Fx Choice Limited

A summary of what happened?

FX Choice Limited, operating under the brand name FXChoice, is a Belize-based online brokerage firm established in 2010. It offers trading services across various financial instruments, including forex, commodities, indices, shares, and cryptocurrencies, primarily through the MetaTrader 4 and MetaTrader 5 platforms.

Regulatory Status:

FXChoice is regulated by the International Financial Services Commission (IFSC) of Belize. However, this regulatory body is considered less stringent compared to top-tier regulators such as:

• The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
• The UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
• The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC)

Consequently, clients may not receive the same level of protection as they would under more rigorous regulatory frameworks.

Major Concerns and Complaints:

1. Regulatory Oversight:
   • The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) included FXChoice on its RED List in August 2015. This list identifies entities operating outside the U.S. that solicit or accept funds from U.S. customers without proper registration, suggesting that FXChoice was engaging with U.S. clients without the necessary authorization.
     Commodity Futures Trading Commission
2. Client Protection:
   • The IFSC of Belize, which regulates FXChoice, is perceived as a low-tier regulator. Brokers under such regulation may not adhere to the stringent standards enforced by top-tier regulators, potentially compromising client protection.
     BrokerChooser
3. Client Feedback:
   • Some clients have reported high fees associated with deposits and withdrawals. For instance, a user noted that a €500 deposit resulted in only €467 being credited to their account, indicating significant fees during the transaction process.
     Myfxbook

While FXChoice offers a range of trading services and platforms, its regulatory status and associated client concerns warrant careful consideration. Potential clients should be aware of the limitations in regulatory oversight and reported issues related to transaction fees. Engaging with brokers regulated by top-tier authorities can provide enhanced security and client protection.

Analyzing the Fake Copyright Notice(s)

Our team collects and analyses fraudulent copyright takedown requests, legal complaints, and other efforts to remove critical information from the internet. Through our investigative reporting, we examine the prevalence and operation of an organized censorship industry, predominantly funded by criminal entities, oligarchs, and disreputable businesses or individuals. Our findings allow internet users to gain insight into these censorship schemes’ sources, methods, and underlying objectives.

What was Fx Choice Limited trying to hide?

Fx Choice Limited‘s attempts to hide unfavourable content through the misuse of copyright notices while allegedly engaging in perjury present serious legal concerns. These actions suggest a calculated attempt to manipulate legal systems to suppress free speech, a fundamental violation of copyright law principles and an abuse of legal processes. The use of such tactics not only undermines the integrity of copyright protection but also potentially constitutes perjury, further entangling Fx Choice Limited in legal accountability. Let’s examine the information Fx Choice Limited may be trying to remove from the internet –

Investigative Report: FX Choice Limited

Introduction: FX Choice Limited, a Belize-based online brokerage firm established in 2010, has positioned itself as a platform for trading in various financial markets, including forex, cryptocurrencies, commodities, and indices. While it offers robust trading platforms like MetaTrader 4 and MetaTrader 5, the firm has also been a subject of controversy and scrutiny. Allegations of regulatory shortcomings, complaints from clients, and sanctions have raised questions about its transparency and reliability. This investigative report examines all adverse claims and feedback surrounding FX Choice Limited.

Background and Regulatory Framework:

FX Choice Limited operates under the regulation of the International Financial Services Commission (IFSC) of Belize. While the IFSC provides a basic level of oversight, it is widely regarded as a less stringent regulatory body compared to top-tier regulators like:

• The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) in the UK
• The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC)
• The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC)

Belize’s regulatory framework has drawn criticism for its limited enforcement capabilities and lenient requirements for financial institutions. Brokers regulated by IFSC may offer lower levels of investor protection, including insufficient deposit insurance, weaker auditing requirements, and minimal intervention in cases of disputes.

Major Concerns, Complaints, and Allegations:

1. Regulatory Red Flags:

In August 2015, FX Choice was placed on the RED List by the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). This list identifies unregistered entities that operate outside the U.S. but solicit or accept funds from U.S. customers. FX Choice’s inclusion on this list indicated that it was engaging with U.S. clients without proper regulatory authorization, violating U.S. laws that protect retail investors.

Key Issues:

• Lack of proper registration with the CFTC.
• Potential exposure of U.S. clients to risks due to insufficient regulatory oversight.

The RED List designation harmed FX Choice’s credibility, as the CFTC warned investors about the dangers of dealing with unregistered offshore brokers.

2. Client Protection and Security Concerns:

Although FX Choice claims to segregate client funds from its operational accounts, critics have pointed out that the firm’s regulatory environment does not mandate rigorous checks and balances. Unlike top-tier regulated brokers, FX Choice:

• Lacks investor compensation schemes to protect clients in case of insolvency.
• Does not provide transparent dispute resolution mechanisms under internationally recognized arbitration bodies.

This leaves clients vulnerable in cases of broker misconduct or financial instability.

3. Client Complaints:

A significant number of user complaints and reviews have surfaced online, citing various issues with FX Choice’s operations. These include:

High Transaction Fees:

Clients have reported exorbitant charges during deposits and withdrawals, leading to significant losses before trading even begins. One user detailed how a €500 deposit resulted in only €467 being credited to their account, with the discrepancy attributed to unexplained fees.

Delayed Withdrawals:

Multiple users have flagged delays in processing withdrawals. While the broker advertises fast processing times, clients have occasionally experienced waiting periods extending beyond 10 business days, creating frustration and financial uncertainty.

Poor Customer Support:

While FX Choice advertises 24/7 customer support, clients have complained about unresponsive service, particularly during disputes over funds or trading discrepancies.

Manipulative Trading Practices:

Some users have alleged that FX Choice manipulates spreads and slippage to disadvantage traders during volatile market conditions. This practice, if true, undermines the integrity of its trading platform and raises concerns about fairness.

4. Negative Reviews and Online Criticism:

FX Choice’s Trustpilot and MyFXBook pages include both positive and negative reviews, with negative ones often focusing on issues of transparency and trust. Common themes include:

• Unjustified Account Closures: Users have alleged that FX Choice closed their accounts without providing valid explanations, often retaining funds.
• Platform Glitches: Complaints about sudden disconnections and lag during high-impact news events have been reported, which traders attribute to deliberate sabotage to prevent profit-taking.

5. Tax Haven Allegations:

As a Belize-registered broker, FX Choice has faced criticism for operating in a jurisdiction commonly labeled as a tax haven. Critics argue that the broker benefits from loose regulatory oversight and low corporate tax rates, which may prioritize profitability over client security.

Sanctions and Legal Implications:

1. CFTC Action: The CFTC’s inclusion of FX Choice on the RED List marked a significant blow to its operations. While no direct fines or sanctions were imposed, the warning discouraged U.S. residents from engaging with the broker, shrinking its potential client base.
2. No Major Legal Actions to Date: Despite numerous complaints, FX Choice has not faced any large-scale lawsuits or class-action suits, likely due to the challenges of pursuing legal action against an offshore entity.

Regulatory Comparison:

FX Choice’s regulatory status is a major point of concern. In comparison to brokers regulated by authorities like the FCA or ASIC, FX Choice:

• Does not enforce negative balance protection, exposing traders to significant losses.
• Offers limited audit transparency, making it difficult for clients to assess the broker’s financial health.
• Operates without comprehensive supervision of its trading practices.

Positive Aspects (for Context):

To provide a balanced perspective, FX Choice has also received praise for:

• Offering competitive spreads and low commissions on some account types.
• Supporting a wide range of trading instruments, including cryptocurrencies.
• Accepting deposits and withdrawals in cryptocurrencies, which appeal to certain traders.

Conclusion:

FX Choice Limited has carved out a niche in the trading industry, particularly among retail traders seeking lower initial deposits and access to cryptocurrencies. However, its regulatory status, history of client complaints, and the CFTC RED List designation highlight significant risks associated with this broker. Traders considering FX Choice should weigh these risks against the broker’s offerings and seek alternatives regulated by top-tier authorities for enhanced security and transparency.

Key Takeaways:

• The firm’s inclusion on the CFTC’s RED List signals serious regulatory concerns.
• User complaints about high fees, delayed withdrawals, and questionable trading practices raise doubts about its fairness and reliability.
• The lack of investor compensation schemes and strong regulatory oversight leaves clients vulnerable to financial losses.

Recommendations for Traders:

• Conduct thorough research before engaging with FX Choice or any offshore broker.
• Prefer brokers regulated by trusted authorities like the FCA, ASIC, or CySEC.
• Be cautious of enticing offers from brokers in jurisdictions with lenient regulatory frameworks.

How do we counteract this malpractice?

Once we ascertain the involvement of Fx Choice Limited (or actors working on behalf of Fx Choice Limited), we will inform Fx Choice Limited of our findings via Electronic Mail.

Our preliminary assessment suggests that Fx Choice Limited may have engaged a third-party reputation management agency or expert, which, either independently or under direct authorization from Fx Choice Limited, initiated efforts to remove adverse online content, including potentially fraudulent DMCA takedown requests. We will extend an opportunity to Fx Choice Limited to provide details regarding their communications with the agency or expert, as well as the identification of the individual(s) responsible for executing these false DMCA notices.

Failure to respond in a timely manner will necessitate a reassessment of our initial assumptions. In such an event, we will be compelled to take appropriate legal action to rectify the unlawful conduct and take the following steps –

Since Fx Choice Limited made such efforts to hide something online, it seems fit to ensure that this article and sensitive information targeted online by these events get a lot more exposure and traffic than what it would have received originally

We hope this becomes an excellent case study for the Streisand effect…The key idea behind the Streisand effect is that efforts to restrict information can backfire, often causing the information to gain more attention than it would have otherwise. This effect is widespread in the digital age, where users quickly notice and spread censorship efforts on social media and other platforms. Trying to suppress something can unintentionally lead to it becoming more visible, which Fx Choice Limited is finding out the hard way.

Potential Consequences for Fx Choice Limited

Under Florida Statute 831.01, the crime of Forgery is committed when a person falsifies, alters, counterfeits, or forges a document that carries “legal efficacy” with the intent to injure or defraud another person or entity.

Forging a document is considered a white-collar crime. It involves altering, changing, or modifying a document to deceive another person. It can also include passing along copies of documents that are known to be false. In many states in the US, falsifying a document is a crime punishable as a felony.

Additionally, under most laws, “fraud on the court” is where “a party has sentiently set in motion some unconscionable scheme calculated to interfere with the judicial system’s ability impartially to adjudicate a matter by improperly influencing the trier of fact or unfairly hampering the presentation of the opposing party’s claim or defense.”  Cox v. Burke, 706 So. 2d 43, 46 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998) (quoting Aoude v. Mobil Oil Corp., 892 F.2d 1115, 1118 (1st Cir. 1989)).

Is Fx Choice Limited Committing a Cyber Crime?

Yes, it seems so. Fx Choice Limited used multiple approaches to remove unwanted material from review sites and Google’s search results. Thanks to protections allowing freedom of speech in the United States, there are very few legal ways to do this. Fx Choice Limited could not eliminate negative reviews or search results that linked to them without a valid claim of defamation, copyright infringement, or some other clear breach of the law.

Faced with these limitations, some companies like Fx Choice Limited have gone to extreme lengths to fraudulently claim copyright ownership over a negative review in the hopes of taking it down.

Fake DMCA notices have targeted articles highlighting the criminal activity of prominent people to hide their illegal behavior. These people, which include US, Russian, and Khazakstani politicians as well as members from elite circles including the mafia and those with massive financial power, are all connected – and alleged corruption ranging from child abuse to sexual harassment is exposed when exploring evidence found at these URLs. It appears there’s a disturbing level of influence being exerted here that needs further investigation before justice can be served. Fx Choice Limited is certainly keeping interesting company here….

The DMCA takedown process requires that copyright owners submit a takedown notice to an ISP identifying the allegedly infringing content and declaring, under penalty of perjury, that they have a good faith belief that the content is infringing. The ISP must then promptly remove or disable access to the content. The alleged infringer can then submit a counter-notice, and if the copyright owner does not take legal action within 10 to 14 days, the ISP can restore the content.

Since these platforms are predominantly based in the U.S., the complaints are typically made under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which requires online service providers and platforms to react immediately to reports or violations. Big Tech companies rarely have systems in place to assess the merit of each report. Instead, all bad actors need to do is clone a story, backdate it, and then demand the real thing be taken down.

Reputation Agency's Modus Operandi

The fake DMCA notices we found always use the “back-dated article” technique. With this technique, the wrongful notice sender (or copier) creates a copy of a “true original” article and back-dates it, creating a “fake original” article (a copy of the true original) that, at first glance, appears to have been published before the true original.

Then, based on the claim that this backdated article is the “original,” the scammers send a DMCA to the relevant online service providers (e.g. Google), alleging that the ‘true’ original is the copied or “infringing” article and that the copied article is the “original,” requesting the takedown of the ‘true’ original article. After sending the DMCA request, the person who sent the wrong notice takes down the fake original URL, likely to make sure that the article doesn’t stay online in any way. If the takedown notice is successful, the disappearance from the internet of information is most likely to be legitimate speech.

As an integral part of this scheme, the ‘reputation management’ company hired by Fx Choice Limited creates a website that purports to be a ‘news’ site. This site is designed to look legitimate at a glance, but any degree of scrutiny reveals it as the charade it is.

The company copies the ‘negative’ content and posts it “on the fake ‘news’ site, attributing it to a separate author,” then gives it “a false publication date on the ‘news’ website that predated the original publication.

The reputation company then sent Google a Digital Millennium Copyright Act notice claiming the original website infringed copyright. After a cursory examination of the fake news site, Google frequently accepts the notice and delists the content.

In committing numerous offences, Fx Choice Limited either premeditated actions or were unaware of the consequences. Despite hiring an agency to make Google disregard any negative information about Fx Choice Limited, ignorance does not excuse this wrongdoing.

Fake DMCA notices have targeted articles highlighting the criminal activity of prominent people to hide their illegal behavior. These people, which include US, Russian, and Khazakstani politicians as well as members from elite circles including the mafia and those with massive financial power, are all connected – and alleged corruption ranging from child abuse to sexual harassment is exposed when exploring evidence found at these URLs. It appears there’s a disturbing level of influence being exerted here that needs further investigation before justice can be served. FSMSmart is certainly keeping interesting company here.

The Reputation Laundering

Rogue Reputation agencies use spurious copyright claims and fake legal notices to remove and obscure articles linking clients to allegations of tax avoidance, corruption, and drug trafficking. Most of these reputation agencies are based offshore, mainly in Russia, India, and Eastern Europe, and they do not worry about complying with US-based laws.

The content in all of the articles for which the fraudulent DMCA notices have been sent relates to allegations of criminal allegations, including corruption, child abuse, sexual harassment, human trafficking and financial fraud against businesses and individuals with ultra-high net worth.

In addition to the misuse of the DMCA takedown process, there is a notable absence of enforcement concerning perjury violations. The statutory requirement related to perjury is designed to deter copyright holders from submitting fraudulent or knowingly false takedown requests, as they may face legal consequences for making false declarations under penalty of perjury. However, to date, there have been no known instances of any individual being prosecuted for perjury in connection with the submission of false DMCA takedown notices.

This lack of enforcement has emboldened copyright holders to exploit the DMCA takedown process to suppress dissent, criticism, or other unfavorable content, without fear of legal repercussions.

Some of the people and businesses who have employed this tactic to remove legitimate content from Google illegally include a Spanish businessman-turned-cocaine-trafficker, Organised crime, an Israeli-Argentine banker accused of laundering money for Hugo Chávez’s regime, a French “responsible” mining company accused of tax evasion, child molesters and sexual predators. Fx Choice Limited is in great company ….

What else is Fx Choice Limited hiding?

We encourage you to ‘Dork‘ Google by searching for keyword combinations such as [Fx Choice Limited] + {Negative Keyword, such as Scam, Fraud, Complaints, Lawsuit, Sanction, etc} on Google. It’s likely if you scroll down to the bottom of this Google search results, you’ll stumble upon this Legal Takedown notice (pictured below)

To make such an investigation possible, we encourage more online service providers to come forward and share copies of content removal requests with industry experts and researchers. If you have any information on Fx Choice Limited that you want to share with experts and journalists, kindly email the author directly at [email protected].

All communications are strictly confidential and safeguarded under a comprehensive Whistleblower Policy, ensuring full protection and anonymity for individuals who provide information.