Spreadbetting group London Capital may have to pay up to £7.7 million to clients

PualoP said:
Considering the compliance guys at Alpari got fired, personally fined and banned from working in finace ever agian, for sending money to different bank accounts than the original source, you can kind of see why they're being cautious.
Click to expand...

It's not just LCG. It's other spreads firms and the sports bookmakers as well. The rules really are pretty clear on this, companies have to refund to source if you want to keep your nose clean or there are all sorts of AML (anti money laundering) implications. You can spout off saying "I'll have my money back how I want" but that is just naive wishful thinking. Unless circumstances are exceptional then you'll always get it your refund back to the source. Get used to it. And if you think about it for a couple of minutes you'll realise the reasons why are pretty obvious.
 
Not always to the same source

" Please note that MasterCard do not accept refunds from gaming organisations. If you deposit funds using a MasterCard we will make refunds to a bank account in your name, or to the default bank account details registered on your spread betting account. It is possible that we may require proof of your Bank Account details to establish that the account is in your name. This should be in the form of an original bank statement dated within the last three months. The statement should include your name, account number and, for international clients, an IBAN or Swift Code. We may also need sight of the card in question via faxed or scanned documentation. "

http://www.capitalspreads.com/generic/faqs.shtml
 
I wanted refund back to the original source. Provided them with proof of the online transaction however they claimed it should be screenshot instead of printout. A year ago or so such document was sufficient since they did not object anything.
 
PualoP said:
Considering the compliance guys at Alpari got fired, personally fined and banned from working in finace ever agian, for sending money to different bank accounts than the original source, you can kind of see why they're being cautious.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

Blame the scum at the European Commission for bringing in the anti money laundering directives, then blame the scum of the Labour Party for their over enthusiastic implementation.

They should all be put against a wall and shot.
 
Jon41 said:
It's not just LCG. It's other spreads firms and the sports bookmakers as well. The rules really are pretty clear on this, companies have to refund to source if you want to keep your nose clean or there are all sorts of AML (anti money laundering) implications. You can spout off saying "I'll have my money back how I want" but that is just naive wishful thinking. Unless circumstances are exceptional then you'll always get it your refund back to the source. Get used to it. And if you think about it for a couple of minutes you'll realise the reasons why are pretty obvious.
Click to expand...

i did think about it.

and thats why i got my funds returned back to a different source from four different spreadbetting companies this week.

thanks.
 
Jon41 said:
It's not just LCG. It's other spreads firms and the sports bookmakers as well. The rules really are pretty clear on this, companies have to refund to source if you want to keep your nose clean or there are all sorts of AML (anti money laundering) implications. You can spout off saying "I'll have my money back how I want" but that is just naive wishful thinking. Unless circumstances are exceptional then you'll always get it your refund back to the source. Get used to it. And if you think about it for a couple of minutes you'll realise the reasons why are pretty obvious.
Click to expand...


Get real? So the debit card I used to fund the account has now expired.
How exactly are they going to refund back to the original source?

That's hypothetical, because I've not yet had this situation with LCG directly, although I have with firms completely unrelated to LCG, and also with an LCG "White Label Partner". In all cases, I simply registered a new card (not necessarily with the same bank, funded the account with a small amount of additional money, and then requested a refund to the new card, which eventually, I received. Whether this would work with LCG directly, I have yet to find out.


It sounds to me like they are, if you'll pardon the technical term, taking the pïss.
 
I have finally been able to spend some time reading this thread as I am sure you can appreciate I have been very busy recently.

Firstly, I am not going to add anything further to the RNSs we have released to the market regarding the topic of this thread, which strictly speaking shouldn’t be posted on the spread betting forum as the potential losses in question (which we are appealing against) do not relate to our spread betting business. Please refer to our RNSs for clarity on the situation, which confirm that we remain well capitalised and will continue to do so even if the appeal goes against us.

Secondly, in respect of our deposit and withdrawal policies these are very specific and clearly outlined in our FAQs section online. We will only return funds to their source and where this is not possible we will need to confirm the identity and legitimacy of the destination so as to prevent money laundering. The rules are set by the FSA and interpreted by our compliance department, so different firms may have different policies due to their interpretation of the rules. Also, we live in a time where London, being one of the biggest financial centres of the world, is consistently being targeted by money launderers. This means that in certain circumstances it is unfortunately not straight forward getting funds back to people, whether it’s £1 or £1m.

Finally, we segregate all retail client funds which is what we are required to do under FSA rules. I might add that, unlike many of our competitors, LCG has always done this. This means that unless the bank where we place your money (always one of the big four UK banks) goes bust, no jokes please!, your money is safe.

I would be grateful if anyone who has any further questions regarding this directs it to my Customer Support department or the Capital Spreads thread.
 
This refund of money nonsense shouldn't be on this thread, it also betrays how fookin small time the complainant is..

I met with new accountants this morning, first thing he (they) did (before he'd even talk to me, even though I'd be introduced by a associate company) was ask for ID and utility bill and or bank statement. Do you clueless whoppers have any idea of the money laundering regs, how tight they are and if a company such as LGC gets it *wrong* how it could impact on them?

Now ask yourself how easy it would be to get dirty money into (and more importantly re-cycle out) the SB business without the right checks being in place...?
 
Black Swan said:
This refund of money nonsense shouldn't be on this thread, it also betrays how fookin small time the complainant is..

I met with new accountants this morning, first thing he (they) did (before he'd even talk to me, even though I'd be introduced by a associate company) was ask for ID and utility bill and or bank statement. Do you clueless whoppers have any idea of the money laundering regs, how tight they are and if a company such as LGC gets it *wrong* how it could impact on them?

Now ask yourself how easy it would be to get dirty money into (and more importantly re-cycle out) the SB business without the right checks being in place...?
Click to expand...



this was about non return of money when the proof of id was provided, if you pop into the capital spreads thread it seems to be blowing up in there as well.

i proved who i was and wanted my money back - the method refund to another account should be available. ITS MY MONEY. (maybe the EU fault yada yada)

as i will reiterate, i got my money back to a different account with 4 different spreadbetting vendors.

so dont tell me it cant be done and its against regulation - because if it is, they have all broken it haven't they?

thanks.
 
francis

frankly I would say that if you have really asked for money back to a different account than the one you funded from and they did not ask a single question or require proof then "YES they are not following the ML/Fraud procedures as Capital Spreads reads them". Perhaps you could could send a list to the FSA ML division!

Simon
 
capitalspreads said:
francis

frankly I would say that if you have really asked for money back to a different account than the one you funded from and they did not ask a single question or require proof then "YES they are not following the ML/Fraud procedures as Capital Spreads reads them". Perhaps you could could send a list to the FSA ML division!

Simon
Click to expand...

maybe i could simon.

care to to throw me a bribe?

but your post shows you haven't read a single thing i have written, like the rest of the clowns caring to comment on nothing they have any personal interest in.
 
montmorencyt2w said:
Rather interesting, and not very good news for LCG I suspect.
Click to expand...

If, as the news story suggests, white label customers migrate across to the main Capital Spreads platform then surely this is good news for LCG since there is no soft commission to pay out?


Steve.
 
stevespray said:
If, as the news story suggests, white label customers migrate across to the main Capital Spreads platform then surely this is good news for LCG since there is no soft commission to pay out?


Steve.
Click to expand...

Paddy power spread betting punters aren't exactly smart money (more like cannon fodder ;) ).

There is probably a very high turnover among them, but also a constant stream of new ones never the less.

All clients that migrate will probably be gone within six months. and there will be no replacements from new paddy power signups.
 
stevespray said:
If, as the news story suggests, white label customers migrate across to the main Capital Spreads platform then surely this is good news for LCG since there is no soft commission to pay out?
Click to expand...


Echoing Donaldduke's comment somewhat, plus...

...it is still an IF...IF they migrate...I mean their accounts might be migrated for them, but they might not bother to use them.

- It might mean that the white label model is beginning to lose its appeal.

- The white label model meant that LCG could in effect "harvest" customers from the recreuiting labours of others. One this lot are "used up" (as per DD's comment), LCG are going to have to recruit them themselves.
 
What people need to realise, if spread betting companies are like any other brokerages, the importance of clients is gonna be a kinda pareto distribution.... thousands of piddlers is going to be far less important than one big boy, and conceivably five clients are responsible for half their revenue... I doubt there are any of those big boys in the paddy power white label (may be wrong)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
[LCG - London Capital Group] - CFD Trading
Replies
11
Views
7K
hobbie
H
tar
Volumes & Earnings Decline at London Capital Group (CapitalSpreads):buyer beware !
Replies
2
Views
2K
Visaria
V
J
London Capital Group
Replies
14
Views
5K
javster
J
H
LCG - What a terrible company
Replies
3
Views
4K
sminicooper
sminicooper
M
Market Share
Replies
9
Views
3K
tar
tar
Top