Hargreaves Lansdown - tech error on my account

joshuadeacon94

Alexland said:

Given the average HL investor makes badly timed investments into poor choices then I can't imagine HL would be pleased about taking on responsibility for these duplicate market trades.

Whilst their response was poorly timed and lacked the standards of service I’d have liked, they did at least correct the problem for me, which by last night had reached £125k debt of shares. 

John464

Looks like HL will have to spend some of their legendary platform fees on compensating victims of their incompetence, instead of promoting Brexit.

Thrugelmir

John464 said:

Looks like HL will have to spend some of their legendary platform fees on compensating victims of their incompetence, instead of promoting Brexit.

Hasn't cost their victims anything though. They've simply done what you'd expect them too. 

John464

Thrugelmir said:

John464 said:

Looks like HL will have to spend some of their legendary platform fees on compensating victims of their incompetence, instead of promoting Brexit.

Hasn't cost their victims anything though. They've simply done what you'd expect them too. 

Punters weren't able to trade when the system froze - so it might have cost them something
over and above the time and worry it cost everyone else
Its going to take a while to sort out because its all got to be done manually
And those who have benefited from the duplicate trades might object to their being unwound.

masonic

John464 said:

And those who have benefited from the duplicate trades might object to their being unwound.

Those who have benefited from the duplicate trades won't know about the trades being placed since those trades would have been placed by a different HL investor. As the trades occurred from pooled nominee accounts, for sales proceeds would be shared between all holders of the security in question in proportion to their shareholding (i.e the owners of the shares that were actually sold under CASS rules). For purchases, the purchased shares would be divided up fractionally between all clients in proportion to their cash account balance (i.e the owners of the cash that was actually used to purchase the shares). HL might well use its own money to settle the share purchases, in which case it would own the purchased shares and could sell them for a profit, but taking the profits made purchasing shares to reimburse those whose shares have been wrongly sold would seem a lot more questionable.

AnotherJoe

FWIW in my daughters case there were three purchases, all identical, and to her and my surprise the two that were nullified/wiped/expunged were not the last two, but the two with the highest purchase prices.

Perhaps to forestall a complaint?  I dont know? But anyway she's come out marginally better off.