Jump to content

Company merger, but ticker stuck in call to close


Recommended Posts

Eldorado ERI bought Caesars CZR. On Commsec they changed the ticker for ERI to CZR automatically. On IG, my ERI shares are still stuck in CALL TO CLOSE. Have called and e-mailed IG and they said the helpdesk is still working on changing the ticker.

Like, totally wtf?

It's been 48 hours now and my ERI shares are still locked. Anybody else have the same problem/?

Link to comment

Called them twice, emailed six times, 3 days later every response is they are resolving the ticker issue.

$1000 loss to far as we have been unable to close off the position.

The postion is still locked at $38.24 in ERI.

Unless for some insane reason our whole position was just meant to be paid out at $38.24 at the point of merger?

This is all due to a technical error on their behalf. Sheer incompetence.

Screen Shot 2020-07-25 at 10.33.52 am.png

Link to comment

Hold tight and make sure you get compensated (keep asking for status updates), otherwise go to the FCA.  Tweet them so that other people are aware of the problem too (a problem shared and all that).

Edited by dmedin
Link to comment

6 e-mails latter, 2 phones calls, every e-mail saying, they are fixing the ticker, last one says call them during general session and they will give me my options. WTF. I think it sounds like everyone is working from home and the guy who knows how to fix it is on break....

Even commsec with it's crummy international portal got it done the instant the market opened.

Link to comment

Yeah.  I don't know.  Their web platform has serious issues so their new woman finance chief is going to spend £10 million on it.  Hope that's enough.  Their customer service appear to have given up.  They clearly don't give a flying f*ck.

Edited by dmedin
Link to comment

4th Phone call. Still no fix. 

$1600USD loss and counting.

Have not been able to close the stock for over a week now.

Has been pushed up to corporate as no one can help or give a straight answer.

Looks like this is going to be headed to the onbudsman. This is beyond technical negligence.

 

 

 

Edited by JackSparrow
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
52 minutes ago, JackSparrow said:

...

Looks like this is going to be headed to the onbudsman. This is beyond technical negligence.

 

 

 

Really? Are they denying financial responsibility for it? Can't see how this would need to go to an ombudsman - clearly seems to be caused by a technical shortcoming on their part. 

Link to comment
8 minutes ago, Fletch said:

Really? Are they denying financial responsibility for it? Can't see how this would need to go to an ombudsman - clearly seems to be caused by a technical shortcoming on their part. 

Yeah, screwing someone out of $1600 is clearly just a wee technical glitch and no big deal.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Fletch said:

Not really what I said, or indeed anything remotely like it.

Yeah, 'technical glitches' that cost clients money should absolutely go to a higher authority, especially when IG's technical 'support' is inaccessible or incompetent or simply can't be bothered.   Otherwise these c*nts will get away with a shoddy system, see? :)

Edited by dmedin
Link to comment
1 minute ago, dmedin said:

Yeah, 'technical glitches' that cost clients money should absolutely go to a higher authority, especially when IG's technical 'support' is inaccessible or incompetent or simply can't be bothered.   Otherwise these c*nts will get away with a shoddy system, see? :)

Can't really argue with that. Providing of course you want to wait it out for an 'official' investigation.

Link to comment
49 minutes ago, Fletch said:

Can't really argue with that. Providing of course you want to wait it out for an 'official' investigation.

 

I doubt the FCA will give it the time of day, personally.  The brokers are free to swindle and cheat :)

Link to comment
1 minute ago, dmedin said:

 

I doubt the FCA will give it the time of day, personally.  The brokers are free to swindle and cheat :)

Nor do I. IG would doubtless claim extenuating circumstances due to the covid situation. Ultimately depends on whether you would want all the additional time and hassle to make a point. It's unlikely you would up with anything extra by going to the ombudsman, except possibly a dose of piles as you sit around waiting.

  • Thought provoking 1
Link to comment

I'm in Australia, so it is going to be another entity. Obviously I'm not going to go to any onbudsman first would expect them to resolve.

Sounds like they don't have any idea what is happening. Their last response was a 'rebooking' is required. 

I explained the line of logic where:

Ticker changes happen all the time, the same stock on our other 2 brokerage accounts changed instantenously.

It doesn't make sense that a 'rebooking'/'/line change' needs to be done and I need to wait 7 days for this to happen.

If such was the case, why was I told on 4 separate e-mails to just wait for the ticker to change and the helpdesk is working on it (4 times via email and once via phone).

FYI I can't cannot do anything with the position. I'm getting the feeling that I'm being palmed off by juniors and wouldn't get a resolution until it honestly does go to the complaints department and someone senior can make a decision.

 

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • image.png

  • Posts

    • In the decentralized future, collaboration is key. Builders shaping the next wave of gaming, entertainment, finance, and community spaces require blockchain infrastructure that's scalable, cost-effective, and adaptable. They seek an ecosystem where creativity thrives, and support is abundant. This is where SAGA comes in. With its recent listing on Bitget exchange, its native token is gaining significant traction, signaling growing interest in SAGA's mission to empower Web3 builders.
    • The cryptocurrency industry has undergone substantial growth in recent years, largely fueled by centralized exchanges. However, with this growth comes a responsibility to adhere to regulatory standards. Recent revelations have cast a shadow over BingX, a prominent cryptocurrency exchange, as it has been found to be facilitating transactions for Iranian users in defiance of US sanctions. This blatant disregard for regulatory prohibitions, which are in place to combat terrorist financing and illicit arms procurement through crypto channels, raises serious ethical questions. The decision by BingX to engage with Iranian clients despite the associated risks and legal constraints has sparked concerns about the judgement of its management team. Of particular concern is the lax enforcement of Know Your Customer (KYC) verification, allowing users to withdraw significant sums without proper identity authentication. Inevitably, regulatory bodies such as the DOJ and SEC will seek explanations from BingX regarding these breaches. The repercussions of such inquiries are likely to be severe, with users already expressing alarm and initiating mass withdrawals. Beyond regulatory scrutiny, BingX's actions threaten its reputation and long-term viability. By flouting US sanctions and disregarding regulatory compliance, the exchange risks damaging its integrity and credibility. As BingX navigates this ethical quagmire, the extent of the fallout remains uncertain. What are your thoughts on the potential implications of these breaches for the exchange? Source: https://cointelegraph.com/news/bingx-exchange-iran-sanctions-evasion      
    • Current Bitcoin Price USD $67,710.6 GBP £54,355.5 Euro €63,529.5  
×
×
  • Create New...
us