New rules in contract

Anyone from trading 212 or on here able to shine light on the new clause in the contract regarding funds being potentially paid to failed partners?

1 Like

Hi Dman, hopefully the two above posts from 212 help clarify, there has already been some confusion with people from another blogger expressing concerns not understanding the meaning, so this is the clarification from 212 to explain.

If it helps eTorro and others also have similar if not identical updates, so it’s not something unique with 212.

@Dman this guy is asking the right questions, and is very clear why and explains that he does not understand the answers. I would highlight they are doing a review on 212 changes, wearing a Stake logo jumper so I will leave it at that.

Two links to rival brokers in his comments. One pays him a significant stack of cash per sign up.

1 Like

Just to note the person in the vid is a financial advisor. But I wanted to know in the unlikely event of one of trading 212 partners developing an issue will trading 212 users funds be potentially used?

1 Like

Long story short. there is no problem with the terms, your assets are not at risk. the terms existed before, so they aren’t really “new”, the number just changed from 13.9 to 13.10 with some clarification about handling of accounts. the assets and funds ARE segregated, but not in the way people think they should be which is what causes most of the confusion.

FCA, FSCS and specifically CASS 6 ensure you’re protected.

the markets the minor changes address are not on the platform yet so neither are the assets that could potentially be touched, but even if that happened FSCS retrospectively reimburses those affected. (which is how the cover works that is put in place for clients)

It’s a 5 page document, but there’s really only 2 paragraphs/clauses and a few sentences of change.

Be aware a financial advisor has no more skills then you in reading a terms and conditions page. Literally none.


So my question above?

you’re covered for the stated £85k as UK client, or however much the EU covers as an EU client going forward with the EU entity. the excess is what could in theory be affected, but any impact will be equally split across all client accounts that exceed the protected cover. as a client in either for UK, US or EU markets, the FCA rules are applicable and so you don’t need to be concerned about the new wording. T212 holds a large enough reserve by regulations to account for anything that does get touched.

while slow (@Briscoe mentioned in his video one such case took 2 years) nearly everyone (99.7%?) got all their money back via the FSCS. so it’s perfectly rationally to make the call to split your accounts across brokers/platforms so they don’t exceed the cover. (just ensure they don’t use the same bank et cetera or only part will be covered is it applies on a per institution basis)

for T&C advice, you want a legal advisor, not a financial one. both the videos covering this clause are by people with no legal background or relevant experience. you want someone who handles contract law or such as their main practice.

for the specific markets affected (none of the current or major ones) there is a small possibility that funds will be touched, but the first funds affected would be T212’s own and the chain of custody is in itself a protection for us as clients.

There’s precedent of it happening before. See Beaufort Securities, their account was as segregated as any broker is in the UK.

FSCS covered the shortfall.

The EU compensation scheme for financial securities is up to 20k EUR (the minimum). But the EU Member States can have a higher compensation if they want. E.g. Portugal has a up to 25k compensation scheme. There is some talks about rising the minimums.

The EU bank deposits compensation scheme is up to 100k EUR/person (the bank accounts can have more than 1 person).