Problem LITE FOREX closed 17 of my positions in 45 seconds

[Shuvalov]

This is a situation that the client is innocent until proven guilty.

Why?
There are log files (sent to us by mikewise) which say that trades were closed from mikewise's end. Everything else is words. This is our position and I am not going to continue unless mikewise files a case against us.

 

[stevesmain]

Seems Liteforex took this so seriously that they did not even look into there own log records.
Only referencing Mike's file that he forwarded.

Would this be customer service at it's best?

Again the journal lists the actions taken on trades. Not showing how they were initiated.

No comments about the midstream repeated relogin?

Also there is sufficient lag time between the server receiving the request to close a trade to time it responds and reports a trade closed.
Looks like we ought to make reference to the thread "metaquotes" on the use of a plugin to delay orders being executed in a timely manor by the server. An average of what looks like 3 seconds to close the trades is not exactly "instant". Revealing?

 

[PipStar]

Does anyone really believe that any broker would steal from a trader the sum of 600 euro cents (6 euros)?

Common, get real.

 

[stevesmain]

Naturally it is not the amount.

Dealers will & do watch for trades that put them at risk. Therefore they will even work to prevent the small from becoming large.

What we are witnessing is essentially poor service, they either looked at the amount and couldn't be bothered to use there resources to see what happened or it may just be a prelude to stalling ea's.

 

[Pharaoh]

Hopefully mikewise can try another file type to show his trade logs. If it still doesn't work, posting the file type and size here will allow AsstMod to enable that style.

Checking the logs from both the user end and broker end should provide a pretty good amount of evidence about where the trades originated. If they really did close from the user end, then mikewise needs to figure out what went wrong on his end. If they didn't, then LiteForex has some explaining to do.

Personally, I think that most bad brokers would be smart enough to hold back on wrecking trades until there was enough money in the account to make it worthwhile. Sure, they'd monitor small, successful accounts, but only to be ready for the same trading strategy to be applied in a larger account.

 

[PipStar]

Naturally it is not the amount.
Dealers will & do watch for trades that put them at risk. Therefore they will even work to prevent the small from becoming large
.

Dealers do not watch for cents trades, I can assure you of this. But it's possible for a small fish to get caught in a bigger net.
Until proven otherwise, I dont believe a broker would close trades that would net them the sum of 6 euros.

 

[mikewise]

Hopefully mikewise can try another file type to show his trade logs. If it still doesn't work, posting the file type and size here will allow AsstMod to enable that style.

It still doesn't work: 20120106.log: Invalid File 7.41 KB
logs.rar: Invalid File 45.1 KB

I kept thinking how I could prove the incident. It seems the only way to prove it is to continuously capture the screen in a neverending videoclip. Well, I didn't do it and couldn't do it from now on because of the limited CPU power.

After a week of tense posts and arguments I finally got the conclusion:

- FPA doesn’t care about small accounts;
- FPA doesn’t care about small losses, be it they due to suspicious broker’s actions;
- some members and the people in charge at FPA are certain we can trade small accts in all confidence;
- the only suspicious broker’s actions for the people at FPA are withdrawal denial, confiscating money from acct, non-confirmation of deposit.

I can not change the way the above mentioned people are thinking.
On the other hand it’s not funny or relaxing for me to write these posts. There is a lot more to talk about people in charge/members attitude, but it’s useless.

 

[stevesmain]

This is a case that size doesn't matter! Dealers stations are set up to watch for discrepancy's in trades etc. made within their system regardless of the amount. I can assure you of that also!

The broker has never provided any logs. They have only used Mike's logs that he furnished to them. Perhaps an expanded log file may show how Mike traded? The broker will likely have to provide that ie. do some homework.

The probability here is that an ea got triggered, the trades closing mimics how a close trade script would do it. The question is how did it get activated? The broker's interest as it is only a cents acct. is not an example of good customer service. They both took shots at one another. It is time to analyze and figure out how this happened!

The FPA folks are trying to take a reasonable approach to this so as to cover all the bases, plus to endeavor to show some impartiality. Don't fault them for that!

 

[kantungemas]

After a week of tense posts and arguments I finally got the conclusion:

- FPA doesn’t care about small accounts;
- FPA doesn’t care about small losses, be it they due to suspicious broker’s actions;
- some members and the people in charge at FPA are certain we can trade small accts in all confidence;
- the only suspicious broker’s actions for the people at FPA are withdrawal denial, confiscating money from acct, non-confirmation of deposit.

I can not change the way the above mentioned people are thinking.
On the other hand it’s not funny or relaxing for me to write these posts. There is a lot more to talk about people in charge/members attitude, but it’s useless.

mikewise, i don't mean to be rude.. if i were you i would take those words back.

 

[Pharaoh]

Try saving your attachment as a zip file. Looks like rar isn't supported. If you can't save it as a zip file, then put in a request to have rar supported.

I personally care about scams large and small. I do however reserve the right to think about a situation, consider the evidence, apply some logic, and not declare a company to be automatically guilty. I also have noticed that bad brokers don't usually bother scamming until there's enough money on the table to pay some underpaid live chat person to keep handing out excuses. It is possible for a bad broker to scam for 6 euros, but that would be a losing proposition since it could easily cost more than 6 euros to deal with the angry client.

Denial of withdrawals, failure to acknowledge deposits, and confiscation of funds is much more straightforward and easy to prove. Proving a case of remote closing of trades would be inherently more difficult and will take a lot more effort from the trader. That's simple reality, not any bias.

You on the other hand seem to prefer to attack anyone who wants more evidence, asks about possible alternative explanations, and doesn't automatically fall into line behind you chanting "The Broker MUST be a Scam!" I suggest you take a day off to reexamine your attitude.