Welcome to NexusFi: the best trading community on the planet, with over 150,000 members Sign Up Now for Free
Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
Quality education from leading professional traders
We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free for basic access, or support us by becoming an Elite Member -- see if you qualify for a discount below.
-- Big Mike, Site Administrator
(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)
Trading: Primarily Energy but also a little Equities, Fixed Income, Metals and Crypto.
Frequency: Many times daily
Duration: Never
Posts: 5,057 since Dec 2013
Thanks Given: 4,409
Thanks Received: 10,225
It is an interesting question, but really needs replies from people with knowledge (ie lawyers) and not just opinions of people (probably influenced by their position). I'd be interested in somebody with legal knowledge opinions on 'responsibility'. If we assume that 'non-real' trades will all get resolved I suspect what we are left with, is trades people did in reaction to seeing an inaccurate position. Legally who is responsible for any trades entered into due to inaccurate information? I can guess but I'm not a lawyer so will say nothing.
FYI as @Big Mike said complaints would go to the NFA. They are the self regulating body - not a trade association. The CFTC is more like the rules maker, while the NFA is more like the enforcer. SEC is securities and has no jurisdiction in futures.
Another question for NT/PC account holders. If your account was incorrectly showing negative over the last few days were you able to trade, or were you unable due to lack of margin/funds?
Absolutely, NFA is self-regulating. However, brokers/FCM's are highly motivated to have a clean record. I would venture to say that it is highly unlikely it would be necessary to involve the CFTC on most disputes. But absolutely, the option is there for the trader to have recourse. Which is great news! I also would venture to guess that working with the personnel NFA is far easier than with the CFTC.
Trading: Primarily Energy but also a little Equities, Fixed Income, Metals and Crypto.
Frequency: Many times daily
Duration: Never
Posts: 5,057 since Dec 2013
Thanks Given: 4,409
Thanks Received: 10,225
Should probably add that while the NFA is self-regulating, membership in the NFA by brokers (companies and individuals), swap dealers, floor traders etc is mandatory, and is mandated by the CFTC.
Thanks Mike, I am following this thread as it sounds similar to the problem PFG Best had back in 2008 or 2009. I was one of the lucky ones that were relentless and got my money back. The issue then was (as they explained to me) that there were 2 servers that held the trades and when I closed/Flatten the trades it only flatten them on the 1 server and not the other , it showed on my Strategy Runner as closed. The next morning there were still trades open. It took emails , phone calls to the US from Australia and I was relentless. I think it is crucial that there is a safer way for beginners to trade where the trade sits on a “managed desk” re if the trade loss is more than your set stop loss it closes out automatically. This should help traders feel more secure in case power failures or pc crashes etc. occur, like a gauranteed stop loss? If there is such a service can someone post it here please.
I can identify with these traders that complain as I have personally experienced this, needless to say PFG Best not long after this shut down I believe, whether it was because of this or something else. I think this is when I became a member of Big Mike in 2009
Hang in there fellas as Mike said these brokers want to have a clean record otherwise they will not survive just like The other one mentioned.