Trader333
Moderator
- Messages
- 8,746
- Likes
- 1,025
You should also consider trading the futures. FB is very expensive compared to IB (Interactive Brokers). Trading with FB, you are actually trading the futures. You have a much lower price for the futures on IB, on the other hand you have to pay tax on your profit, but at the same time if you are in the red at the end of the year you can deduct loses from your tax.
Message me and hopefully your statement could help my case against CMC ..... this needs to be a statement of truth, I will be very greatfull if you could ...
Tom
F
Hi Paul
Do you have an account with FB? What's your experience with them been?
I'm suprised to hear '...absolutely no requotes...'! Are they really delivering a good execution service?
:-0
Hi Paul
Do you have an account with FB? What's your experience with them been?
I'm suprised to hear '...absolutely no requotes...'! Are they really delivering a good execution service?
:-0
Claudia123
Established member
- Messages
- 724
- Likes
- 57
There are no requotes you dealing direct to market (DMA) Try a demo of the platform -that takes a little bit working out and you need a separate charting package.
Phil Mibbutz
Experienced member
- Messages
- 1,860
- Likes
- 58
I haven't heard much praise about their spread/commission rate.
I've gone through their website futuresbetting.com a bit and it certainly looks VERY interesting. Certainly compared to what else is out there in terms of spreads and executions, they seem much tighter and transparent! They even seem to offer some type of Level 2 access :-0 for spreadbetting?!?!?!
gotta see this!What's not so clear to me yet are their margin requirements and trade sizing. They seem to use normal futures 'lots'/contracts as opposed to £'s per point which is standard in Spread betting.
If anyone has any experience with FB or further details along this line would be useful to know. Also interested in details of any threads on T2W with further info thanks.
By next week details of original responses regarding the on going sarga with CMC & Obusman will be here for all to read.
Will be interesting reading especially when CMC state that I phoned there dealing desk in there response and the Obusman reports its in his opinion that is what they meant to say was I claimed to called the dealing desk. Plus other iregualities.
Will be interesting reading especially when CMC state that I phoned there dealing desk in there response and the Obusman reports its in his opinion that is what they meant to say was I claimed to called the dealing desk. Plus other iregualities.
Claudia123
Established member
- Messages
- 724
- Likes
- 57
hey i genuinely wish you well but be prepared for the worst. If CMC thought for one minute they were wrong they would have paid up. These guys employ the top legal people and would be mad to lose a case for money which to them is peanuts. But i do wish you luck.
stevespray
Experienced member
- Messages
- 1,289
- Likes
- 156
TomTom,
I’ve been following this thread off and on with some interest.
Whilst I feel that your pursuit of apparent justice is well meaning I would warn you that the only way to realistically take this matter forward is a more direct course of action – ie a Civil Action to remedy the matter.
Over the last few years I’ve been involved in a number of matters with the Financial Ombudsman Service and to be quite frank they are flipping useless. In my experience you can generally gauge the validity of your complaint on the length of time they take to respond to it. If they respond quickly then I would suggest that you have given them a complaint where they can easily defend the firm in question.
I sent them a case once and they took 2 years!! That’s because my case was valid. In the end I had to force the Ombudsman to respond to my complaint – If I hadn’t the complaint would have just been moved lower and lower down an increasing pile of cases. (Seriously – I had to email them every week or two for the best part of six months.) Ultimately they made up a load of nonsense about how they were unable to find in my favour. Basically they just found a series of reasons why they couldn’t consider many different types of evidence which I presented. The Ombudsman Service also maintained that a firm cannot gain an advantage by holding client orders (in Dow Futures) for almost 60 seconds before deciding on whether to execute or reject the order – apparently “No advantage is gained in such a situation because the dealer does not know which way the market will move after the order is accepted or rejected”. Obviously I pi$$ed myself laughing when I read it. Oh... and as an aside, the Ombudsman decided to ignore what the T&C’s actually said on the matter since the T&C’s appeared to favour me!
The fact is that the FOS do not know what the hell they are doing. Let us be honest and realistic here, if anyone down there was any good at this stuff they wouldn’t be working for the flipping regulator would they??
Also bear in mind that most of the City’s financial firms know how to handle the FOS. They know that they aren’t the sharpest tools in the box that is for sure. In some cases they ignore the FOS all together. When I presented a list of questions for the FOS to answer the firm in question failed to respond to the FOS.
Don’t hold your breath with these muppets. Your best line of approach, in my opinion, is to do all the donkey work yourself. For instance, in your case, you need to find out if all dealing lines MUST be recorded under FSA regulations – don’t ask the FOS to find out for you – FIND OUT YOURSELF and then put it in your report to the FOS. If you ask the FOS to find out this info they will not bother because they will not ask anything which potentially means that they place the firm in an awkward situation. Can you see how the game works now? Your best bet is to provide the FOS with a list of facts that you have already researched ie the recorded dealing lines etc. Present the FOS with anything which is conflicting evidence.
Feel free to PM for any advice.
Good luck,
Steve.
I’ve been following this thread off and on with some interest.
Whilst I feel that your pursuit of apparent justice is well meaning I would warn you that the only way to realistically take this matter forward is a more direct course of action – ie a Civil Action to remedy the matter.
Over the last few years I’ve been involved in a number of matters with the Financial Ombudsman Service and to be quite frank they are flipping useless. In my experience you can generally gauge the validity of your complaint on the length of time they take to respond to it. If they respond quickly then I would suggest that you have given them a complaint where they can easily defend the firm in question.
I sent them a case once and they took 2 years!! That’s because my case was valid. In the end I had to force the Ombudsman to respond to my complaint – If I hadn’t the complaint would have just been moved lower and lower down an increasing pile of cases. (Seriously – I had to email them every week or two for the best part of six months.) Ultimately they made up a load of nonsense about how they were unable to find in my favour. Basically they just found a series of reasons why they couldn’t consider many different types of evidence which I presented. The Ombudsman Service also maintained that a firm cannot gain an advantage by holding client orders (in Dow Futures) for almost 60 seconds before deciding on whether to execute or reject the order – apparently “No advantage is gained in such a situation because the dealer does not know which way the market will move after the order is accepted or rejected”. Obviously I pi$$ed myself laughing when I read it. Oh... and as an aside, the Ombudsman decided to ignore what the T&C’s actually said on the matter since the T&C’s appeared to favour me!
The fact is that the FOS do not know what the hell they are doing. Let us be honest and realistic here, if anyone down there was any good at this stuff they wouldn’t be working for the flipping regulator would they??
Also bear in mind that most of the City’s financial firms know how to handle the FOS. They know that they aren’t the sharpest tools in the box that is for sure. In some cases they ignore the FOS all together. When I presented a list of questions for the FOS to answer the firm in question failed to respond to the FOS.
Don’t hold your breath with these muppets. Your best line of approach, in my opinion, is to do all the donkey work yourself. For instance, in your case, you need to find out if all dealing lines MUST be recorded under FSA regulations – don’t ask the FOS to find out for you – FIND OUT YOURSELF and then put it in your report to the FOS. If you ask the FOS to find out this info they will not bother because they will not ask anything which potentially means that they place the firm in an awkward situation. Can you see how the game works now? Your best bet is to provide the FOS with a list of facts that you have already researched ie the recorded dealing lines etc. Present the FOS with anything which is conflicting evidence.
Feel free to PM for any advice.
Good luck,
Steve.
fibbinstarchi
Active member
- Messages
- 164
- Likes
- 4
CMC were originally trading as Deal4Free, they were nicked named 'Steal4Free' for obvious reasons, maybe these people should be aware of that. I wouldn't let them get away with it, start a website up, CMC sucks.com or some simular, that will put off potential mug punters!
stevespray
Experienced member
- Messages
- 1,289
- Likes
- 156
...Or it might cause them to persue you through the courts for damage to their business! Afterall all TomTom has at the moment his large loss and a failed complaint made to the UK regulator - all a court will see is an angry losing client who failed to recover his funds who then took matters into his own hands.
Far better to focus on the case itself imho dispite the fact that a spoof website might make you feel better in the short term. As I mentioned before I feel that a key aspect of this case is the recording of the dealing lines. Does the firm really only record certain 'random' conversations or is it actually hiding this particular recording because it doesnt benefit the firm to reveal it?? If the firm is obligated to record such conversations but either failed to do so or cannot find the recording then it can reasonably be claimed that the firm acted unprofessionally and does not show a reasonable amount of care and attention in fullfilling its contractual obligations. Has anyone actually read the T&Cs to see what is agreed on these matters?
Steve.
Good point Stevespray
No point diffusing energy into activities of dubious impact, though I think you should not be silent about it.
Also beware the impact this whole charade could have on your all important trading psychology.
All the best TomTom!
No point diffusing energy into activities of dubious impact, though I think you should not be silent about it.
Also beware the impact this whole charade could have on your all important trading psychology.
All the best TomTom!
I have an account and yes there are no requotes, the reason being they hedge all trades straight into the Futures markets hence taking no positions against their clients. If they say they want their clients to win as if they win they bet more and they make extra spreads. The fills are lightnig quick.
I used to trade in the city using TT and the fills on FB are just as quick the only difference being they do not have a static ladder.
I used to trade in the city using TT and the fills on FB are just as quick the only difference being they do not have a static ladder.
Trader333
Moderator
- Messages
- 8,746
- Likes
- 1,025
Compared to who ? If you wish to trade through the use of SB then they have an enviable reputation based on the feedback from most of those that use them from this site. You may not get the lowest spread but then you wont be re-quoted or falsely stopped out either. I use direct access so it is not applicable to me and I was only relaying what others have said.
Paul
Phil Mibbutz
Experienced member
- Messages
- 1,860
- Likes
- 58
I appreciate the advantages of FB, but 5pt on YM, for instance, is pretty steep. The undoubted speed of the platform doesn't help much because it's difficult to make profitable short-term trades with such a wide spread. Ordinary SB is fine for longer term stuff, and you can get a 2pt YM spread.
Similar threads
- Black Swan
- Spread Betting & CFDs
