Error in ProOrder, losses and refunds from IG Markets

Forums ProRealTime English forum General trading discussions Error in ProOrder, losses and refunds from IG Markets

  • This topic has 11 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 5 years ago by avatarSeb.
Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)
  • #15924

    Hello PRT community.

    A while back one of my older systems in my demo account incorrectly opened a lot of positions, well it made 50 trades until it was automatically stopped and when that occurred I contacted IG Markets and they had agreed there was an error with PRT and not with my code due to an inconsistency with performance report and systems profit list and I was informed that if an error like this due to PRT and not my coding I would be covered and money would be refunded.

    This week one of my live systems at the open of the FX market on Monday added a position when it wasn’t supposed to which had required me to intervene and close all the positions in the system, that being the new position and existing positions. Of course I couldn’t just close off the new added position because that would have ended the strategy and left the other positions unmanaged. This system has been running for a while which I started prior to 1 September 2016.

    On Friday 28 October 2016 IG Markets sent me the following email:

    Dear David
    Our technical team noticed that you do not currently use the latest version of the ProOrder module.
     
    The night of Saturday, October 30th, summer time will go to winter time. Please note that the new version of ProOrder improves the management of time zones in certain time related instructions in codes.
     
    We suggest as a result, in anticipation of the coming time change, that you restart your strategies in order to take advantage of these improvements.
     
    The procedure to do this is simple: If you are executing a strategy that was started before September 1st, 2016,
     
    –  go to the ProOrder window,
    –  stop the strategy,

    –  then start the strategy normally.

    If possible I would have stopped the system and restarted it but the system was in a loss, so reading the above I didn’t see any real risks for my system to have any issues especially considering that my code has nothing time zone specific. Nevertheless to make sure, I responded to IG and asked them to clarify what they meant by improvements and the response I got was…

    Thanks for your email. The new fix just means that a system will automatically adjust for time changes.

    As you can see there’s no extra information in their response and PRT has essentially provided me with the same lack of information.

    At present I’m in discussion with IG Markets about the error and have also contacted PRT directly but PRT are not responding to my specific query. I’m finding the current situation very frustrating and disheartening to say the least. IG Markets have asked me to submit the code to PRT via the platform for them to inspect the code. I understand the requirement to submit the code for inspection to ensure it’s not an error on my behalf which I’m certain it’s not, but I’m finding the lack of response from PRT and IG Markets attempts to put the blame on me because I didn’t stop and restart my system very frustrating (that’s what they have said to me). Due to this frustration and lack of response I’m reluctant to submit my code to PRT and considering to take this loss and be done with PRT and swap to another platform.

    We all know there are many risks in trading but to have extra risk from the unreliability of a platform for which you pay money for is very troubling. On top of that when you’re only given less than 24 hours to stop and start a systems in my opinion is unacceptable especially when they had known this for some time.

    I’m hoping and staying positive that we’ll have a good resolution in this instance but I do have some doubts. I’m wondering if anyone else has had to deal with a similar situation and what the outcome was.

    Thanks for all your support.

    #15928

    As far as I know, you need to send a console if you want to have a refund. Otherwise, the problem (if it exists) can’t be proved.

    #79182
    Seb

    What exactly do you mean by a console Nicolas?

    #79186

    A technical report, with CTRL+M or Help/Help Center.

    1 user thanked author for this post.
    avatar Seb
    #79193

    Without access to the code there is no evidence that it is not the code so it just becomes your word against theirs. No harm can come from giving them the access to the code so I would just send it and try to get the issue resolved rather than walk away and lose money.

    On the other hand you were given notice that you needed to stop and restart the system and even though it should not have been effected by the time issue (according to you) there must have been a point between 28 October 2016 and now when it did not have a trade on the market or could have been stopped while in profit. It may not be the cause of the recent issue but does give a nice potential get out clause for a good lawyer!

    I would give them access to the code and hope that common sense prevails when they see that the time issue could not have effected the operation of the code nearly two years later.

    #79282

    @vonasi I started this topic and @seb asked for a clarification.

    In regards to your comment.

    On the other hand you were given notice that you needed to stop and restart the system and even though it should not have been effected by the time issue (according to you) there must have been a point between 28 October 2016 and now when it did not have a trade on the market or could have been stopped while in profit. It may not be the cause of the recent issue but does give a nice potential get out clause for a good lawyer!

    1. The system was manually stopped after the erroneous trade back in November 2016 to prevent further loss.
    2. I can confirm it was a PRT platform error.
    3. The comment that it should not have been affected wasn’t just according to me, it was according to IG (as an aside look a this recent post I made with an error).
    4. I was given less than 24 hours notice to stop the system (IG’s fault) while it was in a loss – is that enough time to inform me in your opinion?


    @Vonasi
    , with respect if you’re going to comment please take the time to read the post a little more carefully and who started it and then who made a follow up post.

    #79592


    @vonasi
    , with respect if you’re going to comment please take the time to read the post a little more carefully and who started it and then who made a follow up post.

    If you feel that the responses that you receive have not met your requirements than maybe it is not down to the fact that someone has not read your post carefully enough and it is possibly just the fact that you have not clarified exactly what your issue is and what solution you expect and why you expect it.

    The best people to solve your issue (from what I understand from my careful re-reading of it) are you and IG and maybe a very good lawyer. I’m not sure anyone on this forum will satisfy your requirements.

     

    #79596

    Just to help, clarify and do a bit of conciliation here … the original past was in Nov 2016 by David and presumably the Issue was long ago sorted?

    No further posts from David after the single original post, then on 27 Aug 2018 Seb asked Nicolas what a Console was.

     

    #79597

    Well spotted GraHal. Why people can’t just let dead topics lie dead and open a new topic with their new question is beyond me. Nicolas responded so I did not check the posting dates of all the posts and just assumed that this was a recent and relevant topic and not something dragged up from two and a half years ago! Then again you know what they say about assuming. Assume makes an ASS out of U and ME. I do far too much of it where others are concerned.

    Maybe there is something to be said for locking a topic to new posts after a certain amount of time has passed to prevent this sort of unnecessary confusion.

    #79598

    @GraHal 100%


    @Vonasi
    as a moderator you might put in more effort than I do here but we are polar opposites. Which is generally good because thorough debate and discourse managed well provides and opportunity for improvement. Having said that even when I asked you to kindly re-read the post which I didn’t think I had tell you to look at the dates or clarify the dates for your because that would be superfluous because that’s the purpose of date stamps on forums  you continued with your usual assumptions.


    @Vonasi
    you write:

    If you feel that the responses that you receive have not met your requirements than maybe it is not down to the fact that someone has not read your post carefully enough and it is possibly just the fact that you have not clarified exactly what your issue is and what solution you expect and why you expect it.

    In my original post (11/03/2016 at 1:16 PM) I gave some background context but the key and final point was:

     I’m wondering if anyone else has had to deal with a similar situation and what the outcome was.


    @Vonasi
     have you had to deal with a similar situation and what was the outcome?

    Instead of sharing if you had a similar situation and what your outcome was you write something that is not helpful and places the blame on me, as you tend to do.

    On the other hand you were given notice that you needed to stop and restart the system and even though it should not have been effected by the time issue (according to you) there must have been a point between 28 October 2016 and now when it did not have a trade on the market or could have been stopped while in profit. It may not be the cause of the recent issue but does give a nice potential get out clause for a good lawyer!

    Then when I later point out some key points to provider further clarification to you:

    1. The system was manually stopped after the erroneous trade back in November 2016 to prevent further loss.
    2. I can confirm it was a PRT platform error.
    3. The comment that it should not have been affected wasn’t just according to me, it was according to IG (as an aside look a this recent post I made with an error).
    4. I was given less than 24 hours notice to stop the system (IG’s fault) while it was in a loss – is that enough time to inform me in your opinion?


    @Vonasi
    still no humility from you but fortunately @GraHal was able to step in and provide some clarity to you and then you were finally able to see your assumptions.

    Regardless of the above I asked you for your opinion and just as usual, you evaded the question and instead you wrote:

    If you feel that the responses that you receive have not met your requirements than maybe it is not down to the fact that someone has not read your post carefully enough and it is possibly just the fact that you have not clarified exactly what your issue is and what solution you expect and why you expect it.

    Again I repeat at the time of the original post:

    I’m wondering if anyone else has had to deal with a similar situation and what the outcome was.


    @Vonasi
    the responses I receive from you don’t answer my questions I’m asking, instead they are forms of unsolicited advice – and worse like telling me to go suck an egg – get a very good lawyer.

    1. have you had to deal with a similar situation and what was the outcome?
    2. I was given less than 24 hours notice to stop the system (IG’s fault) while it was in a loss – is that enough time to inform me in your opinion?


    @Vonasi
    if you haven’t dealt with a similar situation or don’t have an opinion then please don’t add purposeless comments to my posts because they don’t help me or others in my opinion. All they do is clutter up the forum and then I add some clutter like this post to clarify my points.

    Why are you so unwilling to provide your opinion? 

    I don’t agree with locking down posts after a certain amount of time and restarting a similar topic because if the reader had read it carefully with the time stamps there wouldn’t be any confusion.

    Let’s leave this post on a positive note.

    1. All the people that contribute to PRC are providing different types of input that helps us improve in the long run even if at first we discount it
    2. We all have our strengths and weakness – as long as we have the humility to accept them – then we can improve
    3. I was able to attain a refund for the loss after a lot of effort and in my opinion as a long term client it was way too much effort
    1 user thanked author for this post.
    #79600

    Moderators are all doing a great job. More than doing simple moderation stuff, they are also helping me answering the questions members are posting all days long 🙂 sometimes they make error, answering too fast, confounding topic with other ones,  etc. Just like I do sometimes too! Too many problems, so little time! 😆

    Anyway, glad to know that David  “was able to attain a refund for the loss”.

     

    #80733
    Seb

    “Why people can’t just let dead topics lie dead and open a new topic with their new question is beyond me.”


    @Vonasi
    The reason why I asked the question in this topic, is because the question was relevant to this topic. I use the search function myself on this forum. I find it less convenient if there are many topics about one subject. If one would read this old topic via search and would wonder what a console was, he would have the answer in this topic. Could be a matter of personal preferences.

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)

Create your free account now and post your request to benefit from the help of the community
Register or Login