Basically, I have asked you a question before. But the situation is that I was looking to deposit £120,000 into a broker who has a retail platform and an institutional platform. I have made clear concerns about the negative slippage (Hence the negative cost of execution) experienced before and asked whether I should be using the retail platform or institutional platform.
Members of staff at this company has promised that, the retail platform would be suffice and someone have called me to fix the problems I have experienced before. However such a person has never called and the platform remained to be problematic.
When I visited their offices, they then told me to use the institutional platform and not the retail platform when the negative costs is already very high and they simply offered no fix to it.
Hence, technically staffs at this firm knew that the retail platform is not sufficient for my needs but still sold it to me. What does this breach?
But if they said X Platform is sufficient for my needs and therefore I don't need Y. But it turns out that X couldn't handle my needs and Y is needed. Then it is a misrepresentation?
Right is it more or less a straight forward claim.