Demand for Immediate Withdrawal of False Allegations and Apology

Dear Trading 212 Legal Team & Senior Management,

I am writing to demand the immediate withdrawal of the false and defamatory allegations made by Trading 212 against myself and my domains, discrepancy212.com and discrepancy212.co.uk. These allegations, communicated to my domain registrar, LCN, have led to the unjust suspension of my domains based on misleading and unsubstantiated claims.

Your complaint to LCN contained the following statement: "Trading 212 mainly created by threat actors for phishing, credential harvesting, and other such cybercrimes." This statement is categorically false and grossly misleading.

Trading 212 is fully aware of my identity and my intentions in creating the website, which are to expose the underhanded tactics and regulatory abuses your company has engaged in. I find it deeply concerning that, despite knowing the legitimate purpose of my site, you have misled LCN into believing that you had no knowledge of my intentions, implying that the site was created for nefarious purposes.

Given that Trading 212 is a sophisticated technology company with extensive experience in developing and maintaining digital platforms, it is inconceivable that you could genuinely believe that a simple two-page website with a contact form constitutes a phishing or credential harvesting operation. This leads me to conclude that Trading 212 has deliberately lied to LCN, a tactic that seems to be a recurring theme in your company’s approach to criticism and regulation. As a financial institution regulated by the FCA in the UK, ESMA in Europe, and the Australian financial regulator, you should be fully aware of the importance of honesty and transparency in all your dealings.

Furthermore, your statement that my website engages in the "unauthorised use of trademarked names/logos, and suspicious domain names should suggest that this is a fraudulent domain impersonating the Trading 212" is another blatant misrepresentation. Trading 212 is well aware that my website does not use your logo but merely references your name in a critical context. My use of the "Trading 212" name and images of your senior management, who I believe have failed to fulfil their legal and regulatory duties, falls under the principles of "nominative fair use" and "fair dealing" as defined under UK intellectual property law.

The content on discrepancy212.com is clearly critical of Trading 212 and does not imply any endorsement or affiliation. Therefore, your claims of trademark infringement are entirely without merit. By conflating the use of your name and logo in this context, you have once again sought to mislead LCN.

It is telling that instead of addressing the evidence I hold of undisclosed 10,000%+ markups on spreads—evidence showing that losses of £55,000 are predominantly comprised of 83% in spreads and undisclosed fees, issues that directly affect your customers—Trading 212 has elected to employ its default tactic of attacking critics and stifling legitimate concerns. This attempt to silence me rather than engage with the substantive issues raised only further demonstrates the validity of my claims and the lengths to which Trading 212 will go to avoid accountability.

It is also worth noting that this is not the first time Trading 212 has engaged in such deceptive practices. Just last month, my website host suspended my hosting for five days based on similar false allegations. However, after investigating, they unsuspended the site and issued an apology, acknowledging that their actions were triggered by an automated response rather than a genuine review of the complaint. Below is an excerpt from Hostinger’s communication:

Hostinger

Wed, 7 Aug 2024 at 3:17 pm

**To: *******************@gmail.com

Dear customer,

We thank you for your patience. We have investigated the case and we can see that we indeed received an abuse report for your website discrepancy212.com. In response to this report, the website was suspended by our automation. We have now unsuspended the website. Please be assured that the team responsible for the automation is looking into why this happened as well. We apologise for the inconvenience.

This repeated pattern of filing false complaints indicates a systematic effort by Trading 212 to stifle criticism and silence those who would expose your company’s questionable practices.

Breaches of FCA Regulations

I would also like to bring to your attention the breaches of FCA regulations that, in my opinion, your actions have violated. The FCA’s new Consumer Duty requires firms to act to deliver good outcomes for retail customers, which includes being fair, honest, and transparent. By making a false complaint that led to the suspension of my domain, Trading 212 may have violated these duties, especially considering that my website is aimed at raising awareness and encouraging others with similar experiences to come forward. This is particularly relevant given that Trading 212 is under investigation by the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) and should be taking every opportunity to identify and rectify failures, not suppressing them.

Demand for Action

Given the above, I demand the following actions:

1. Immediate Withdrawal of the False Allegations: Trading 212 must immediately retract the false and defamatory statements made to LCN and any other parties.

2. Public Apology: Trading 212 should issue a public apology for the harm caused by these false allegations, both to my reputation and to the legitimate efforts of those seeking justice through my website.

3. Evidence of Complaint: If Trading 212 believes that its allegations are true, I challenge you to provide concrete evidence within the next seven (7) days. Failure to do so will be considered an admission that the allegations are baseless.

4. Compensation for Damages: I expect Trading 212 to compensate me for the disruption and damages caused by these false allegations, including but not limited to the costs associated with the suspension of my domain and the impact on my advocacy efforts.

If these demands are not met within seven (7) days, I will have no choice but to pursue all available legal avenues, including but not limited to:

 1. Filing a formal complaint with the FCA for breaches of Consumer Duty and other relevant regulations.

 2. Initiating defamation proceedings to hold Trading 212 accountable for the damage caused to my reputation.

 3. Reporting Trading 212’s conduct to the relevant regulatory authorities, including the FCA and ESMA, for further investigation.

 4. Publicising these events on my website, corrupt212.com, and through other media channels to ensure that the public is aware of your company’s tactics.

This letter and any further correspondence on this matter will be published on my website, corrupt212.com, to maintain transparency and inform the public of your actions.

I look forward to your prompt response.

Yours sincerely,

Ali 

A ruthless, corrupt 'identities threat actor' is another man’s T212 victim

ali@corrupt212.com

Breached Regulations and Principles

1. Principle 2: Skill, Care, and Diligence
FCA Handbook Reference: PRIN 2.1.1R (2)

Breach: Trading 212, as a regulated firm, is required to conduct its business with due skill, care, and diligence. The false and misleading complaint to LCN, which led to the suspension of my domain, indicates a lack of care and diligence. T212’s failure to verify the legitimacy of its accusations before making them could be viewed as a breach of this principle.

2. Principle 6: Customers’ Interests
FCA Handbook Reference: PRIN 2.1.1R (6)

Breach: T212 is required to pay due regard to the interests of its customers and treat them fairly. By making false allegations that resulted in the suspension of my domain, T212 may have acted in a way that unfairly hindered my ability to advocate for the rights of their customers who may have been harmed by T212’s practices. This could be considered a failure to act in the best interests of all customers, particularly those who may share my concerns.

Additional Consideration: This failure is even more concerning given that T212 specifically markets itself to individuals who may be inexperienced in financial markets. As stated in T212's own marketing, "Trading 212 is a fintech company that democratizes the financial markets with free, smart, and easy-to-use apps, enabling anyone to trade Stocks, ETFs, Forex, and more." This marketing clearly targets a demographic that includes individuals with little to no prior trading experience, positioning T212’s platform as accessible to "anyone."

Given this focus, T212 has a heightened responsibility to protect these less experienced or more vulnerable clients. The actions taken by T212 could disproportionately harm these customers, particularly those who might rely on advocacy and collective action to understand their rights and seek redress for any wrongs they have experienced. By attempting to silence criticism and hinder the organisation of such advocacy, T212 may have failed to act in the best interests of these clients, further violating Principle 6.

3. Principle 7: Communications with Clients
FCA Handbook Reference: PRIN 2.1.1R (7)

Breach: Firms are required to communicate information to their clients in a way that is clear, fair, and not misleading. The misleading statements made by T212 to LCN about the nature of my website, suggesting it was involved in phishing and other cybercrimes, may breach this principle as they did not accurately represent the situation.

4. Consumer Duty: Acting in Good Faith
FCA Handbook Reference: PRIN 2A.2R (2)
Breach: Under the new Consumer Duty, firms must act in good faith towards retail customers. By submitting what appears to be a knowingly false or misleading complaint against my website, T212 could be seen as failing to act in good faith, particularly if the aim was to stifle legitimate criticism and deter others from coming forward with similar experiences.

5. Consumer Duty: Avoiding Foreseeable Harm
FCA Handbook Reference: PRIN 2A.2R (3)

Breach: Firms must avoid causing foreseeable harm to retail customers. The suspension of my website, based on T212’s false complaint, could foreseeably harm customers who might benefit from the information and collective action my website facilitates. If T212’s actions were intended to prevent criticism and avoid accountability, this could be a breach of this duty.

6. Consumer Duty: Enabling and Supporting Customers to Pursue Their Financial Objectives
FCA Handbook Reference: PRIN 2A.2R (4)

Breach: T212’s actions may have directly or indirectly hindered my efforts to organise collective action or raise awareness among its customers, thereby preventing them from pursuing their financial objectives through potential legal action. This could be a breach of the Consumer Duty, as my website is designed to help customers who believe they have been wronged by T212.

7. Principle 11: Relations with Regulators
FCA Handbook Reference: PRIN 2.1.1R (11)

Breach: Firms are required to deal with regulators in an open and cooperative way and must disclose anything relating to the firm of which the FCA would reasonably expect notice. If T212 has not been transparent with the FCA about the nature of my website and its intentions, or if it has misrepresented facts to avoid regulatory scrutiny, it could be in breach of this principle.

8. SYSC (Senior Management Arrangements, Systems and Controls)
FCA Handbook Reference: SYSC 4.1.1R

Breach: This rule requires firms to have effective systems and controls to ensure that their business is conducted in accordance with regulatory requirements. The submission of a misleading complaint to LCN could suggest a failure in T212’s internal systems and controls, particularly regarding how they handle complaints and criticisms.

Complaint from Trading 212 received by LCN

We are the authorized representatives of our client Trading 212. Trading 212 is a fintech company that democratizes the financial markets with free, smart, and easy-to-use apps, enabling anyone to trade Stocks, ETFs, Forex and etc. We believe you are the host/registrar for this site:

URL: http://discrepancy212.com

The official Website of the Trading 212 is https://www.trading212.com/. The infringing above domain is a foolproof copy of the official website of the Trading 212 mainly created by threat actors for phishing, credential harvesting, and other such cybercrimes.

Even if the claims were true, there is no need for any company to showcase its association with copying the entire official site layout. It should be clear by now that the fake association claims, illegal web cloning, unauthorized use of trademarked names/logos, and suspicious domain names should suggest that this is a fraudulent domain impersonating the Trading 212. Kindly suspend this domain on priority.

Trademark Details:
Trademark: Trading212
Registration Number: 012671038
Registration Jurisdiction: EUIPO (European Union)
Main Website: Trading212.com
Direct Link to Trademark: https://branddb.wipo.int/en/brand/EM500000012671038