From newspaper reports: The Performance Foreign Exchange Corporation (PFEC) raid conducted on Wednesday last week was supposedly due to a complaint of a PFEC investor.
The raid was conducted pursuant to the complaint of an investment scam victim identified as George Palos, a resident of Olandes Industrial Valley Complex, Makati City.
According to the victim, who was accompanied by his wife Aurelia to the NBI-AOCD office yesterday, they were enticed to invest an amount of $8,500 (about P382,500) in the firm and were made to believe that their investment will earn substantial profit.
Relying on such assurance, they invested the amount.
The victims were later informed that their investment lost in the firm’s transactions and were not able to recover their investment, including the principal.
– Source: The Daily Tribune
Heard from the grapevine: Mr. Palos's loss was apparently the fault of his son, employed as a Business Executive of PFEC, who insisted that he trade his father's account.
More details when you click "Read More."
This was from a comment of a supposed PFEC insider who posts under the nickname "pfecstaff" in the PMT Forum.
[T]he alledged victim "George Palos" who lost $8,500 in trading NOT becoz of PFEC, the TRUTH is that it was his Son who then was a Business Executive of PFEC Lorenzo Palos who traded and made decisions for his father's account and NOT the company.
– pfecstaff's post on August 10
It appears that some PFEC's Business Executives-cum-traders (including Mr. Palos's son) are not properly trained regarding forex trading.
Yung isa pa sigurong problema is yung mga business executives na kumukuha lang siyempre ng mga clients to trade. Siyempre di naman lahat marunong magtrade, kaya natatalo rin. Yung ibang clients wala ring tamang training on how to properly trade, kaya nga natatalo.
– lehboy's post on August 10
If that is the case, should it be PFEC's responsibility to ensure that its "traders" do know how to "trade" before they play with investors' money? Two PMT members share their opinion:
So why did they not assist nor supervise the son (of Mr. Palos)? This question leads us to the next conclusion. PFAKE would always have wanted it that way (Editor's Note: PFAKE is a play on the acronym of the company, PFEC.). The boy just made their jobs easier. Their hands-off policy towards incompetent "business executors" and/or inexperienced clients clearly shows their intention to instill mistakes and in turn, LOSSES in countless of their investor's accounts.
– Enforcer_MACS's post on August 12
You should have taught the son on how to trade…
The service does not stop when the account is in. The client will always rely on you kasi kayo "magaling" jan eh. If you let the son trade and give the hugas kamay excuse that "it was the son who traded," then i have nothing to say. It's (a case of) the blind leading the blind….
– smooth's post on August 11
If you can only talk to the son, he can attest (granting he still is God-fearing and would tell the truth), you will find out that his immediate Manager discouraged him and his father to engage in this risky business with a borrowed capital but the Son insisted with his father assuring the Manager his Son had several practice demo accts making money so his Son is ready na daw. Anong magagawa pigil ng Manaager eh pera naman nila yun daw.
– pfecstaff's post on August 12
Supervised? Of course (the son) was, but problem being the son-agent as if he is the client himself when he argues. So he exercised his right to keep password for himself. [The] Manager cannot compel him to share the open positions to help strategize, the most only reminders to put stop-loss but to no avail.
… the risks of FX trading was clearly discussed and made understood more especially by the son-agent Lorenzo Palos. He's a SMART guy if u only knew him.
– pfecstaff's post on August 12
Interesting twist to this PFEC saga. We'll wait for the next developments.
For the meantime, you can join the discussion in the PFEC: Performance Foreign Exchange Corporation thread in the PMT Forum.