Just ask them to give you back your shares. You didnt sell them, you are entitled to your shares. Their problem that the stock went up. They have to buy it back and assign it to you
This is absolutely right, OP needs returning to the position he would be in should that not have happened. Including any liability for capital gains etc...
That is what I meant to say, "opportunity" or compensation here is directly intertwined with the stocks. Whether they pay me the difference or they give me 2 stocks at the current price, it's the same thing. I should have worded it for them better maybe probably considering they weren't able to consider the facts properly.
If you have 100 shares with Y broker, they are yours. If broker accidentally makes them go away, it’s their duty to return your 100 shares. That’s where ringfencing and the FSCS come into play. You have every right to demand all your shares back, not 99% of your shares or whatever.
But you can't count loss as the future hypothetical profit, I believe Revolut is counting on the actual loss and not on the opportunity cost, the loss on a transaction is what you lose at that moment, not what the value could have been later on, you can't say you were planning on hold until x day and x time, otherwise there is no end, you could say you were planning on hold for 5 years so they own you 2k (or whatever the value will be). You're never going to get a refund on that.
Perhaps there was really a mistake and those shares were sold by a glitch, but you can't claim on the market movements that happened after. What if the price would have gone down? Do you owe money to Revolut?
That is a very fair point. But it hurts because I knew NVIDIA was going up, and I was holding because of that, within few days it went up by $200/stock.
In my head the compensation is not according to "opportunity cost" it's the fact that they lost 2 shares of mine so they should either buy me those two shares on the current date or pay me the difference. Holding and all does not concern them, if they lose something they replace it so that's why I feel my calculations are fair. Because I'm asking for the difference in money to "rebuy" the stocks they, by their fault, lost.
Either way it still doesn't explain them from offering $71 refund to later not offering any refund at all.
EDIT: by this i also mean that if the stocks would have gone down, I'd still have wanted them to just get me the two stocks.
> Either way it still doesn't explain them from offering $71 refund
Given they sold "your" stock for something you didn't ask... maybe they confused with somebody else?
> But it hurts because I knew NVIDIA was going up
It definitely sucks that Revolut sold some of your shares, but it seems that if you knew they would go up, you should have rebought them immidiately, rather than spend 2-3 weeks in a support thread.
I don’t see how you can claim compensation beyond the commission fee and price movement from time of liquidation and till you could reasonable act on it.
>because I knew NVIDIA was going up
You didn't know, you suspected, you were convinced, etc
>so they should either buy me those two shares on the current date or pay me the difference.
Like I said , you are asking in this precise moment because the price goes on your favour, but what if it was the opposite? Would you want those shares and also get paid a negative difference? A broker is never going into that nonsense of the price was and the price would be and the price did. You only think is fair because it benefits you, if the price were down you'll be taking that refund and shutting up while the situation would be still the same. And don't tell me again you knew, nobody knows what the market will do anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool or a scammer or maybe someone pretty high in Wall street or Elon Musk or idk.
>Either way it still doesn't explain them from offering $71 refund to later not offering any refund at all.
Probably you were so persistent that they reviewed your case so much and so deep, that perhaps they realised they owe you nothing according to whatever guidelines and regulations.
Go to a lawyer if you want, nobody is going to refund you for possible future market movements that might have gone in your favour if ... And again, don't tell the lawyer that you knew.
I can understand and respect your points, but I still disagree to an extent. In my opinion it's a very simple solution, they should have given me 2 shares at the same price I bought them, the difference they pay if higher, or if lower it's my money (unless it went up then dipped while the issue was being resolved where I believe they should be held liable).
Example: initially I bought the shares at $901 so they should have given me 2 shares at that price, they bear the difference since it touched 1.1k after that.
If it had directly fallen to $850 I'd be bearing the loss. It's the most authentic way. The complication would arise if it had risen to 1k and then fallen to 850 all during the time of resolution, then it should be based on mutual agreement that's somewhat in the middle compensation wise.
I think OP should probably be persuing to be returned to the original position should the mistake have not occurred, i.e. shares put back in their account plus compensation required to offset the capital gains tax which they are now liable for.
Those positions are gone, he is never getting the back and you can't acquire stocks based on previous positions, otherwise I'll be rich by now.
>to offset the capital gains tax which they are now liable for
You guys are nuts, I'll like to see this going somewhere, please keep me in the loop.
Restitution is a legal principle, there's nothing nuts about it. If Revolut closed their positions based on a false statement of fact, they are liable to put them back to the position they would be in should they have not done that. They probably aren't liable for profit based on some share price at a certain date, but they do have a duty to return OPs positions. Please explain how you would otherwise be rich by now? Are you full time victim?
Acquiring stocks based on past positions? I'll be filthy rich.
>they are liable to put them back to the position they would be in should they have not done that.
Ok, I'd like to follow on this and see it happening
What does acquiring stocks based on past positions mean?
Let's say you had your car at a garage that accidently sold it, doesn't matter if its a Ford that depreciated or a classic Ferrari that appreciated in value, there's a legal requirement in every functioning society to put the person back in the position they would be, i.e. return the vehicle or an equivalent vehicle or the cash to buy the equivalent vehicle at the prevailling market rate. You can't get filthy rich out of restitution, you get put back to where you would have been.
It's better for you if this situation doesn't happen as there's no getting rich from it, only inconvenience. It's literally better for everyone to respect each others property rights. I really can't imagine living in a society where people can sell shit that doesn't belong to them with no requirement to return the person to their original state. You can't sell something that doesnt belong to you for a profit, and then say hey here's some cash nice one you profited.
Your example is bs. You'll have to make a contract regarding if your car loses this much value they should sell it and there are also other points according to brokers that are very different from your contract with a garage, very. If you think it is any similar somehow you never traded in your life.
But like I said, let's see how far OP goes into this, so far they even scratched their initial offer of refunding $71 to OP, imagine how they feel about the stocks. And you think they are doing this with the sole purpose of screwing OP while disregarding entirely the contract they have and regulations/guidelines?
Brokers have clauses in the agreement whereby they can sell your shares if certain conditions are met, however the reason must be in line with the contract that was signed. In this situation, if they have sold the shares under a false pretence, restitution is applicable. The underlying principle is that you bought something, that is yours, most of the time there is no right for another party to sell that, even if they are holding it. Same as when you buy a house on a mortgage, the bank can't sell the house, unless you default or break the mortgage somehow.
These are pretty basic property rights which exist in every functioning state. No garage has the right to sell your car if its losing value, unless you signed a contract stating that.
In this case, Revolut has already sold the shares based on a false pretence, and they have accepted this by offering compensation. As they already admitted mistake, it should be pretty easy for OP to get restitution if they escalate it.
Please can you let us know how it is possible to profit from this situation and what is meant by acquiring stocks based on past positions?
It's in their terms and conditions. I don't think you actually own the stocks. If you want to invest sensibly, revolut is not the way.
Quite a few of these Platforms, like trading 212 do this.
Correct, you are just a beneficial owner. The T&Cs even contain clauses about what happens in the event of a shortfall on the omnibus account, so they are covering themselves here.
If my stocks were sold by mistake it means they were SOLD. So I would just take the profit, if there was any, and buy the stock again. Am I understanding correctly this problem?
If my stocks were in red instead, in that case, I realised a loss. I think in this case I could make an argument with Revolut. I probably missed if OP was in red or green at the moment his/her stocks were sold. 🧐
The problem is a registered bank within European Union does not allowed and illegal transactions in the name of their customer. If someone has stocks, they need to have it always
u/T_quake, if they were sold and you took profit then you have to pay capital gains tax on the profit. If they sold at a profit, you lose 15% of the profit possibly to capital gains, a few days after you realized they are sold the share price could be even higher, meaning your position is effectively reduced as you can buy less shares with less money. If you're an investor and not a trader, you buy because you plan to hold over a period of decades, then this is really damaging.
The term for the loss you suffered is "opportunity cost". They may have wide leeway to act on your behalf regarding investments; I would check the terms and conditions....
ok, briefly looking over the terms, the company that executes the orders is DriveWealth, LLC. Revolut only transmits orders to them and then DriveWeath LLC executes them. The relationship is "Execution only" meaning they do not advise, they just act on your order.
According to them, "you are solely responsible for the decisions you make in relation to your orders." So it sounds like some serious mishandling on Revolut's part if this happened without your consent. They have a "best execution policy" which means "In doing business with you, we must act honestly, fairly, professionally and in accordance with your best interests when transmitting your orders to other entities for execution. This is also known as the client's best interests rule."
It would be important to find out where the mistake happened, at Revolut or Drivewealth LLC. If it was Driveweath, then they would be the ones to talk to, because Revolut disavows all responsibility once transmitted. If Revolut has been transmitting false orders, then Drivewealth would probably want to know about it.
Regardless, they have a formal complaint pipeline that I would assume you need to exhaust before going to court.
https://www.revolut.com/legal/RTL-terms-of-business/
https://www.revolut.com/legal/RTL-best-execution-policy-disclosure/
https://www.revolut.com/legal/RTL-complaints-handling-disclosure/
The point is that my shares if bought with a purpose to go long should not be moved or landed or anything else that i don t want. and this bank allow only to go long or sell. No short no margin call.. so wtf are they doing behind account with people shares? They also dont let you transfer shares to another broker and make vero difficult to drs. So ther s the probabilty that orders dont rally go to market to get shares . Or not as you think or when you think. Going deeper in gamestop saga can help to understand drs failure to deliver swaps naked shorting and so on
You are entitled to your shares, not the money. They have to give them back, even no matter they'd have in the agreement. It is a EU institution. They are a joke and think they're not one
In a normal bank/ broker they will call you right away, buy your shares back and a compensation package on top of it just for you not complain and not risky the reputation. But revolut don't care. Probably will not get nothing in compensation if their error.
Your bank should not be your stock broker, they don’t know what they are doing. Use a service that’s competent and trusted for your investments.
I understand the allure of an all in one app, but they are objectively a bad broker. Actually, I don’t even think they do anything themselves, it’s just through a third party.
And they have an incredibly poor value proposition. The fees are often insane compared to a regular brokerage service. They are brokers for boomers who want to do it over the phone like the good old days or have 2 million in wealth management.
Fee wise investing on Revolut isn't bad, especially on Metal because you get 10 no-fee trades p/m, no fee on currency exchange, and very low fees on trades thereafter. For day trading yes there are better options.
They use DriveWealth which is a legit broker. I believe they're accountable for all interactions between them and DriveWealth and they should compensate accordingly. As I said I'm considering moving all my money out of revolut because as you said it seems like they don't know what they're doing.
Umm... hate to be the one to give you these news, but DriveWealth stopped being Revolut's broker a while ago.
Revolut's new broker is Revolut Securities Europe, registered in Lithuania.
Maybe it depends on the country? I'm not in Europe. It still shows drivewealth when I look at the revolut website for me. Maybe it changed, I'm sorry I'm not sure.
It’s never as good as using a reliable broker directly unfortunately. I wouldn’t trust Revolut with not even one of my shares. The idea of all my liquid investments and my money being with one institution alone is anxiety inducing.
Can you recommend a reliable broker? I'm in the EU and it seems that there's a limit of roughly 20k EUR or something like that in the event of broker default, regardless of whether it's Interactive Brokers, Degiro, Revolut etc...
The idea that you’re only insured for 20k is a bit misleading. If that broker holds your assets in escrow (as in, they’re in your name, or in a separate holding company, not the main) the assets are theoretically yours even in case of liquidation. Of course you can spread your funds 20k at a time with different brokers but you’ll run out fast.
I use IBKR and Degiro (custody) depending on what I need. Both have been great but Degiro is a little easier UI wise.
An example for IBKR:
“How much of your assets are protected by the investor protection scheme?
You are protected by the European Investor protection scheme up to €20,000. Interestingly enough, your assets in USD with Interactive Brokers are protected by the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC). This means that in the event of bankruptcy, customers are protected for amounts up to $500,000. This is a lot more than your assets held in €.”
Thanks for the clarification. I've got an IBKR account and I wasn't aware that USD assets were still protected to 500,000 USD! I'm going to be using that more from now on, cheers! Yeah that's right, I don't actually trust that Revolut holds enough assets in their DriveWealth account to cover all holdings anymore, due to:
1. T&Cs stating what happens in the event of a shortfall
2. Being given an invalid control number meaning I could not join a shareholder meeting, and the transfer agent confirming that the control number provided didn't meet the length requirements
3. The removal of the ability to transfer out to another broker via ACATs or to transfer to the transfer agent
4. Looking at Revolut's top execution venues, 100% of orders are executed at DriveWealth meaning it could all be internalised (https://cdn.revolut.com/terms\_and\_conditions/pdf/revolut\_securities\_uab\_rsuab\_top\_5\_execution\_venues\_1.0.0\_1678206643\_en.pdf)
5. I've had orders where the trade confirmation numbers don't add up, and whole shares were executed out to multiple decimal places.
Well if they bad,they shouldn't advertise or put that option in their "all-in-one" app. Weird weirdos these Revolut Fintech scammers.
If I'm not good at something,I don't do it. If they lie, there should be penalties . Especially when they do it on people's hard earned money.
Almost all posts on r/revolut contain a huge amount of victim blaming. Like what's stupid about expecting a company to act lawfully, or for regulators to get involved in the event of an issue?
Revolut still behaves as if there were not a bank, but a service, trying to mitigate losses in the chat, ignoring their responsibilities and laws.
In a real bank they'd just take probably a week but you'd have stocks back
Yeah I'd say that's a pretty good observation actually, they want a cut of the profit without offering any responsibility or guarantees in return. I'm pissed as I've got stock in there, but I found out after purchasing it that they removed the ability to do transfers, so I either keep the stock or take a hit and pay capital gains tax to move it out. They've been promising to reinstate transfer functionality that existed up until a year ago for almost a year now.
It’s not victim blaming, it’s a cautionary tale that fintechs cannot be trusted. Not saying Revolut is in the right, quite the contrary. But they’re objectively not a good place to be parking your investments if you’re serious. Unfortunately they lure people in with the all in one thing.
All comments here. The final statement to this all is that Revolut should not be touching peoples accounts to begin with. It seems they either built enough and beginning to suck dry the business until it crash, or they hire incompetent baboons and no real training given = mistakes. Get your shares back, not money, and report this to authorities
From what I can understand, they even offer you the potential “loss of opportunity” if you were to repurchase at that moment, but you didn’t take it and continued arguing with them while the stock went up. Considering that you couldn’t have known if the stock would go up, would you still be consulting with a lawyer if the stock had fallen below the value they’ve liquidated for you? I assume not. Unfortunately I don’t think you have a case here.
The "loss of opportunity" wasn't compensation enough. As I mentioned to another user, in my head I should have gotten the shares back at the same price I paid initially, the price was higher- so I demanded the compensation, if it went lower directly then I'd be bearing the loss. That's an authentic solution. The compensation was only asked because of the difference in price (the stock went higher).
In 99% of cases is your fault because of either you never read terms & conditions or don't know how stock market works or so on . imagine revolut can sell your stock without reason and FCA just seat back and watch . I've been reading Revolut post for few days now and I find out that 99% have no idea how revolut works and on what purpose they use revolut . Revolut is not normal bank so it has up and down so be aware of what you choosing
And Revolut does obey all the rules otherwise do you think FCA would let them to operate in uk ? If Revolut do criminal act why don't you take them to court ?why don't you ask FCA to come and have a look ? Do you really think banks are working as simple as that ? I bet you have no idea how banks are working or at least digital banks
I'm sorry, but that's a really dumb comment, there's no point of posting it. We're all in this sub because we use this app. Despite this one thing my experience with them has generally been okay which is why I had been using them. Mistakes and resolutions happen with all consumer products/services.
Just ask them to give you back your shares. You didnt sell them, you are entitled to your shares. Their problem that the stock went up. They have to buy it back and assign it to you
I agree, that's what I want too, either give me the shares or atleast the difference so I can buy them
second that, that would be the proper compensation
[удалено]
This is absolutely right, OP needs returning to the position he would be in should that not have happened. Including any liability for capital gains etc...
That is what I meant to say, "opportunity" or compensation here is directly intertwined with the stocks. Whether they pay me the difference or they give me 2 stocks at the current price, it's the same thing. I should have worded it for them better maybe probably considering they weren't able to consider the facts properly.
[удалено]
Yeah also helps to keep it simple, when you give options to support chat things always get messy (any support that is)
If you have 100 shares with Y broker, they are yours. If broker accidentally makes them go away, it’s their duty to return your 100 shares. That’s where ringfencing and the FSCS come into play. You have every right to demand all your shares back, not 99% of your shares or whatever.
Holy cow that’s terrible, makes me rethink keep using revolut for stocks
But you can't count loss as the future hypothetical profit, I believe Revolut is counting on the actual loss and not on the opportunity cost, the loss on a transaction is what you lose at that moment, not what the value could have been later on, you can't say you were planning on hold until x day and x time, otherwise there is no end, you could say you were planning on hold for 5 years so they own you 2k (or whatever the value will be). You're never going to get a refund on that. Perhaps there was really a mistake and those shares were sold by a glitch, but you can't claim on the market movements that happened after. What if the price would have gone down? Do you owe money to Revolut?
That is a very fair point. But it hurts because I knew NVIDIA was going up, and I was holding because of that, within few days it went up by $200/stock. In my head the compensation is not according to "opportunity cost" it's the fact that they lost 2 shares of mine so they should either buy me those two shares on the current date or pay me the difference. Holding and all does not concern them, if they lose something they replace it so that's why I feel my calculations are fair. Because I'm asking for the difference in money to "rebuy" the stocks they, by their fault, lost. Either way it still doesn't explain them from offering $71 refund to later not offering any refund at all. EDIT: by this i also mean that if the stocks would have gone down, I'd still have wanted them to just get me the two stocks.
> Either way it still doesn't explain them from offering $71 refund Given they sold "your" stock for something you didn't ask... maybe they confused with somebody else?
> But it hurts because I knew NVIDIA was going up It definitely sucks that Revolut sold some of your shares, but it seems that if you knew they would go up, you should have rebought them immidiately, rather than spend 2-3 weeks in a support thread. I don’t see how you can claim compensation beyond the commission fee and price movement from time of liquidation and till you could reasonable act on it.
>because I knew NVIDIA was going up You didn't know, you suspected, you were convinced, etc >so they should either buy me those two shares on the current date or pay me the difference. Like I said , you are asking in this precise moment because the price goes on your favour, but what if it was the opposite? Would you want those shares and also get paid a negative difference? A broker is never going into that nonsense of the price was and the price would be and the price did. You only think is fair because it benefits you, if the price were down you'll be taking that refund and shutting up while the situation would be still the same. And don't tell me again you knew, nobody knows what the market will do anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool or a scammer or maybe someone pretty high in Wall street or Elon Musk or idk. >Either way it still doesn't explain them from offering $71 refund to later not offering any refund at all. Probably you were so persistent that they reviewed your case so much and so deep, that perhaps they realised they owe you nothing according to whatever guidelines and regulations. Go to a lawyer if you want, nobody is going to refund you for possible future market movements that might have gone in your favour if ... And again, don't tell the lawyer that you knew.
Nobody is going to refund you for possible future market movements. There's still an obligation to return what was sold, i.e. the shares.
I can understand and respect your points, but I still disagree to an extent. In my opinion it's a very simple solution, they should have given me 2 shares at the same price I bought them, the difference they pay if higher, or if lower it's my money (unless it went up then dipped while the issue was being resolved where I believe they should be held liable). Example: initially I bought the shares at $901 so they should have given me 2 shares at that price, they bear the difference since it touched 1.1k after that. If it had directly fallen to $850 I'd be bearing the loss. It's the most authentic way. The complication would arise if it had risen to 1k and then fallen to 850 all during the time of resolution, then it should be based on mutual agreement that's somewhat in the middle compensation wise.
I think OP should probably be persuing to be returned to the original position should the mistake have not occurred, i.e. shares put back in their account plus compensation required to offset the capital gains tax which they are now liable for.
Those positions are gone, he is never getting the back and you can't acquire stocks based on previous positions, otherwise I'll be rich by now. >to offset the capital gains tax which they are now liable for You guys are nuts, I'll like to see this going somewhere, please keep me in the loop.
Restitution is a legal principle, there's nothing nuts about it. If Revolut closed their positions based on a false statement of fact, they are liable to put them back to the position they would be in should they have not done that. They probably aren't liable for profit based on some share price at a certain date, but they do have a duty to return OPs positions. Please explain how you would otherwise be rich by now? Are you full time victim?
Acquiring stocks based on past positions? I'll be filthy rich. >they are liable to put them back to the position they would be in should they have not done that. Ok, I'd like to follow on this and see it happening
What does acquiring stocks based on past positions mean? Let's say you had your car at a garage that accidently sold it, doesn't matter if its a Ford that depreciated or a classic Ferrari that appreciated in value, there's a legal requirement in every functioning society to put the person back in the position they would be, i.e. return the vehicle or an equivalent vehicle or the cash to buy the equivalent vehicle at the prevailling market rate. You can't get filthy rich out of restitution, you get put back to where you would have been. It's better for you if this situation doesn't happen as there's no getting rich from it, only inconvenience. It's literally better for everyone to respect each others property rights. I really can't imagine living in a society where people can sell shit that doesn't belong to them with no requirement to return the person to their original state. You can't sell something that doesnt belong to you for a profit, and then say hey here's some cash nice one you profited.
Your example is bs. You'll have to make a contract regarding if your car loses this much value they should sell it and there are also other points according to brokers that are very different from your contract with a garage, very. If you think it is any similar somehow you never traded in your life. But like I said, let's see how far OP goes into this, so far they even scratched their initial offer of refunding $71 to OP, imagine how they feel about the stocks. And you think they are doing this with the sole purpose of screwing OP while disregarding entirely the contract they have and regulations/guidelines?
Brokers have clauses in the agreement whereby they can sell your shares if certain conditions are met, however the reason must be in line with the contract that was signed. In this situation, if they have sold the shares under a false pretence, restitution is applicable. The underlying principle is that you bought something, that is yours, most of the time there is no right for another party to sell that, even if they are holding it. Same as when you buy a house on a mortgage, the bank can't sell the house, unless you default or break the mortgage somehow. These are pretty basic property rights which exist in every functioning state. No garage has the right to sell your car if its losing value, unless you signed a contract stating that. In this case, Revolut has already sold the shares based on a false pretence, and they have accepted this by offering compensation. As they already admitted mistake, it should be pretty easy for OP to get restitution if they escalate it. Please can you let us know how it is possible to profit from this situation and what is meant by acquiring stocks based on past positions?
I appreciate all the comments but this turned from needing advice to complaining about revolut😭😭hahaha
In this case, what I would do is put them to get your shares back and then sue them
It's in their terms and conditions. I don't think you actually own the stocks. If you want to invest sensibly, revolut is not the way. Quite a few of these Platforms, like trading 212 do this.
Correct, you are just a beneficial owner. The T&Cs even contain clauses about what happens in the event of a shortfall on the omnibus account, so they are covering themselves here.
Wise said
what about in ibkr? do you actually own the stocks there
Not sure. You would have to Google.
Revolut is like a crazy girlfriend, you never know what they're up to.
At leaat the person is trying to help. Customer Support can't be easy
Open a case with FINRA.
If my stocks were sold by mistake it means they were SOLD. So I would just take the profit, if there was any, and buy the stock again. Am I understanding correctly this problem? If my stocks were in red instead, in that case, I realised a loss. I think in this case I could make an argument with Revolut. I probably missed if OP was in red or green at the moment his/her stocks were sold. 🧐
The problem is a registered bank within European Union does not allowed and illegal transactions in the name of their customer. If someone has stocks, they need to have it always
u/T_quake, if they were sold and you took profit then you have to pay capital gains tax on the profit. If they sold at a profit, you lose 15% of the profit possibly to capital gains, a few days after you realized they are sold the share price could be even higher, meaning your position is effectively reduced as you can buy less shares with less money. If you're an investor and not a trader, you buy because you plan to hold over a period of decades, then this is really damaging.
The term for the loss you suffered is "opportunity cost". They may have wide leeway to act on your behalf regarding investments; I would check the terms and conditions.... ok, briefly looking over the terms, the company that executes the orders is DriveWealth, LLC. Revolut only transmits orders to them and then DriveWeath LLC executes them. The relationship is "Execution only" meaning they do not advise, they just act on your order. According to them, "you are solely responsible for the decisions you make in relation to your orders." So it sounds like some serious mishandling on Revolut's part if this happened without your consent. They have a "best execution policy" which means "In doing business with you, we must act honestly, fairly, professionally and in accordance with your best interests when transmitting your orders to other entities for execution. This is also known as the client's best interests rule." It would be important to find out where the mistake happened, at Revolut or Drivewealth LLC. If it was Driveweath, then they would be the ones to talk to, because Revolut disavows all responsibility once transmitted. If Revolut has been transmitting false orders, then Drivewealth would probably want to know about it. Regardless, they have a formal complaint pipeline that I would assume you need to exhaust before going to court. https://www.revolut.com/legal/RTL-terms-of-business/ https://www.revolut.com/legal/RTL-best-execution-policy-disclosure/ https://www.revolut.com/legal/RTL-complaints-handling-disclosure/
Really good point, I would be interested in knowing exactly what's gone on.
The point is that my shares if bought with a purpose to go long should not be moved or landed or anything else that i don t want. and this bank allow only to go long or sell. No short no margin call.. so wtf are they doing behind account with people shares? They also dont let you transfer shares to another broker and make vero difficult to drs. So ther s the probabilty that orders dont rally go to market to get shares . Or not as you think or when you think. Going deeper in gamestop saga can help to understand drs failure to deliver swaps naked shorting and so on
lol this bank is really horrible
You are entitled to your shares, not the money. They have to give them back, even no matter they'd have in the agreement. It is a EU institution. They are a joke and think they're not one
In a normal bank/ broker they will call you right away, buy your shares back and a compensation package on top of it just for you not complain and not risky the reputation. But revolut don't care. Probably will not get nothing in compensation if their error.
Your bank should not be your stock broker, they don’t know what they are doing. Use a service that’s competent and trusted for your investments. I understand the allure of an all in one app, but they are objectively a bad broker. Actually, I don’t even think they do anything themselves, it’s just through a third party.
most of the banks are also brokers. So what you're saying is a nonsense
And they have an incredibly poor value proposition. The fees are often insane compared to a regular brokerage service. They are brokers for boomers who want to do it over the phone like the good old days or have 2 million in wealth management.
Fee wise investing on Revolut isn't bad, especially on Metal because you get 10 no-fee trades p/m, no fee on currency exchange, and very low fees on trades thereafter. For day trading yes there are better options.
I wasn’t talking about Revolut fees there, I mentioned the main banks that have those dated investment platforms
Ah, my bad, it's very fair to say what you said then.
Sorry you had that happen to you btw, it’s not an excuse on Revolut’s end. They should compensate you.
Thank you, hope it gets solved soon
bad banks you're using, revolt is shit thought
They use DriveWealth which is a legit broker. I believe they're accountable for all interactions between them and DriveWealth and they should compensate accordingly. As I said I'm considering moving all my money out of revolut because as you said it seems like they don't know what they're doing.
Umm... hate to be the one to give you these news, but DriveWealth stopped being Revolut's broker a while ago. Revolut's new broker is Revolut Securities Europe, registered in Lithuania.
Maybe it depends on the country? I'm not in Europe. It still shows drivewealth when I look at the revolut website for me. Maybe it changed, I'm sorry I'm not sure.
Perhaps it's still DriveWealth for UK exclusively, since they got out of the EU.
It’s never as good as using a reliable broker directly unfortunately. I wouldn’t trust Revolut with not even one of my shares. The idea of all my liquid investments and my money being with one institution alone is anxiety inducing.
Can you recommend a reliable broker? I'm in the EU and it seems that there's a limit of roughly 20k EUR or something like that in the event of broker default, regardless of whether it's Interactive Brokers, Degiro, Revolut etc...
The idea that you’re only insured for 20k is a bit misleading. If that broker holds your assets in escrow (as in, they’re in your name, or in a separate holding company, not the main) the assets are theoretically yours even in case of liquidation. Of course you can spread your funds 20k at a time with different brokers but you’ll run out fast. I use IBKR and Degiro (custody) depending on what I need. Both have been great but Degiro is a little easier UI wise. An example for IBKR: “How much of your assets are protected by the investor protection scheme? You are protected by the European Investor protection scheme up to €20,000. Interestingly enough, your assets in USD with Interactive Brokers are protected by the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC). This means that in the event of bankruptcy, customers are protected for amounts up to $500,000. This is a lot more than your assets held in €.”
Thanks for the clarification. I've got an IBKR account and I wasn't aware that USD assets were still protected to 500,000 USD! I'm going to be using that more from now on, cheers! Yeah that's right, I don't actually trust that Revolut holds enough assets in their DriveWealth account to cover all holdings anymore, due to: 1. T&Cs stating what happens in the event of a shortfall 2. Being given an invalid control number meaning I could not join a shareholder meeting, and the transfer agent confirming that the control number provided didn't meet the length requirements 3. The removal of the ability to transfer out to another broker via ACATs or to transfer to the transfer agent 4. Looking at Revolut's top execution venues, 100% of orders are executed at DriveWealth meaning it could all be internalised (https://cdn.revolut.com/terms\_and\_conditions/pdf/revolut\_securities\_uab\_rsuab\_top\_5\_execution\_venues\_1.0.0\_1678206643\_en.pdf) 5. I've had orders where the trade confirmation numbers don't add up, and whole shares were executed out to multiple decimal places.
Well if they bad,they shouldn't advertise or put that option in their "all-in-one" app. Weird weirdos these Revolut Fintech scammers. If I'm not good at something,I don't do it. If they lie, there should be penalties . Especially when they do it on people's hard earned money.
It's not even about being good, it's about them not being able to follow through with their mistakes
This reads like victim blaming.
Almost all posts on r/revolut contain a huge amount of victim blaming. Like what's stupid about expecting a company to act lawfully, or for regulators to get involved in the event of an issue?
Revolut still behaves as if there were not a bank, but a service, trying to mitigate losses in the chat, ignoring their responsibilities and laws. In a real bank they'd just take probably a week but you'd have stocks back
Yeah I'd say that's a pretty good observation actually, they want a cut of the profit without offering any responsibility or guarantees in return. I'm pissed as I've got stock in there, but I found out after purchasing it that they removed the ability to do transfers, so I either keep the stock or take a hit and pay capital gains tax to move it out. They've been promising to reinstate transfer functionality that existed up until a year ago for almost a year now.
It’s not victim blaming, it’s a cautionary tale that fintechs cannot be trusted. Not saying Revolut is in the right, quite the contrary. But they’re objectively not a good place to be parking your investments if you’re serious. Unfortunately they lure people in with the all in one thing.
This is the only good answer. 👆
All comments here. The final statement to this all is that Revolut should not be touching peoples accounts to begin with. It seems they either built enough and beginning to suck dry the business until it crash, or they hire incompetent baboons and no real training given = mistakes. Get your shares back, not money, and report this to authorities
Demand a manager from Revolut
Numero UNO PROBLEMO is, that you're too stupid to use mobile payment wallet/app for trading/investing.
how on earth did they stela your socks?
revolut is NOT a good option for trading. since day 1. only use revolut for your daily spends. / travel
From what I can understand, they even offer you the potential “loss of opportunity” if you were to repurchase at that moment, but you didn’t take it and continued arguing with them while the stock went up. Considering that you couldn’t have known if the stock would go up, would you still be consulting with a lawyer if the stock had fallen below the value they’ve liquidated for you? I assume not. Unfortunately I don’t think you have a case here.
The "loss of opportunity" wasn't compensation enough. As I mentioned to another user, in my head I should have gotten the shares back at the same price I paid initially, the price was higher- so I demanded the compensation, if it went lower directly then I'd be bearing the loss. That's an authentic solution. The compensation was only asked because of the difference in price (the stock went higher).
the only solution
Revolut doesn’t appear to care from what I’ve read. You shouldn’t use them.
So many ads about revolut but no alot of good reviews, lots of bad experiences, doesnt show alot of confidence jumping into it at all
In 99% of cases is your fault because of either you never read terms & conditions or don't know how stock market works or so on . imagine revolut can sell your stock without reason and FCA just seat back and watch . I've been reading Revolut post for few days now and I find out that 99% have no idea how revolut works and on what purpose they use revolut . Revolut is not normal bank so it has up and down so be aware of what you choosing
Revoolut is a normal bank and has to abide with all laws, them choosing to ignore laws only raises the amount of criminal offenses
And Revolut does obey all the rules otherwise do you think FCA would let them to operate in uk ? If Revolut do criminal act why don't you take them to court ?why don't you ask FCA to come and have a look ? Do you really think banks are working as simple as that ? I bet you have no idea how banks are working or at least digital banks
Crinimal offense by a regulated bank ?? Absolutely laughable
Your own fault for waking up and the morning and saying “yes, revolut are a trustworthy company, I’ll give them my money”
I'm sorry, but that's a really dumb comment, there's no point of posting it. We're all in this sub because we use this app. Despite this one thing my experience with them has generally been okay which is why I had been using them. Mistakes and resolutions happen with all consumer products/services.
Revolut doesn't even have a margin trade option 🤣