100 %.
I'm sure we'll be able to revisit this thread some time in the future on a related debacle, so I'll wait until then as I've said what I want to say for now.
The largest FX prop firm named MyForexFunds stopped working now, are they out of business ?
- Thread starter TrAndy2022
- Start date
100 %.
I'm sure we'll be able to revisit this thread some time in the future on a related debacle, so I'll wait until then as I've said what I want to say for now.
Yes, you have said plenty of lies, i am glad it's finally everything you had to say.
What is the opinion when it comes out CFTC wins the case as usual and then it is called illegal business practice from MFF. Does it also mean that any payouts needs to be paid back to the bankruptcor so that all challenge fees can be paid back from MFF ? Opinions ? Myself I do not think so, but I am not a "ponzi" expert.
Proceeds of Crime Act:
"The Proceeds of Crime Act allows for the confiscation of assets that have been obtained through criminal activity. But, the act also provides for the confiscation of money and assets even if they have been acquired through legitimate means, if it can be shown that they are indirectly derived from criminal activity."
....
from www (university law school..)
"When a Ponzi scheme collapses, there will typically be net winners and net
losers. The bankruptcy trustee will often seek to force the net winners-
those who received more money back from the Ponzi scheme than they
invested-to disgorge their profits."
...
"The power of the bankruptcy trustee to claw back the debtor's prepeti-
tion transfers via avoidance actions is an important part of the framework of
creditor protection built into the Bankruptcy Code. In the context of bank-
rupt Ponzi schemes, the avoidance action is equally important, if not more
important, than it is in nonfraudulent bankruptcies. For example, the trustee
in the Madoff bankruptcy has filed roughly a thousand lawsuits, many of
which contain avoidance claims, in an attempt to recover billions of dollars
for the estate. Although this Note ultimately concludes that, with two key
exceptions, the Code does not permit the trustee to claw back earnings from
net winners, this Section sets forth the basic transfer avoidance framework
and concludes that a bankruptcy trustee will almost always have a prima
facie avoidance claim against those who receive transfers from a Ponzi
scheme."
Proceeds of Crime Act:
"The Proceeds of Crime Act allows for the confiscation of assets that have been obtained through criminal activity. But, the act also provides for the confiscation of money and assets even if they have been acquired through legitimate means, if it can be shown that they are indirectly derived from criminal activity."
....
from www (university law school..)
"When a Ponzi scheme collapses, there will typically be net winners and net
losers. The bankruptcy trustee will often seek to force the net winners-
those who received more money back from the Ponzi scheme than they
invested-to disgorge their profits."
...
"The power of the bankruptcy trustee to claw back the debtor's prepeti-
tion transfers via avoidance actions is an important part of the framework of
creditor protection built into the Bankruptcy Code. In the context of bank-
rupt Ponzi schemes, the avoidance action is equally important, if not more
important, than it is in nonfraudulent bankruptcies. For example, the trustee
in the Madoff bankruptcy has filed roughly a thousand lawsuits, many of
which contain avoidance claims, in an attempt to recover billions of dollars
for the estate. Although this Note ultimately concludes that, with two key
exceptions, the Code does not permit the trustee to claw back earnings from
net winners, this Section sets forth the basic transfer avoidance framework
and concludes that a bankruptcy trustee will almost always have a prima
facie avoidance claim against those who receive transfers from a Ponzi
scheme."
Also MFF did not provide unfair slippage or trading execution conditions in average when you count that real market conditions like STP were WORSE than trading conditions compared to MFF. Clearly it is said by CFTC document snippet here.
And how they want to achieve that if a lot of traders do not want to payback their payouts. They are all from different countries and then they needed to be claimed each on different country too or how would this work out ?
I imagine it’s for the bankruptcy court to figure out. While a court can issue judgements, collections are another endeavor entirely. I just caught the end of that in the above referenced spaces where the clawbacks were being discussed; specifically the topic of challenges paid. Folks are hoping over to Rizs so the discussion might continue on that vein.
I trade my own capital so this current situation doesn’t concern me other than the fascination in watching a slow moving train wreck.
edit:
Page38
Last edited:
But if a firm is claiming that they are facilitating the trading of products under the CFTC's regulatory umbrella, then they have every right to investigate whether or not that is true under the hood.
Don't complain about governmental overreach when it comes to detecting and fighting fraud.
This is not about protecting the wannabe traders that know what they are getting into, this is about getting a piece of the action.