On 17 June, I gained a nice profit trading on GBPUSD. The prices of the two transactions were filled at 11:29:59 (platform time). Later, XM accused me of price latency arbitrage. In particular, they said that I was "taking advantage of the internet delays which do not reflect the market rates at the time your trades were executed." Thus, it is vital to decide whether the price entered was reflective of the market rates. In my formal complaint, I told and showed XM the evidence that it was so.
On 6 August, XM told me they would send me their final response that day. I am still waiting for it despite repeated reminders over the phone, e-mails and live chats.
As to the legitimacy of the cancellation itself, it is crucial to determine whether the price originally offered and confirmed by the business was correct or not. If not, XM cannot rely on the price latency arbitrage clause and should honor my trades. My account statement shows that the entry time of the sell order was 11:29:59. It also shows that the price quoted by XM was 1.69758. XM now says it was not a market price. Bloomberg quotation taken at 11:29:59 shows the price of 1.6978 which is three pips better for me. Given the widened spread, which naturally makes the price worse for me, the price quoted by the business was clearly reflective of the market rates and no error took place.
To pre-empt XM’s argument that their ticks may be different from the market rates-or at least from my evidence-I compared the closing prices. It is noteworthy that the closing price at 11:32:18 in the Account Statement is 1.69438 and that Bloomberg at the same time shows the price of 1.6943-the same one.
To conclude, XM cancelled my trades alleging that they were based on incorrect prices, however, this did not take place and therefore they should honor the trades.
On 6 August, XM told me they would send me their final response that day. I am still waiting for it despite repeated reminders over the phone, e-mails and live chats.
As to the legitimacy of the cancellation itself, it is crucial to determine whether the price originally offered and confirmed by the business was correct or not. If not, XM cannot rely on the price latency arbitrage clause and should honor my trades. My account statement shows that the entry time of the sell order was 11:29:59. It also shows that the price quoted by XM was 1.69758. XM now says it was not a market price. Bloomberg quotation taken at 11:29:59 shows the price of 1.6978 which is three pips better for me. Given the widened spread, which naturally makes the price worse for me, the price quoted by the business was clearly reflective of the market rates and no error took place.
To pre-empt XM’s argument that their ticks may be different from the market rates-or at least from my evidence-I compared the closing prices. It is noteworthy that the closing price at 11:32:18 in the Account Statement is 1.69438 and that Bloomberg at the same time shows the price of 1.6943-the same one.
To conclude, XM cancelled my trades alleging that they were based on incorrect prices, however, this did not take place and therefore they should honor the trades.
