Not upheld: Investment mis-selling complaint against Pepperstone Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr L complained that Pepperstone Limited deliberately manipulated its trading platform to prevent him from trading and cause financial loss. He experienced platform freezing issues at a specific time when important financial information was released, but did not experience similar issues with other platforms. Pepperstone rejected the complaint and provided cTrades tick data showing no other customers experienced the same issues at the same time. The ombudsman found no evidence of deliberate manipulation and concluded the issues were more likely due to coincidence or problems with Mr L's computer terminal/connection. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied a balance of probabilities test and found that while Mr L experienced genuine trading issues, there was no evidence to support deliberate manipulation by Pepperstone. The fact that Mr L did not experience similar issues with other platforms does not prove Pepperstone was responsible. Pepperstone's cTrades tick data showed no other customers experienced the same issues at the same time, and the most likely explanation was either coincidence or a problem with Mr L's computer terminal or connection rather than Pepperstone's platform.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website