'We lost everything gambling on shares'

Thrugelmir

While at fault primarily. There has to be questions as to how the situation spiralled out of control. There should have been limits within the system.

mr-tom_2

I design systems for a major investment platform (not the one featured).

My 2013 main project was overhauling our stockbroking capability.

I can tell you hand on heart that neither we nor *many* of our peers would dream of operating a system that facilitates borrowing to fund investment, let alone one that encourages speculation in the manner this one does.

And the concept of providing that direct to unsophisticated customers? Just asking for trouble.

This really never should have happened and whilst there can be no doubt that the couple involved were adults who made their own moronic decisions, Barclays deserve their share of bad press as this was frankly irresponsible.

talexuser

Thrugelmir wrote: »

There should have been limits within the system.

According to the Barclays blurb, "professional tools" include " best, limit, stop and trailing stop".

It's difficult to imagine they knew anything about what they were doing given that he "invest(ed) up to 850pc of the value of his holdings" despite "never having traded in shares before".

The William Hill analogy would be either close down all betting shops or limit the stake anyone can gamble. And close down the payday lenders in case people use the money to gamble. Hang on a minute, maybe there's something in that.... :):)

grizzly1911

Even the "professionals" with "fat fingers" make mistakes:eek:

Two separate ones by the sound of things.

'Fat fingered' City trader loses £400,000 in 30 seconds when he accidentally bought HSBC shares"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2549301/Fat-fingered-City-trader-loses-400-000-30-seconds-accidentally-bought-HSBC-shares.html

DaveTheMus

I'm surprised people that stupid managed to get £180'000 in the first place......doesn't matter though, no doubt they'll get the money back because the FCA will rule that although they are adults they shouldn't have to take responsibility for their bad decisions

talexuser

DaveTheMus wrote: »

I'm surprised people that stupid managed to get £180'000 in the first place

They sold their London house.

DaveTheMus

talexuser wrote: »

They sold their London house.

I read the story.......

They sold their house, yes, I'm surprised that people that stupid where able to buy a house in the first place.

Colin_Hunt

Mr Prinzi saw 98 direct debits returned unpaid, using credit in a series of manoeuvres to invest up to 850pc of the value of his holdings. He estimates that £16,000 was taken in trading commission and £1,400 in late payment fees between 2008 and 2011

It took 3 years to realize how "good"they were at stock picking?
Back in the eighties my stockbroker allowed me to trade within the accounting period (buy at the start, sell at the end), October 19th 1987 was "interesting", is it too late to claim?

Glen_Clark

DaveTheMus wrote: »

I read the story.......

They sold their house, yes, I'm surprised that people that stupid where able to buy a house in the first place.

Inheritance maybe?

MoneySaverLog

kidmugsy wrote: »

You can't go wrong in bricks and mortar.

I'm guessing they used leveraged products where you do not have to put up the full value of the shares purchased. Just like buying a property with 5% deposit.

If house prices move for you, all well and good. If they move against you, you end up in negative equity and owe more than the value of the property.

So you can effectively be over-leveraged in property, just as you can with shares.

With share trading, leverage can work for you if you're sitting on the right side of a trade, used in the wrong way with poor risk management it can wipe you out completely.