You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Unethical Conduct by IB
- Thread starter TRADERguy
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
IB has suggested that the customer should have immediately called IB when he noticed the cancel stayed pink. I have to wonder what they would have been able to tell him, since the original order had disappeared into the counterparty's servers, not to emerge for 30 minutes. Probably all they could have said was, well it appeared to be marketable but we really don't know what your position is. I don't see how that helps him at all.
Quote from IBsoft:
I will add a clarification to this: There is no way to configure the tws in such a way that the unacked orders fall off the screen. In other words, the pink ones remain displayed.
Thank you. This is a crucial point. So if the order disappears, users are justified in treating it as cancelled?
Quote from AAAintheBeltway:
IB has suggested that the customer should have immediately called IB when he noticed the cancel stayed pink. I have to wonder what they would have been able to tell him, since the original order had disappeared into the counterparty's servers, not to emerge for 30 minutes. Probably all they could have said was, well it appeared to be marketable but we really don't know what your position is. I don't see how that helps him at all.
Should a client inquire about an order whose status is indeterminate (pink or light blue), we would:
1) know there is a possible problem,
2) run a trace process which would show us where the thing got lost
3) see it was sent to a bank/exchange but never ack'd as either executed or rejected
4) contact the exchange/bank to get a status
5) maybe get a fill report or maybe get black-holed by them since they might not be able to figure it out in real time (don't know how fast they are since we really haven't had the opportunity to test the situation) but would have at least registered the issue which would let them feel comfortable that we (IB et clients) were not using a time option on them.
When there is no concern about 'gaming' on errors, the party who is being asked for comp usually feels much more comfortable granting it. Remember, for every honest person out there, there is at least one who will act opportunistically.
Technology is always subject to failure so the technology owner would quickly go under if forced to warrant the performance without restricting that liability in some manner. Without doubt, the best way to limit liability is to put a clamp on the amount of time to report the error. IB looks carefully at the timeliness issue. So do forex banks and exchanges and ECNs. So does your personal bank (read the small print on the General Conditions regarding reporting of errors). Putting the issue on the table in an unambiguous and "official" manner is always the best way to get grey area problems treated as favorably as possible.
IBj,
No doubt.
Would you kindly address the issue that has floated throughout this thread. Are we entitled to treat an order as cancelled when the order line disappears after we hit cancel?
No doubt.
Would you kindly address the issue that has floated throughout this thread. Are we entitled to treat an order as cancelled when the order line disappears after we hit cancel?
Quote from AAAintheBeltway:
IBj,
No doubt.
Would you kindly address the issue that has floated throughout this thread. Are we entitled to treat an order as cancelled when the order line disappears after we hit cancel?
IB's basic rule 1 is: 'If a client submits an order that subsequently executes, that execution belongs to the client as long as the execution was consistent with the terms of the order'. Examples of inconsistency might be executions at worse than a limit, or an over-execution.
It is rare that an order just vanishes. If it does, you should double check to ensure you are where you expect to be. If a client cancels an order, and sees it go pink (could be for a fraction of a second), then red, he can assume he is out. If he hits the cancel, then shuts down the TWS immediately without waiting for the confirms, or just goes away then logs back in later or just comes back, then that would be a poor assumption since the intermediate stages of the cancel process do provide valuable and indicative information.
At the end of the day, since there are a thousand possible ways things could work differently than expected or otherwise go wrong (in fact there are probably 2 or 3 but the details make them seem different), rule 1 applies. If the client believes he should not have received a fill because he cancelled, he/she should:
- look at his audit trail to see if he got the confirm (and save it)
- call IB immediately
- IB will usually say "manage your risk" which means, if you think you should not have the trade, then cover it as quickly as possible thereby establishing a fixed gain/loss. If you delay in the cover, we will likely limit consideration on the claim to the market prices at the time of the call.
- make a claim for the loss.
- give us some time to investigate
- Status
- Not open for further replies.