Forex trader in family scammed my brother, estimated £100k stolen total. Please help

A forex trader in our family promised my brother unrealistic returns with “zero chance of losing his investment”

He has now lost the money and around £100k of other peoples money too from what we can tell, and is refusing to pay anything back, saying that my brother has no legal grounds to make him pay as “it was an investment”.

Does my brother have any legal recourse as I believe?

Some facts that might be relevant:

He seems to be unauthorized by the FCA.
He formed a LLC to solicit deposits and claim he was trading under. Whether the accounts traded under that LLC or not I dont know, but companies house shows no accounts filed in the past year and due for termination in 1 month due to not-filing.
The amount is £5 000, no a massive amount but brother is facing big problems because of it.
There are signs of him lying about the trades he was making, such as being unable to close a one month option on gold no matter what he did, as "you have to wait for the end of month for those to complete". If I understand correctly this is plain false, they can be closed at any time.
When soliciting the deposits he was making claims of £xyz profit in x months guaranteed, with zero chance of losing his investment.
This all took place in the UK

Can ayone advise on where he stands legally? Sounds like he could be jailed for fraud to me, as similiar cases show:

Thankyou, appreciate any help at all

did your brother sign any documents about this all with that wannabe “trader”?

if yes then pls post a copy and ill tell you exactly what you can do legally.

if not. well then your brother can write the 5k off and forget about them forever.

but tbh even if theres a change to sue him for something it does not meam you will see that money ever again simply because if that “trader” has no money then he can not pay back anyways. no money means no money means no refund.

Hi, thankyou for your reply.

He didnt sign any legal documents no. All solicitation was done via facebook messenger though so there is a record of what was said and promised.

He will be able to pay back a small amount each month I believe, or sell some possessions (he claims to have some rolex watches), so the threat of legal action would be useful in making that happen.

Appreciate the reply thankyou again

[I]Promises [/I]of future repayments is not the same as [I]actual [/I]repayments, and the longer the issue is delayed the weaker your case becomes.

Have you reported the case and evidence to the FCA for their advice?

You could also consult a solicitor together with your evidence and see what your options are. If you are UK based and aware of the other people involved maybe you can do a collective approach, which may help reduce the inevitable costs. I doubt that a preliminary advisory consultation to assess your options would be impossibly expensive?

There are two issues here. Firstly, there is the case for criminal action since financial services in the UK ( I am assuming you are in the UK since you mention the FCA?) are regulated by legislation. Secondly, there is the case for a civil action for damages resulting from misrepresentation.

It is unfortunate that often such cases require further outlay of funds in order to obtain justice and compensation, and with no guarantee of a successful outcome. But I doubt you are likely to receive much on the basis of a “friendly agreement” - some rolexes? really? Well, if they really [I]are [/I]genuine then he can just hand them over to you [I]now [/I]for you to dispose of yourselves (but check their origin first, that they have been acquired legitimately…).

What is the name of the company. There are many scumbags running their deceiving schemes,unfortunately from the legal side they are clean in most cases, as in the papers your brother signed there should be a clause where “investors risk to lose all his capital” etc…

Its a cousin in the family.
There was no actual contract, all communication and solicitation was done via Facebook.
He promised guaranteed returns - assuring impossible to lose the money.

I would think this was highly fraudulent and thus criminal. If I could establish this then it could be used to encourage repayment under threat of criminal charges.

no.highly unlikely.

facebook chatt protokolls are not good enough as a prove since they can be faked easily (emails aswell btw.)

the court will see this situation: brotger gave cousin money, cousin spent it. no contracts no nothing.

in the real legality of this there is no case of fraud existend.

why you may ask?

simply because your brother gave the money on good will and it can be layed out by any beginners lawyer that it was a gift.

your family “trader” is no company and didnt offer any service on a legal ground. what your brother and your cousin did is simple good will of your brother.

anyways. if you try to sue him (if theres any chance to sue-
which i doubt) you should consider the cost of suing will be easily another 2000 (minimum) and if you lose the case youd have to take over the defending costs of that “trader” you sue, which is anotger 2000.

so you are throwing 4k of good money after 5k of bad money.

simply not worth it.
from your texts i see that the “trader” is willing to pay back the sum. otherwise ge wouldnt offer rolex and other stuff.

my advice: talk directly to him and agree on a plan to get the money back. take the rolex if you must to.

but dont expect too much cooperation of him. since legally you really cant do mich but waist good money for possible return of bad money.

"facebook chatt protokolls are not good enough as a prove since they can be faked easily (emails aswell btw.) "
This isnt true in the UK. The litigation rules in England and Wales, the Civil Procedure Rules, broadly define “documents”, meaning that electronic documents which can be demanded can include instant messages and content from social networking sites.

"your brother gave the money on good will and it can be layed out by any beginners lawyer that it was a gift."
Not if chatlogs of solicitation and promises of unrealistic returns are acceptable as evidence, which they are in the UK

"your family “trader” is no company and didnt offer any service on a legal ground. what your brother and your cousin did is simple good will of your brother."
That doesnt make it legal. Fraud by misrepresentation is a real thing. BTW he did form an LLC to "look official " and help convince people to make investments with him.

"anyways. if you try to sue him (if theres any chance to sue-
which i doubt) you should consider the cost of suing will be easily another 2000 (minimum) and if you lose the case youd have to take over the defending costs of that “trader” you sue, which is anotger 2000."
Yes Im aware it would be costing more money to sue, plan is to firmly establish that he was breaking the law and then use that as motivation to repay. Sueing is not really an option I would advise my brother to take in these circumstances.

"from your texts i see that the “trader” is willing to pay back the sum. otherwise ge wouldnt offer rolex and other stuff."
He didnt offer them. We just know he has them. He is saying he will pay one day when he can afford it. And so far he has lied about everything to this point, this is just another lie.

THankyou for your post but I think you are wrong. Your reasoning is flawed.

you asked a question and you got the answare. im sorry that you dont like the answare.

1st. UK law is EU law. EU law is UK law.
untill uk leaves the EU the laws are the same.

2nd. I did not say facebook chats can not be used as prove i said they are not good enough in your case. -read carefully.

why?: fb chats can be used by government under special conditions as prove.
special conditions:
the person in the chat must be identified without any doubt that it is him.
this can be done by police under “life observation”- but not by you :slight_smile:

life observation is out of option since the chats are probably months old.
it is out of option that police does anything at all since the government does not really care for your loss. police only does their work when government prosecutor orders them to, and that is only if government has an interess in it, that happens only if your cousin scammed the government.

the issue: if not without doubt identified the person who wrote these chats they are useless because everyone can open a fb profile and pretend to be that person. i could open a fb profile now with the name of “Jesus Christ- Son of God” and declare war on elephants and dolphins. and you think PETA will sue Jesus for it?

you bring the facebook and email protocolls to court and your cousin says “that wasnt me, its fake” and your prove is worth less than the paper it is printed on.

if your cousin opened a LLC then you got even worse cards if you have no signed documents.

if i were your cousins lawyer id simply instruct him to say “i never took any money from that person and i never talked about any business with him, neither in real nor on facebook” and court would ask you for prove which a sub optimal lawyer can argue against very easily.
case lost.

my reasoning isnt flawed. your perception is biased. you did not hear the answare you would like to hear and now you become mad.

anyways, even the title you chose is showing how biased you are -as it says “stolen”- but it wasnt stolen, your brother gave it it to your cousin by his own choise. stolen is “taken without allowance”. so it wasnt stolen.

and we both know it wasnt ur brother who got scammed but it was you. people love to say “my friend has xyz” while its truly them having “xyz” and theyre just too ashamed to admit that it happenend to them.

so ill keep my answare to your post simple:

:rolleyes: if you say so :rolleyes:

go on and sue him and enjoy the process.

Bro, theres an old saying where I come from. Goes a little something like

“Nothing like family to duck you over”

Sux it up and move on. There are many ways “fraudsters” get our money. Very few of us ever see any of it again.

The reasoning oresented in your previous post was “facebook chats cannot be used as evidence.” full stop. This is incorrect as you have since elaborated. If this 2nd post of yours was correct then yes, that will mean the chats are next to worthless.

Where did I get mad? Maybe you just assume a negative tone in posts which disagree with you? Im guessing youre american, it seems normal to do that there.

I say stolen as the guy promised the world, assured there was no chance of losing it, and is now changing tone to “f you I can do what I like”. I doubt he ever even traded a penny of the funds sent to be honest. To me, it was all just a plan to trick my bro into sending the money, ie theft.

Why would I be ashamed to admit it lol. Assume what you want, youre obviously just going for the personal attack angle now since you dont like it when people disagree with you in conversations. Im sure many people do make up fictional 3rd parties to claim things happen to, but I have no interest or reason in doing so.

Your spelling and grammar are piss poor by the way so Ill take your points with a pinch of salt. Like I said, thanks for your reply, I dont care if I like the answer or not, but when a quick google search tells me what you say isnt true I will say so, like I did. “Facebook chats cannot be used as proof” = false, as you said yourself. Thats all I was saying so get your panties out of the twist theyre in

This is a global forum, for many of the members here English is a 2nd or even 3rd language. However, in the spirit of your post…

*presented
*you’re
*I’ll
*don’t
*that’s
*they’re

To reiterate, I dont need to know the chances of success of suing him, or prosecuting him. I want to know the legalities of what he did with regards to the FCA and fraud by misrepresentation. I want to wave the legal stick at him, not use it. Hes family who needs a kick up the ass, he wouldnt want it to go to court even if he thought he would win, he wouldnt want to spend the money on defense as much as we dont want to spend it on taking him there.

1 Like

lol, one typo, and a lack of apostrophes due to laziness. You got me.

The guy is wrong by the way, its not only when police have the person under “life observation” (surveillance) that your conversations with them can be used as evidence. Ive since checked with several other sources who all agree.

"if i were your cousins lawyer id simply instruct him to say “i never took any money from that person and i never talked about any business with him, neither in real nor on facebook”

If you were his defence you would be a public defender with little interest in breaking the rules to cover this guys ass, he is not a wealthy client who youre going to risk your entire career for. You could be disbarred if it was found you were instructing clients to lie. Oh, and the witness evidence from various sources saying that your client discussed the exact same deals with them in person, on facebook, and on the phone would hurt your clients defense quite a bit. Not sure a jury would buy that…

But like I said, Im just here to know what the legalities are of him operating how he did. Not armchair legal advice about how it would pan out in court, thankyou. Lets keep the personal attacks out of it too, if I plainly disagree with a point and back up my reasons for doing so with facts then by all means explain how you “didnt state the full truth” and elaborate, but keep the attitude dialled down please!

He didnt sign any legal documents no. All solicitation was done via facebook messenger though so there is a record of what was said and promised

The bottom line then is that your brother was naive. And, no, the above will not hold any validity, unless it covers all aspects that make up a contract.

(1) offer; (2) acceptance; (3) consideration; (4) mutuality of obligation; (5) competency and capacity; and, in certain circumstances, (6) a written instrument.

It’s highly unlikely over FB that this would have happened, as i’m sure any sensible person would appreciate.

Stop watching Judge Rinder

Believe me I know he was naive, Im well aware of the risks of forex trading having traded sports and crypto currencies successfully for years, we all know claims of guaranteed profits are pretty much the hallmark of a scam.

It may not hold up as a contract, but was it legal. You can break the law without ever touching a contract.

I dont watch TV court shows, so I wouldnt know who Judge Rinder is.

Also, if you’re concerned that he will continue to do this to others, then you’re first port of call should be the FCA. They have regular updates on scams and hot lists of ‘companies’ to avoid who are not registered by the FCA.

https://www.fca.org.uk/news/search-results?np_category=warnings&start=1

PS, incidentally:

“There’s no reason to believe that Facebook communications cannot form a legally-binding contract, so long as there is an offer, an acceptance, and an exchange or promise of exchange of consideration.”

https://www.quora.com/Can-a-Facebook-conversation-be-considered-a-legal-contract

There [I]was[/I] an offer (guaranteed returns, no chance of losing money, certain amounts by certain dates
There [I]was [/I]acceptance, where he agreed to wire the money
There [I]was [/I]exchange of consideration, funds were sent and confirmed received.

Again, I wouldnt want him to go downt he civil route. Taking this to court is a last resort of last resorts. I believe what he did was criminal and want to threaten him with a criminal case, not pursue a civil one.

I will be calling their helpline on his behalf soon, they will probably know for sure whether he broke any laws. ‘Alex Hope’ was a big case who appears to have done the exact same thing as this cousin, there are also similiar stories in sports trading. Can look-up “The King of Betfair” if interested.

Ignore it. He’s the same with everyone who either picks him up on incorrect information or takes an opposing view.

It’s a common attitude amongst folks from his neck of the woods.