You Secure Your Trades
We Guard Your Gains

Complete your PropSurance application today! Successful applicants will be notified of their
approval before May 12th, granting exclusive access to the
PropSurance Platform

Choose Your Account Size and Firm

$50k $100k $200k
Phase 1 Phase 2 Live

Coverage for Rejected Payouts

PropSurance Perks

Apply Now

Choose Your Account Size and Firm

$50k $100k $200k
Phase 1 Phase 2 Live

Coverage for Rejected Payouts

PropSurance Perks

Apply Now

Case #20A

DEI Funded

25k Unresolved
user logo

Ethical Breach and Mismanagement | DEI Funded

Executive Summary:

This case study examines an alarming incident reported by a trader at DEI Funded, a proprietary trading firm. The trader alleged that the firm misrepresented trading losses and profits, leading to suspicions of a fabricated MT5 (MetaTrader 5) breach. The incident unveils potential ethical and regulatory violations by DEI Funded, highlighting the need for stringent oversight in proprietary trading.

Incident Overview

  • Evidence: The trader's account history was reviewed, confirming the claimed trading outcomes. To see the relative, evidence, click here.
  • Analysis: An investigation suggested that DEI Funded might have fabricated an MT5 breach, as the reported trades did not match the actual trading activity.
  • Response from DEI Funded: Attempts to address the issue with DEI Funded were met with mockery and disdain, indicating a lack of professionalism and concern for ethical standards.

Ethical and Regulatory Implications

  • Ethical Concerns: Fabricating trading breaches and misrepresenting trading outcomes undermines the ethical foundation of financial trading operations.
  • Regulatory Issues: The incident suggests potential violations of financial regulatory standards, warranting investigation by relevant financial regulatory bodies.

Professional Engagement and Legal Action

  • In dealing with the incident, our approach towards DEI Funded was conducted with utmost professionalism. We reached out to DEI Funded via email to address the discrepancies and concerns raised by the trader's report. Despite our efforts to resolve the issue amicably, the response received from DEI Funded was marked by mockery and a lack of seriousness towards the gravity of the situation, particularly from the brand ambassador of DEI Funded.
  • When we expressed our intentions to escalate the matter to the CEO of DEI Funded, regarding the unprofessional behavior and mockery from the brand ambassador, especially given the serious nature of the allegations and the harm to traders who believed they were scammed by the company, the ambassador's response was dismissive. He jokingly encouraged us to "do it, send him an email," displaying a concerning lack of care and responsibility towards the situation.
  • Given the nature of the discrepancies , the firm's dismissive response, and the brand ambassador's unprofessional conduct, we are now proceeding to make a formal complaint on the grounds of fraud. Because DEI Funded is based in Australia, it falls under the jurisdiction of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC). Hence, this complaint has been submitted to ASIC, the regulatory body responsible for overseeing financial markets and services in Australia. This legal action is taken in light of the evidence that suggests intentional misrepresentation and potential harm to traders operating under DEI Funded's platform.

Conclusion

  • The experience with DEI Funded underscores the critical need for integrity, transparency, and professionalism within the proprietary trading sector. It serves as a poignant reminder of the potential risks involved and the importance of legal and regulatory frameworks to protect individuals and maintain trust in financial trading environments. As we move forward with the complaint to ASIC, our goal remains to highlight the significance of ethical practices and ensure that such incidents are addressed with the seriousness they warrant. The conduct of DEI Funded’s brand ambassador, in particular, highlights the necessity for a culture shift within the firm towards respecting and valuing the concerns of their traders.
Issue Account Breach

Trader's Perspective

  • From the onset of discrepancies noticed on March 6th, I attempted on seeking clarity and rectification from DEI Funded. Despite providing clear evidence of the inaccuracies in my trading account, which pointed to a substantial mismatch in reported profits and losses, my attempts to seek help were met with significant resistance.
  • Communications with the firm were met with minimal assistance, and my concerns were largely overlooked. The lack of substantial support from DEI Funded, despite the clear evidence presented, was disheartening. This situation underscores the challenges traders face when discrepancies arise, especially when those in charge exhibit a disregard for the gravity of such issues.

March 21, 2024

DEI FundedProp Firm
Metrics

Transparency (4%)

Dishonesty (77%)

Recommendation (2%)

© 2024 Prop Patrol. All rights reserved.
Twitter Contact Us Terms Of Service Partner with Us