Not upheld: Service failures generally complaint against LMAX Broker Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr A complained to LMAX Broker Limited about two issues: losses incurred when he closed trading positions after experiencing difficulties updating an expired payment card, and high swap charges for holding overnight positions. LMAX had a three-card maximum policy and Mr A had two other non-expired cards available plus the option of bank transfer, which he did not attempt before closing his positions. Regarding charges, LMAX disclosed the swap charging mechanism in its terms and documents, and the ombudsman verified the charges were correctly calculated and applied based on the formula provided. The ombudsman did not uphold the complaint, finding Mr A had reasonable alternatives to closing his positions and that the charges, while complex, were properly disclosed and correctly applied.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that while Mr A experienced technical difficulties updating his payment card, he had reasonable alternatives available: two other non-expired cards on his account and the option to use bank transfer. Mr A did not attempt these alternatives before closing his positions, so LMAX was not responsible for the resulting losses. Regarding charges, LMAX clearly disclosed the swap charging mechanism in its terms, instrument information documents, and trading manual. The ombudsman verified that LMAX correctly applied the disclosed formula to Mr A's positions. The higher charges Mr A experienced were proportionate to the size and direction of his positions (short oil positions with negative swap points), not errors by LMAX. The complexity of how charges worked did not mean LMAX treated him unfairly, as the charges were properly disclosed and correctly applied.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website