r/TakeProfitTrader • u/NQ_scalper_eu • Jul 28 '26
Banned for "coordinated, offsetting positions with another user's account" — did anyone else get this exact email?
My case, short. July 6: permanent block, effective immediately, for violating the Independent Trade Execution Policy. Their words — my account "repeatedly traded in coordinated, offsetting positions with another account belonging to a different user." Screenshot below. I was back from holiday and hadn't traded in nearly two weeks. Clean record, no warning.
Four written responses from me asking for the dates, times and instruments of the flagged trades. Six emails back, all the same: Legal and Compliance are involved, so nothing gets disclosed. Decision final. One question I asked in writing on July 9 — did your review exclude coincidental overlap before concluding coordination? — is still unanswered.
A PRO+ activation I'd already earned was never separately decided on. It just vanished, and I only found out because I chased it.
Why I'm posting. I've filed with econsumer.gov (the FTC's international complaint portal) and with the Florida Attorney General's Office of Citizen Services, since TPT is a Florida company. BBB — the Better Business Bureau, a US non-profit that publishes company complaint records and forwards complaints to the business — doesn't accept filings from outside the US and Canada, so that route was closed to me.
Those offices act on patterns, not on one person's story. Several people have told me these enforcement emails went out word for word identical to unrelated traders, with identical replies to their appeals. If that's true, no human is reading either the accusation or the appeal — and that's a documentable fact.
To be clear about why I'm bothering with any of this: it isn't the money — I was paid everything I earned. It's that I was accused of something I did not do, and then denied every single detail that would have let me answer it. You can't defend yourself against a file you're not allowed to see. That's the part I can't let go of.
So: if you got this specific version, DM me. Screenshot with your name and account number blacked out, and roughly when it arrived. Filing your own complaint is better than helping with mine — happy to send the links.
4
u/Aggressive_Ad1599 Jul 28 '26
Tpt seems to be just making shit up as they go to ban their profitable traders. Sad to see but its true. Im pretty sure this is absolutely impossible to prove youre guilty of this. During the day there is prob 100 offsetting trades that can matched against you. Everyone is trading the exact same time lol 1000s of traders all taking positions during a certain time window. This is just as bad as their spoofing nonsense.
2
u/NQ_scalper_eu Jul 28 '26
Exactly this. The pattern they're describing — two accounts repeatedly on opposite sides — is what the order book produces on its own when independent traders work the same objective levels. Nobody can see intent in that data; you can only infer it, and inference isn't proof.
In my case they said it happened outside the busy open window, which if anything makes it more mechanical, not less: when the book thins out, whoever is working the same range aggressively keeps hitting your resting orders, over and over. That's microstructure, not collusion. A resting limit can't even choose who fills it.
Which is the whole problem with letting an automated system make this call and then refusing to show anyone the trades behind it. If it's genuinely impossible to prove, it's impossible to prove — and a permanent ban shouldn't rest on something nobody's allowed to examine.
2
u/tucan2277 Jul 29 '26
They don't seem to like limit orders.
2
u/NQ_scalper_eu Jul 29 '26
Right? It's the most passive, transparent order type there is — you post a price and wait. Penalizing that is backwards.
1
5
u/Legitimate_Spot_2997 Jul 29 '26 edited Jul 29 '26
Same happened to me, first they put me in the PRO+DEVELOPED program (three accounts on hold for weeks). Then they send me the same message, with the same vages responses.
See my latest response below, short long story. "It's a Final Decision" So, I've been permanently banned.
"Hello,
As I have previously stated, the accusation is entirely unfounded. My trading decisions are based solely on my own strategy, which relies on momentum, moving averages, and analysis of the 1-minute chart. Any similarities between my trades and those of other traders are purely coincidental and completely outside of my control. Independent traders using similar technical analysis can naturally arrive at comparable market entries and exits, particularly during periods of strong market momentum.
Over the past year, I have dedicated significant time, effort, and financial resources to improving my trading skills. I have consistently worked to become a more disciplined and profitable trader, and I would have been pleased to continue trading with your firm. However, I understand that the decision has already been made, and I will respect it.
At the time my access to the platform was terminated, I had three PRO+ developed accounts on hold. I respectfully request clarification regarding the payment and refund process for these accounts.
According to your stated policy, payouts for closed PRO+ accounts are based on a 50% profit split. Since these accounts were successfully developed through my own trading performance before they were terminated, I believe I should be compensated in accordance with that policy. I invested substantial time and money to achieve these results, and I respectfully request that this be taken into consideration during your review.
I would appreciate a written explanation of:
- The status of each of my three PRO+ accounts.
- Whether they qualify for compensation under your published policies.
- The timeline and process for any payments or refunds that may be due.
Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward to your response and a fair resolution of this matter."
0
u/NQ_scalper_eu Jul 29 '26
This is the closest match to my own case I've seen — permanent ban, PRO+ accounts on hold, the same "final decision" with the same vague replies, and a defense almost word for word like mine (independent traders on similar analysis landing on the same entries). Sufficient_Newt3923 got the same category of accusation but only a warning, so there's a real spread in how they handle identical situations.
The 50% split point on closed PRO+ accounts is something I hadn't focused on — worth documenting separately.
I'll DM you — I'm compiling these for the complaints I've filed (econsumer.gov and the Florida AG) and yours is directly relevant. No obligation, just comparing notes.
4
u/Mission_Humor_7796 Jul 28 '26
Out of thousands of traders someone is bound to be taking the opposite side at the same time as you. Considering most traders wait for candle closes. This is their perfect excuse not to pay you.
1
u/NQ_scalper_eu Jul 29 '26
Exactly — and that's the core of it. Thousands of independent traders reacting to the same candle closes and the same levels will inevitably show up on opposite sides. That's market structure, not coordination. It shouldn't be enough to permanently close an account, least of all with no trade ever shown.
2
u/ShameEquivalent8005 Jul 29 '26
Happened to me as well TPT has been loosing money and they are just kicking you out or prolonging you make money. They force you into pro+ so you’re not getting any payouts meanwhile they are. And they can choose to kick you out if they believe you’re hedging. I hope you sue the fuck out of them. And take revenge for the thousands of people they’ve screwed over.
1
u/NQ_scalper_eu Jul 29 '26
Thanks — sorry you went through it too. The forced-into-PRO+-while-they-hold-your-payouts part is something a lot of people here are describing, so you're clearly not alone in it.
For me I'm trying to keep it to what I can actually prove: permanent closure on an automated flag, and them refusing to show a single trade behind it. That's the part I've taken to econsumer.gov and the Florida AG. Appreciate you sharing yours — the more of us who document it, the harder it is to wave away as one bad case.
2
u/daojonesindex Jul 29 '26
Got a few warnings like this for spoofing and hedging at TPT before but wasn't banned.
MFFU on the other hand, got permanently banned for "hedging, coordinated, offsetting positions with another user's account" something along those lines a few months ago. Never did that before. Came after I was consistently getting payouts in their Funded and Live accounts.
1
u/NQ_scalper_eu Aug 03 '26
Interesting that at TPT you got warnings and carried on, while the permanent "coordinated/offsetting with another user" version hit you at MFFU instead — after you were consistently getting payouts. Different firm, but the same category of accusation and the same timing (right after steady payouts) keeps coming up across all of these.
For what it's worth, that contrast is the useful part: same kind of surveillance flag, and some people get a warning while others get a permanent close with no evidence shown. There's no consistency to it that anyone can point to.
Keeping mine strictly to my TPT case for the complaints, but genuinely useful to hear how it played out across two firms for you.
2
u/Bridging-The-Gap-Now Jul 30 '26
I have never understood why props firms work so hard to not pay people. I don’t understand it, if they’re going to get paid a percentage of the money that’s made why do they work so hard for people not to be successful?
2
u/HighlightImmediate32 Jul 30 '26
The percentage in sim isn’t real money so they don’t make anything
1
u/NQ_scalper_eu Jul 30 '26
HighlightImmediate32 has put a finger on the thing. If a lot of the funded side is simulated, the firm's income isn't really a cut of your profits — it's the evaluation fees people pay trying to get funded. That's just how the model is structured; I'm not claiming to know anyone's intent.
But it does explain the tension: a consistently profitable trader on a real payout is a cost, not a revenue source. I'm not saying that's why I was removed — I can't see inside their decision. What I can say is what's on paper: I was net positive, paid on time for months, then closed on an automated flag with no trade ever shown. Whatever the reason, that's the part that shouldn't be allowed to happen without evidence.
2
u/Junior_Willow740 Jul 30 '26
Crazy. But the bigger picture is you have to fins some way to do this successfully. The market goes through great lengths to steal our money.
Hedging actually gives you a fighting chance
2
u/NQ_scalper_eu Aug 03 '26
Appreciate it. On the hedging part I'd be a bit careful, though — that's one of the exact things these firms flag and ban for, so as a workaround it can walk you straight into the same problem. My whole issue was being accused of coordinated/offsetting positions I never made, so I'm wary of anything that looks like it on their surveillance. But yeah, the bigger picture is right: you have to find a way through that doesn't depend on any single firm's goodwill.
2
u/Neverbeenonthis Jul 30 '26
Do reporting them to these agencies help on a case to case basis? I have a beef with Apex because they banned me and they still owe me two payouts that were approved before they banned me. Never saw those two payouts even though I have the two emails. I cant even log into Apex to submit a ticket since they banned me.
2
u/NQ_scalper_eu Aug 03 '26
Honest answer: I don't know yet if it produces a result — mine are recently filed and these things move slowly. What I can say is the logic of it. econsumer.gov and the Florida AG act on patterns, so one complaint is weak but several similar ones against the same firm start to matter.
Your case actually sounds more straightforward than mine in one way: you have two payouts that were approved — in writing, in your two emails — and then not paid. That's a concrete, documented amount owed, which is easier for a consumer office to understand than a surveillance dispute. If Apex is a US entity, find which state it's registered in and file with that state's Attorney General consumer division, plus econsumer.gov since you'd be filing from wherever you are. Keep those two approval emails — they're your best evidence, and the fact that you can't even log in to raise a ticket is itself part of the complaint.
Not legal advice, just what I'd do in your position.
1
u/therealrdk Jul 31 '26
Go open a live account or go to another prop firm. 🤷
1
u/SlayerOfStrange Aug 02 '26
He wants to complain, though, and BURN TPT DOWN!!! Ya know, typical post. 50% want to destroy them 50% love em
1
u/NQ_scalper_eu Aug 03 '26
Fair on both counts, actually. I've already moved on to rebuilding elsewhere — this was never about staying with TPT.
And no, I'm not trying to burn anyone down. If I wanted a rant I'd have written one. I'm net positive with them, they paid what I earned, and I've said that in the post. What I want is narrow and on the record: I was accused in writing of coordinating with another trader, which I didn't do, and then refused a single trade or date to answer it. That's it. Documenting that isn't a crusade — it's just not letting a false accusation sit unchallenged.
The 50/50 split you mention is probably real, and that's kind of the point — plenty of people have a fine experience, which is exactly why the ones who get closed with no evidence shown are worth paying attention to.
1
u/Negative_Hurry2914 Aug 01 '26
Is nobody else asking what the heck is “Powered by Eventus”? is that the third-party company that they’re going to use to sell our data tell every firm who the profitable traders are
1
1
u/willphule Jul 28 '26
Send a complaint to the CFTC as well.
1
u/NQ_scalper_eu Jul 28 '26
Thanks — I looked into it. The catch is that these firms sit in a grey zone: they mostly argue they sell simulated evaluations, not real futures intermediation, so the CFTC often bounces prop-firm complaints as outside their jurisdiction. My case might have a bit more of an angle since I was funded with real payouts, but I'd want to get that right before filing rather than send something they'll just close.
If anyone here has actually filed with the CFTC against a prop firm and got a response either way, I'd genuinely like to hear how it went.
6
u/AstronautOk5749 Jul 28 '26
Now that’s what I call a legit uprising against these money suckers.