The Forex Robot World Cup

[raa]

And they have replied that I need to wait for 30 days. Not unexpected, but still ****ers.

[capsmart]

Keep it on a demo just to have proof in case they ask for it.

[julianj]

Hi Raa,

thank you for doing such hard work on testing the Robots. You've saved me wasting 1000 dollars! Much better to use Marc's methods manually.

I've been in credit card disputes, and also from the other end of the transaction, sell my own authored specialist eBooks over the internet. I give a 100% refund guarantee - and in about eight years I've maybe had to refund 3. I do it immediately without question.

I think it is very poor practice that the company tries to put you off your refund.

My reaction would be to tell them (the FRWC) that I want a refund now or I will go to the credit card company (you did pay by credit card, didn't you?) and ask them to refund the money. This is called a "Chargeback" and the company gets fined if they have too many chargebacks; so companies do not want to get involved in these disputes.

I have to confess I was scammed by the "Acai Berry Health food" "free" trial offer a few months ago (what a fool!) which the T & Cs mean you have signed up for all sorts of other recurring charges on your card. (BTW watch out for tooth whitening and weight loss programmes - it's the same bunch of scammers). After a lot of hassle in complaining I got the credit card charges reversed by my Card company.

Furthermore, in UK consumer law, T & Cs have to be reasonable. That is they can't say something like; "We will only give you a refund if a UFO lands on your front lawn between 9 and 10 am on a Tuesday." - that would simply be thrown out in the courts.

So I suggest you take a firm stand - if the product does not do what is claimed it you are owed a refund. See below UK consumer law - I don't know where you are but you should check out your own law. the below applies to **digital goods like software,** as well as normal physical goods. See the bit about being "fit for purpose".

Your legal rights when you buy goods

When you buy goods (including goods supplied as part of a service), the law gives you certain rights as a consumer. The law says that the goods must:

• be of satisfactory quality. This means that the goods should be free of any faults, including minor ones. They should be of the quality that a reasonable person would expect given the description, price and any other relevant circumstances. You can take into account the appearance and finish of the goods, and whether there are any defects (including minor ones). You can also take into account whether publicized information about specific features of the goods is accurate, and whether the goods are safe when used properly
• be fit for the purpose. This means that you must be able to use them for the purposes that you would normally expect from this type of product, or any purpose that you have told the seller you want to use them for
• match their description. This means that if there is a verbal or written description of the goods, it must be accurate. And if you choose goods after seeing a sample, your goods must match the sample.

There are a number of things a trader is not allowed to do when they sell you goods. These include:

• make a written statement that you have no legal rights when you buy goods
• make a false description about goods
• sell dangerous or unsafe goods
• try to charge for goods sent that you didn't order
• sell short measure or short weight
• give a misleading price, either in writing or verbally.

Unfair contract terms

An unfair contract term is a standard term in a contract of sale which makes the contract unfair to the customer. Standard terms are those that the trader has drawn up in advance, not the ones that you negotiate individually when you are deciding whether to buy something. If you have a written contract, standard terms are contained in the small print.
Examples of unfair terms include contracts written in such a way that you cannot understand them, or terms that try to take away your rights to claim from the trader for faulty goods. If there is any doubt about the meaning of a contract term, it should be decided in favour of the customer.




Hope this helps - best Julian

[raa]

Hi Julian, thank you very much for your advice. I was actually thinking about warning them to do a chargeback, but was not sure if I may have a legal ground to it. However, my claim is not that I don't like robots' performance (I don't like so far but indeed it is very early to tell, they may recover everything), but rather a poor general quality of the software, it is very far from being commercial market ready, and extremely lousy documentation. It all looks like a bunch of high-school students did a home project and got a not very good mark for it. In particular, as I have mentioned I don't like that some vital settings simply do not work at all.

Here is the resolution decline response I have just sent:

Hello, I understand your statement about a refund policy, however my statement is that the software delivered does not work as described (vital functions like MoneyManagement, settings for max number of transactions, minimal lot settings, etc are simply NOT WORKING), on top of that you have failed to provide any meaningful documentation with the product, they PDFs you have do not provide clear and detailed explanation for all the features of the software and possible risks involved. So I claim that the product delivered is simply not what has been described in the advertisement. There is a consumer law that covers digital software purchases like your EA set, please find excerpt below. In conclusion, if you fail to provide me with a refund immediately, I have no other choice but to initiate a payment chargeback with my Bank. I am myself working in a payment industry and believe me I know how fast and easy customers receive chargebacks from VISA and how painful it may become for a merchant under pressure from its merchant bank. I have enough evidence that the the product provided does not match expectations and does not match description in advertisement. I am a member of forex trader forums and will broadcast the situation about my payment refund to your potential consumer base. Belive me, nobody want to have anything in common with a merchant who refuses to refund unhappy customer.

[marc walton]

Hi Raa, if you dont get this resolved & quickly drop me a line. Sometimes its better to speak to the vendor and not the product owner (its the same with clickbank these days) I have a contact to whom I can speak about this, regards, marc

[raa]

Hi Raa, if you dont get this resolved & quickly drop me a line. Sometimes its better to speak to the vendor and not the product owner (its the same with clickbank these days) I have a contact to whom I can speak about this, regards, marc

Thanks, Marc! Indeed. I was communicating with FRWC via dispute resolution console of Plius, so all the correspondence is there anyways, would be easy to assess.

[dannyd]

Hi Raa.

Very concerned to hear of your troubles with FRWC which will make me wary of proceeding with my purchase. As they wish to wait for at least 30 days I will continue testing on the Demo account with changes as I go along.

Results for the first 7 complete trading days are as follows.

Deposit £5000
Balance £6294.93
Equity £6332.72

Althought the results look at first glance to be quite impressive the risk taken to produce these results is in my opinion EXCESSIVE. HiRider s1 risks 100 pips to gain 7 and HiRider s2 risks 210 pips to gain 12. Rough calculations mean that HiRider therefor needs to win appox 95% of the time to break even!!! At one stage last week HiRider was £1200 in the hole untill Fridays lift in euro/usd achieved it's target.

Regarding the main Straasha system and SuperVolcano, neither of them show their S/L so at present unable to identify their risk reward ratio. LMD Multicurrency has had three losses and one win with each of the losses equal to each win so again must win 50% of the time to break even.

Despite the results of Fusion V looking impressive, when you dig a little deeper it proves to be very worrying. Not being very computor literate I do not feel capable of smartening the system but do belive for money oaid we should try and get FRWC to smarten it. Any thoughts welcome. I will continue to feed results into the blog over the coming weeks.

[raa]

I do not know if Marc has interferred in to the resolutions of the situation, but I have just received the following rely from Plimus (vendor), not from the FRWC itself, into regards to the speach I have sent (published in the previous message):

VendorFull refund ( USD 712.81 ) - Refund was completed successfully. Your robots were deactivated for you. You won't be able to trade with them anymore. If you ever want to come back we would like to see you among our clients again and offer the help. Thank you

Thanks to Julian and Marc for your support, I am extremelly glad to it resolved so quickly, although I have lost about a hundred buck on testing Fusion on live account, I have learned quite a lesson. Thanks again, I will continue to enjoy Marc's tuition and will concentrate to make myself a money making machine, instead of loosing for a free cheese elsewhere.. Thanks guys.

[granfaloon]

$481 draw-down on a $1000 live account!

[raa]

Euro is behaving totally crazy since last night.