Not upheld: Investment mis-selling complaint against OANDA Europe Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr C complained that OANDA Europe Limited improperly closed his GBP/USD and Platinum/USD CFD positions via margin calls on 3 July 2018, alleging the closure prices were inconsistent with wider market rates, OEL gave conflicting explanations about margin requirements, and no prior notice was provided. The ombudsman found that the margin calls were legitimately triggered when total available margin (£4,559.16) fell below the required threshold (£5,001), and that the fill prices fell within the historical market ranges for that date. Although OEL initially provided conflicting information, it subsequently clarified the details with reliable account activity evidence. The account terms did not require prior notice and placed primary responsibility for margin monitoring on Mr C as the holder of an execution-only account. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that the margin call closures were legitimately triggered because total available margin fell below the required threshold. Regarding price inconsistency, while OEL initially provided conflicting information, it later clarified the details with reliable account activity evidence. The fill prices used (1.31298 for GBP/USD and 798.591 for Platinum/USD) fell within the historical market ranges for that date, so they were not inconsistent with underlying market rates. OEL is entitled to set its own prices independently of competitors. The account terms did not require OEL to provide prior notice of margin call closures, and Mr C bore primary responsibility for monitoring his execution-only account.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website