"care to u ? 200:1 is legal in the UK u should complain to the FSA to change their rules , it has nothing to do with IG's risk m" - i approached the FSA, they said they don't deal with complaints direct from the public. i asked the FOS to refer the matter to the FSA, they said that they don't refer matters to the FSA. err...ok, so where does that leave financial services regulation? shall i come back in 20 years when you're back from lunch / sick leave / strike?
"I think they did nothing wrong in letting you open the positions, you had the credit for the positions and could calculate how much each point against you would take on your bankroll and credit. This is not a good defense for your case as I see it. You chance lies in your inexperience not being able to close the position, in close connection to breaching the credit you had been granted. You fail to do this, and with a crazy volatile market at the time, they should have closed your position as you were no longer covered by the credit given you." - that is my main defence, but with the benefit of the experience i now have, i think IG's risk assessment of market volatility at the time was woefully inadequate. they obviously realised, too late for some customers, that they had underestimated market volatility by increasing the risk factor from 80, not to 100, not to 120, not to 160, but to 200 in 1 foul swoop. at 200, i would only have been able to put on £100 per point, which would have halved my losses - still not ideal, but a lot better than 92k!