1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

NOT GUILTY PER REGULATOR Case# 2015-004 | psunardi vs icmarkets.com

Discussion in 'Not Guilty Verdicts' started by psunardi, Jan 5, 2015.

?

Based on the available evidence, do you believe that ICMarkets.com is guilty?

Poll closed May 31, 2015.
  1. Guilty

    47 vote(s)
    94.0%
  2. Not Guilty

    3 vote(s)
    6.0%
  1. psunardi

    psunardi Corporal

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2014
    Messages:
    72
    Likes Received:
    14
    Since FPA overruling the vote to not quilty verdict , i thinks FPA moderator must also remove this header "January-February 2015: A large number of suspicious and fake positive reviews have been submitted for IC Markets." to fully support icmarkets .and let's them write 5 star fake reviews to continous misleading customer
    Note : I dont know what kind of regulator they are ??
    1.when i send all my very important evidence including VPS ip address windows username and password to regulator . they send all my information ,windows username and password to icm and lets icm log in to my vps .is it fair ??? the funniest thing is they agree time zone is not important , it is legal for broker have a 2 different time zone .LOL

     
  2. Pharaoh

    Pharaoh Colonel

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2007
    Messages:
    19,679
    Likes Received:
    2,229
    I personally don't see any connection between this case and an issue of reviews. I haven't yet seen a regulator try to involve itself in ruling on which reviews are and are not fake. If one ever did, I think AsstModerator would be publishing the apologies the regulator would be forced to give him for wasting his time.

    Looks to me like the ruling does explain the time zones issue very clearly. If there's still any doubt, it shouldn't be hard to find some traders at the FPA with accounts running in each servier to verify that when all the candles are adjusted to GMT, they will be the same.

    The only thing I'm mystified about is the remaining dispute over how many trades were involved. Surely the access level the regulator had would have enabled it to confirm the exact number of trades. The fact that they left this on the table is truly bizarre.
     
  3. psunardi

    psunardi Corporal

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2014
    Messages:
    72
    Likes Received:
    14
    if you read all the evidence that I have proposed to the regulator , you will clearly see that the regulator were always on the icm side , although icm submitted fake & edited evidence to regulator .
    All my solid evidence include vps data , screen capture 2 different price & timezone, bla bla , they don t want to invetigate it , LOL
     
  4. psunardi

    psunardi Corporal

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2014
    Messages:
    72
    Likes Received:
    14
    if you read the all the 5 star reviews , you 'll see that all the reviews were written by the same person ....
     
  5. Pharaoh

    Pharaoh Colonel

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2007
    Messages:
    19,679
    Likes Received:
    2,229
    There's something we firmly agree on. I do see a very odd pattern in ICM's recent reviews. It looks like someone is paying freelancers around the world to praise their customer service and providing pre-written reviews.
     
    psunardi likes this.

Share This Page