Unethical Conduct by IB

[ddunbar]

Quote from TRADERguy:

I had a stop loss @1.24855, 12 pips from the limit order. The request to cancel the stop was sent at the same time as the request to cancel the limit order. The audit trail shows that the the stop took 1 second to cancel but the cancel request for the limit order was never confirmed and then filled 37 minutes later.

I posted the details of what the audit trail says on page 11 of this thread (Edit: all times are New York Time) http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=68101&perpage=6&pagenumber=11

I was refering to the other short you had on. The one which "required too much margin, so IB closed it a minute later at 1.2517."

Maybe I'm confused. But it appears that you have two shorts on. The one which had the late execution report and another which is not in question.

IB's policy is to aggregate your margin and sell only what is needed inorder to bring you account back to maintenance levels. That tells me that the short that is not in question most likely didn't have a stop or that the order with the late execution was at least twice as large as the "other" short you didn't give much details about.

In any event, let me ask you this; was your stop attached? If it was, and it was cancelled before the parent was confirmed cancelled, then there is a serious problem which is certainly IB's fault. I'm not saying that it's no IB's issue but this is something that can't be brushed aside so easily as, "sorry DBKFX was having booking troubles."

 

[jimrockford]

TRADERguy,

was your stoploss attached by IB as a child order of the mishandled limit order, or was it a standalone stoploss? Was it cancelled because you requested to cancel the stoploss, or because you requested to cancel the limit order to which the stoploss was attached?

 

[TRADERguy]

Quote from def:

fyi, the info provided to me showed your actual fill was 2 seconds after the limit order was placed but the executing bank sent out a delayed execution. if that's the case you would have seen the market trade through your limit price.

Of course I saw the price go lower than the my limit order. The price had spiked up and was coming down. I clicked to go short at 1.24785, I didn't get filled and the price continued to drop so I dragged the order to 1.24735. I still missed getting filled and the price continued to fall. I didn't want to chase the price any more, so I canceled the order.

 

[ddunbar]

Quote from jimrockford:

TRADERguy,

was your stoploss attached by IB as a child order of the mishandled limit order, or was it a standalone stoploss? Was it cancelled because you requested to cancel the stoploss, or because you requested to cancel the limit order to which the stoploss was attached?

Thanks for clarifying my question. I'm confused about the same point. It DOES make a difference.

 

[TRADERguy]

Quote from ddunbar:

I was referring to the other short you had on. The one which "required too much margin, so IB closed it a minute later at 1.2517."

Maybe I'm confused. But it appears that you have two shorts on. The one which had the late execution report and another which is not in question.

The only reason that I mentioned the other short (that I was already short during the 10:38- 10:39am period) was to explain how and why the trade in question was closed-- i.e it was liquidated at 1.2417 because both shorts together required too much margin. I guess it wasn't really necessary to include except to convey to everyone that the trade was closed.

I'll do my best to figure out and post about the stop linkage in a few hours: I've got to get outside and cut the grass before it gets any hotter.

Cheers,

TRADERguy

 

[WmWaster]

Traderguy, what are you going to do if you do not get a satisfactory response from IB?

Would you try to sue them if they refuse to compensate?

Would you consider switching to another broker?

 

[zdreg]

Quote from WmWaster:

I would like to know whether I can get back the money if the brokers commit some big mistakes/faults about trading.

Or can their disclaimers completely waive their responsibilities?

you can only know 100 per cent when you sue. since you use the word completely the answer is no. this is a general rule of law not specific to brokers nearly everywhere in the world.

 

[tomcole]

The brokers will ALWAYS claim their paperwork protects them against everything. But its a judges decision not theirs. If it smells funny, or is too one-sided most courts will rule in your favor.

Go get a lawyer and sue. Take depositions, force them to generate tons of papwerwork for you, it'll be cheaper for them to settle than fight you.

 

[zdreg]

Quote from tomcole:

The brokers will ALWAYS claim their paperwork protects them against everything. But its a judges decision not theirs. If it smells funny, or is too one-sided most courts will rule in your favor.

Go get a lawyer and sue. Take depositions, force them to generate tons of papwerwork for you, it'll be cheaper for them to settle than fight you.

you should sue because your cause is just
not because you can get something for being a nuisance.

 

[WmWaster]

Quote from zdreg:

you can only know 100 per cent when you sue. since you use the word completely the answer is no. this is a general rule of law not specific to brokers nearly everywhere in the world.

I'm not sure, but it's normal they will have such a clause in their contracts:
"The company will not accept any responsilibity from the failure of the system, blah blah blah..."

I'm not sure whether the responsibility can be waived simply by adding these lines to their contracts.

From the sound of your statement, it seems you are telling me the broker can be liable. The disclaimer shouldn't be able to waive all their responsibility.