.

Where did you get this amount? Why is it put in this formula ? This is an inventated formula..

How this net loss was calculated ?? I asked this information several times to you, but I never received answers ...

Deposit –whithdrawal= amount available, this is the only formula that you can apply !!!

The story is simple to understand, if the customer makes profits you reset profits , if the customer has losses this formula is applied, in short. Iron always wins ... this is not scam ???

In the document of FO there are many other lies .. I never had an IB, never traded with the same IP of other people, only lies. Even here I have repeatedly asked for evidence, not a single test has ever been sent to me, do you know why? Because they simply do not exist on this earth, because I've never done these things !!! These are only excuses for not paying ...

This is the truth, dear representative iron, my money is in your hands ... I do not have to be angry after 3 years? I can accept to lose some money doing wrong operations in trading, but this is not my case, this is a theft !! Iron was my first experience in trading, for this bad story I ruined the peace in my family, I can not accept this.

I'm not interested in war, I just want justice, I just want my money. I tell my true story on this forum, everyone is free to believe me or believe in you.​

 

[marc56]

Second point, the FO write : In this case trading behaviour raised reasonable suspicions that the complainant was engaged in abuse trading...
WHAT ???? Where are the proofs, HOW FO CAN ASSERT THIS?
I have asked many times the proofs... not 1 answer !!!!
It is clear,dear rapresentative ,that iron dictate this judgment to FO.


In addition,please read this informations..

Let’s make some facts about the Financial Ombudsman of Cyprus (FOS) clear. This Cypriot entity, which is not independent and does not fulfill the quality requirements foreseen by EU law, is not legally entitled to issue any decision on disputes against Cypriot financial providers.

Pursuant to directive 2013/11/EU on Alternative Dispute ResolutionCyprus was obliged to establish en entity for the off-court-resolution of consumer disputes (so called ADR entities), but has failed to establish such an ADR entity for the resolution of disputes with financial providers until now.

For this reason, upon complaints of damaged clients, the EU Commission has launched the first stage of an infringement procedure against Cyprus, which is an EU pilot procedure. You can read about this procedure in this document (http://bit.ly/2CmrDKF).

During the procedure, Cyprus has repeatedly admitted that the Financial Ombudsman is not an ADR entity and does not comply with the quality requirements of an ADR entity, which are

1. Procedure length up to 3 months (the FOS procedure takes 2 years)

2. Independence and Impartiality (the FOS depends on the CySEC and has engaged external financial analysts to solve the cases. These external financial analysts are possibly connected with the investigated financial providers)

3. Transparency (the FOS never issued an annual report of its activities. It would be interesting to know how many disputes were filed against IronFx)

4. Fairness (complainant were not given the possibility to respond to the abusive trading allegations of IronFx)

Please note the first cases against IronFx were filed to the FOS in early 2015. But the FOS began to examine the cases in early 2017, just after the General Auditor Report(http://bit.ly/2hNZFAQ ) (such an odd coincidence!).

Since the FOS was understaffed, a couple of external financial analysts had to be engaged in order to solve the cases, which have reached the number of 2500.

The decisions were made in a rush, just a couple of days after receiving a statement of IronFx. The complainants were not given the possibility to respond.

In its decisions, the FOS basically recognized the claim of the client for the initial deposit, by deducting the trading losses and zeroing the profit.

Despite accounting all trading losses, the FOS did not recognize the claim of the client for the trading PROFIT, by fully accepting IronFx allegations of “abusive trading”.

These allegations were never supported by evidence. IronFx supported the allegations only with an “Expert Opinion” issued by the law firm Reed Smith LLP (these lawyers were so smart not to call this piece of paper “legal opinion”.). Read it, it is an explosive document: http://bit.ly/2fDlleJ

Among other, the FOS invokes in its decision the contract term (Art. 17) which was found to be unfair by Cyprus Consumer Protection Service (http://bit.ly/2mBsGkX)

You can read 2 FOS decisions here:

http://bit.ly/2Ghwj80 (this case is unbelievable. The client had never traded, but his funds were illegally withheld for 2 years)

http://bit.ly/2ntBNmn(here you can see how the claim for profit was not recognized)



Now I ask to you representative, is this the way to solve my case? Publish the simple opinion of the FO about my case means having it resolved ???

I still do not see my money, if you consider the matter closed I have no other chance than bringing you to court, and you can be sure I will do this ...

 

[IronFX Officer]

Dear IronFx representative,
did you say that there are no criminal files against managers of your company?
Please read the letter that was sent by the Munich Prosecutor to some witnesses. It does not seem to relate to a non-existing file:

Dear IRONFXSCAM,

Without identifying yourself as a client of the company, you continue posting repeated and baseless defamatory allegations.

For your latest attempt to defamate the company (or any other issues or repeated defamatory commentary or false allegations you want to post on the FPA site) please refer to the “IronFX – Falsely Accused Broker” thread: https://www.forexpeacearmy.com/community/threads/ironfx-falsely-accused-broker.54115/ and in particular Point (3) of the said posting.

Should you have any specific, factual complaint, we welcome you once again to identify yourself as a client of the company by providing the relevant details.

Thank you

 

[IronFX Officer]

Second point, the FO write : In this case trading behaviour raised reasonable suspicions that the complainant was engaged in abuse trading...
WHAT ???? Where are the proofs, HOW FO CAN ASSERT THIS?
I have asked many times the proofs... not 1 answer !!!!
It is clear,dear rapresentative ,that iron dictate this judgment to FO.


In addition,please read this informations..

Let’s make some facts about the Financial Ombudsman of Cyprus (FOS) clear. This Cypriot entity, which is not independent and does not fulfill the quality requirements foreseen by EU law, is not legally entitled to issue any decision on disputes against Cypriot financial providers.

Pursuant to directive 2013/11/EU on Alternative Dispute ResolutionCyprus was obliged to establish en entity for the off-court-resolution of consumer disputes (so called ADR entities), but has failed to establish such an ADR entity for the resolution of disputes with financial providers until now.

For this reason, upon complaints of damaged clients, the EU Commission has launched the first stage of an infringement procedure against Cyprus, which is an EU pilot procedure. You can read about this procedure in this document (http://bit.ly/2CmrDKF).

During the procedure, Cyprus has repeatedly admitted that the Financial Ombudsman is not an ADR entity and does not comply with the quality requirements of an ADR entity, which are

1. Procedure length up to 3 months (the FOS procedure takes 2 years)

2. Independence and Impartiality (the FOS depends on the CySEC and has engaged external financial analysts to solve the cases. These external financial analysts are possibly connected with the investigated financial providers)

3. Transparency (the FOS never issued an annual report of its activities. It would be interesting to know how many disputes were filed against IronFx)

4. Fairness (complainant were not given the possibility to respond to the abusive trading allegations of IronFx)

Please note the first cases against IronFx were filed to the FOS in early 2015. But the FOS began to examine the cases in early 2017, just after the General Auditor Report(http://bit.ly/2hNZFAQ ) (such an odd coincidence!).

Since the FOS was understaffed, a couple of external financial analysts had to be engaged in order to solve the cases, which have reached the number of 2500.

The decisions were made in a rush, just a couple of days after receiving a statement of IronFx. The complainants were not given the possibility to respond.

In its decisions, the FOS basically recognized the claim of the client for the initial deposit, by deducting the trading losses and zeroing the profit.

Despite accounting all trading losses, the FOS did not recognize the claim of the client for the trading PROFIT, by fully accepting IronFx allegations of “abusive trading”.

These allegations were never supported by evidence. IronFx supported the allegations only with an “Expert Opinion” issued by the law firm Reed Smith LLP (these lawyers were so smart not to call this piece of paper “legal opinion”.). Read it, it is an explosive document: http://bit.ly/2fDlleJ

Among other, the FOS invokes in its decision the contract term (Art. 17) which was found to be unfair by Cyprus Consumer Protection Service (http://bit.ly/2mBsGkX)

You can read 2 FOS decisions here:

http://bit.ly/2Ghwj80 (this case is unbelievable. The client had never traded, but his funds were illegally withheld for 2 years)

http://bit.ly/2ntBNmn(here you can see how the claim for profit was not recognized)



Now I ask to you representative, is this the way to solve my case? Publish the simple opinion of the FO about my case means having it resolved ???

I still do not see my money, if you consider the matter closed I have no other chance than bringing you to court, and you can be sure I will do this ...

Dear marc56,

We have no comment on the performance of independent departments of the Republic of Cyprus. If you have any specific factual complaints, please take these up directly with them. Or you can choose to use the Courts of Justice to further resolve your rejected claim.

Both ESMA and the EU Parliament have confirmed in more than one occasion (see e.g. the failed petition of July 2017), the sole jurisdiction of the Republic of Cyprus in resolving any purported complaints that you may have.

The matter of fact is that in all your repeated postings on the FPA site (until yesterday), you have chosen to intentionally conceal (i) the true facts of your case and (ii) the fact that you had your case already judged and rejected by the FOS. This defines the defamatory nature of your repeated and baseless postings.

For any other issues or repeated defamatory commentary or false allegations you want to post on the FPA site please refer to the “IronFX – Falsely Accused Broker” thread: https://www.forexpeacearmy.com/community/threads/ironfx-falsely-accused-broker.54115/

Thank you.

 

[IronFX Officer]

I find scandalouse this type of answer and to say that my accusation are defamatory, I find scandalouse to see written “we consider this false allegation now closed”

I wrote that my withdrawal is in pending from maech 2015, is it not true ????

I wrote that none of addresses which I write don t respond, is it not true ???

I sent my case to FO in November 2015,right. The FO had 6 months for respond, more 3 months at max, for resolve the complaint, they replied to me about after 2 years ,why you don t write that this is outlawed ??

In the sentence of FO there is written that I deposit 47023 usd and whithdrawal 29731 usd, I never deposit in usd (liar) the amount is wrong…
I send to FO a table where I highlighted the correct amounts,with all proofs of wire bank, but they have not considered anything ... WHY ???

My net capital is 17292 usd,but this is reset by the “net loss” of 26953 usd.

Where did you get this amount? Why is it put in this formula ? This is an inventated formula..

How this net loss was calculated ?? I asked this information several times to you, but I never received answers ...

Deposit –whithdrawal= amount available, this is the only formula that you can apply !!!

The story is simple to understand, if the customer makes profits you reset profits , if the customer has losses this formula is applied, in short. Iron always wins ... this is not scam ???

In the document of FO there are many other lies .. I never had an IB, never traded with the same IP of other people, only lies. Even here I have repeatedly asked for evidence, not a single test has ever been sent to me, do you know why? Because they simply do not exist on this earth, because I've never done these things !!! These are only excuses for not paying ...

This is the truth, dear representative iron, my money is in your hands ... I do not have to be angry after 3 years? I can accept to lose some money doing wrong operations in trading, but this is not my case, this is a theft !! Iron was my first experience in trading, for this bad story I ruined the peace in my family, I can not accept this.

I'm not interested in war, I just want justice, I just want my money. I tell my true story on this forum, everyone is free to believe me or believe in you.​

Dear marc56,

Please refer to the response to your second consecutive comment.

Thank you,

 

[marc56]

Unfortunately, as I thought, this discussion is useless ... it is sterile. Keep on saying that I have hidden my personal data ... I was the one I proposed to you to analyze my case in a public way, is not it? I've been on this forum for a few days, when I had to explain all this? I expose the reality 'of the facts, you contnuate to repeat defamatory this ... I ask questions, you do not answer, I report real articles about the FO, you do not comment this ... I have written so many times to the FO, but none response has been given on evidence of the facts. Fo has defamed me, writing that I have done "strange things" but without evidence, this is reality, and is there for all to see. You are not going to solve any issues with me, you hide behind a finger, no participation, no collaboration. I consider our discussion closed. Of course I will update the participants to this forum on the outcome of the court case that in a few days will leave ...

 

[oscarra]

Unfortunately, as I thought, this discussion is useless ... it is sterile.

…could have told you from the beginning, again it need’s EU Courts

Failures of Cysec and it’s authorized Brokers are of such extent, there is no other option !

Just considering the Bonus BS, no EU Judge will waste time on reading Irons T&C, he will simply ask are they TRUE or FAKE

…..why did Cysec finally ban Bonuses, rather easy option, instead of obliging it’s Brokers to pay out Bonuses ( not even mentioning the resulting damaging since many years…BO etc etc….

Do trust EU Courts, don’t believe any of Iron comments

 

[IronFX Officer]

Unfortunately, as I thought, this discussion is useless ... it is sterile. Keep on saying that I have hidden my personal data ... I was the one I proposed to you to analyze my case in a public way, is not it? I've been on this forum for a few days, when I had to explain all this? I expose the reality 'of the facts, you contnuate to repeat defamatory this ... I ask questions, you do not answer, I report real articles about the FO, you do not comment this ... I have written so many times to the FO, but none response has been given on evidence of the facts. Fo has defamed me, writing that I have done "strange things" but without evidence, this is reality, and is there for all to see. You are not going to solve any issues with me, you hide behind a finger, no participation, no collaboration. I consider our discussion closed. Of course I will update the participants to this forum on the outcome of the court case that in a few days will leave ...

Dear marc56,

Thank you for your posting.

We refute your comments.


1. You suggested to present the case in the forum and upon doing so it transpired that you had concealed significant information in all your postings.

2. You have made repeated postings, not just the ones recently, where you again concealed the true facts of your case.

3. You are very welcome to present your case to other threads on FPA and we will respond in a similar factual manner.

4. You are also very welcome to pursue your case in a true Court of Justice where we will defend any claims that you may have in line with the evidence presented in these exchanges.


For any other issues or repeated defamatory commentary or false allegations you want to post on the FPA site please refer to the “IronFX – Falsely Accused Broker” thread: https://www.forexpeacearmy.com/community/threads/ironfx-falsely-accused-broker.54115/


Thank you