How do I get my money back for the signal if the signal provider drained my deposit 5 days after I signed up for a paid subscription? - page 4
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
It just goes like this....
If you do not want to get rid of them, they have written "rules" which say only one thing: if you do not sign up your problems, trade the way you want, if you have signed up your problems are your problems too. And we're all out of it.... it's all forex.... there's all these risks...
I know about the risks without you.
I am interested in another question. Let's say you bought a season ticket for a month to a sauna, solarium, swimming pool or wherever.... A week later you're told that... "no more movie." And the natural question arises: "Guys, I kind of paid for a month? You either provide the service or you get your money back."
Makes sense? It does...
And what does the office, which is the intermediary between the "Seller" and the "Buyer", tell us about this?
Nothing!!! You guys are on your own and we have nothing to do with it.
So why the hell did MetaQuotes create this service if they weren't going to regulate it in the first place?
Why are there no sanctions for sellers at all?
They could have just sat back... ...write their own Expert Advisors with indulators.
Your example is not relevant. MQL5 itself acts as an intermediary in the technical part. Have you copied trades? So it has more than fulfilled its function. The fact that you have implemented the wrong provider, that's your problem.
I am amazed at people who want 100-200% a month and ask for some kind of guarantee. Wake up. At that kind of profitability you are assured of a 100 per cent plummet. You have to understand it.
And choose providers who steadily make 5-10% a month and set up adequate risk management.
Right. And then the subscriber sends the signals because of the seller, and the branch starts with the words "Give me the money back, because I have invested it in the wrong place" :) And the regulator, not the one who helped to lose, should give the money back. :)
The service is OK. You just have to know how to invest.
I'll shut up... I'm not a signal provider at all...
Right. And then the subscriber loses the money because of the signal seller, and the thread starts again with the words "give me the money, because I invested it in the wrong place" :) And the regulator, not the one who helped to make the loss, should give the money back. :)
The service is OK. You just have to know how to invest.
I'll shut up... I'm not a signal provider at all...
Your example is off-topic. MQL5 itself acts as an intermediary in the technical part here. Did you copy your trades? So they do their job more than well. You have chosen the wrong provider, that's your problem.
I am amazed at people who want 100-200% a month and ask for some kind of guarantee. Wake up. At that kind of profitability you are assured of a 100 per cent plummet. You have to understand it.
And choose providers who steadily make 5-10% per month and set up adequate risk management.
It's not about copying trades.... not about draining your account, but about regulating the relationship between the Seller and the Subscriber.
If someone provides a service and takes money for it.... even if it's one cent.... this service must be guaranteed to be provided. If it is not, someone must be responsible for it. And that responsibility is exactly what it is not. The company has simply removed itself from the regulation of any relationship.
And again as a reminder... I have NOT subscribed to Dmitry's signal in question and I'm not going to subscribe to any of the signals on a real account until MQ brings this service to a normal form.
It's not about copying trades.... it's not about draining the account, it's about regulating the relationship between the Seller and the Subscriber.
If someone provides a service and takes money for it.... even one cent.... this service must be guaranteed to be provided. If it is not, then someone must be held accountable for it. And that responsibility is exactly what it is not. The office has simply withdrawn itself from regulating any relationship.
And again as a reminder... I have NOT subscribed to Dmitry's signal in question and I'm not going to subscribe to any of the signals on a real account until MQ brings the service to a normal state.
On the subject of refunds they have this. If the signal provider himself has disabled the system, the money will be returned to the subscriber. And if not, it's up to the provider. The MQL does not know whether the provider will continue trading, even if the drawdown is large.
It's not about copying trades.... it's not about draining the account, it's about regulating the relationship between the Seller and the Subscriber.
If someone provides a service and charges for it.... even one cent.... this service must be guaranteed to be provided. If it is not, then someone must be held accountable for it. And that responsibility is exactly what it is not. The office has simply withdrawn itself from regulating any relationship.
And again as a reminder... I have NOT subscribed to Dmitry's signal in question and I'm not going to subscribe to any of the signals on a real account until MQ brings the service to a normal state.
There are as many people as there are opinions. There will always be those who will not like something. It is impossible to create rules that would please everyone. At the moment, the rules that have been developed, suit the majority and they use this service.
To be honest, I don't give a shit about all this....
MQ apparently too.
So..... goodbye everyone... nice talking to you.
So - the regulator has to act as a provider, guaranteeing for him (monetary guarantee)? So - you propose this scheme: regulator = provider ... and then who will regulate the regulator (and you by the way)? Another regulator? the regulator's regulator? :)
And for mistakes in investing funds ( signal subscription fees) the one who made the mistake, i.e. the subscriber, is responsible. And in this case his knowledge = his profit.
If I opened a buy on EUR-dollar, but the price went against me, and I lost, then what - should I open a branch here against the regulator in the USA, like "give me the money" :)
I'm stuck again ... That's it, I'm done.
"...It was all Churchill's idea in '18..." (c) Vladimir Semyonovich.
And then, about the Sportlotto...