Quick Summary
Farah Ansari (name changed) paid 1,58,000 for what was sold as SEBI compliant algorithmic trading software. There was no algorithm behind it at all. Her claim reached 3,58,000. The firm ran two demo trades to build trust, then switched entirely to manual tips over WhatsApp. Our team recovered 1,79,000, a 50 percent share.
Farah was approached in late 2024 by a firm presenting itself as a developer of automated algorithmic trading software, describing a system that would place trades on her behalf based on market signals.
During the sales demo, the firm ran two live trades through what it presented as the algo system, both profitable, and showed past performance figures to reinforce the pitch. She paid ₹1,58,000 across several instalments to access the full software.
After those first two trades, the software disappeared from every conversation. The firm began sending manual trading tips over WhatsApp instead, instructing Farah to place the trades herself through her own broker account.
There was no algorithm running at any point beyond the two demo trades. What had been sold as automated software was, in practice, a manual tip service dressed up in different language.
When her losses began mounting, she was told to sell her existing equity holdings to fund a recovery attempt, which added a further loss on top of the original fees. The firm stopped responding once she questioned this advice.
Selling a manual tip service as automated algorithmic software is a direct misrepresentation of what was purchased. Layered on top of that, the firm held no SEBI registration to offer investment advice of any kind.
Legal Strategy: How FraudFree Built the Case?
We began by tracing the exact point where the software claim disappeared from the relationship, using message timestamps to mark the shift.
Step 1: Document the software to WhatsApp switch
We identified the date the firm stopped referencing the software entirely and began sending manual trade instructions instead, establishing the misrepresentation clearly.
Step 2: Confirm the registration status
We checked the firm against SEBI’s registry and confirmed it held no registration under any category permitted to offer investment advice.
Step 3: Trace the equity sale instruction
We documented the message where Farah was told to sell her existing holdings to fund a recovery attempt, adding this as a separate harm within the same file.
Step 4: File with the product switch as the lead argument
Our complaint led with the software-to-manual tip switch, supported by the unregistered status and the instruction to liquidate existing holdings.
The firm, once contacted, argued the manual tips were simply a temporary measure while the software was being upgraded. We asked for any evidence the software had ever functioned beyond the initial two demo trades, and none was produced.
How FraudFree Secured a 50% Recovery?
With the product switch clearly documented and no evidence of a functioning algorithm ever produced, the firm agreed to settle. Farah recovered ₹1,79,000 of her ₹3,58,000 claim, a 50 percent share.
The settlement addressed both the misrepresented product and the unregistered status of the firm that sold it.
Bought Automated Trading Software That Didn’t Work?
Don’t let misleading software claims stand. We help you gather proof of false assurances and navigate official resolution channels to recover your funds.
Register with us now.
Conclusion
A product switch mid relationship, from software to manual instructions, is a misrepresentation worth documenting on its own. It rarely comes alone.
If you were sold automated software that quietly became manual tips over chat, save the exact point where that shift happened. It often anchors the strongest part of the claim.
Beyond SCORES, our team raises general complaints against SEBI intermediaries for unregistered firms.
Also, we escalate through the SMART ODR portal, where a firm goes quiet.
Report. Recover. Stay Fraud Free.
Frequently Asked Questions
Genuine automated software runs continuously without needing a person to relay individual trade instructions. If tips start arriving manually over chat, that is a strong signal worth documenting.
No. A working demo does not prove an ongoing algorithm exists. What matters is whether the software continued functioning after the sale was made.
That instruction itself became part of the complaint. Document any advice pushing you to liquidate other assets, since it often signals an attempt to fund losses elsewhere.
Yes. An unregistered firm was never permitted to offer this kind of advice at all, which adds to the misrepresentation claim rather than replacing it.
Add us as a preferred source on Google »
