Quick Summary
Initial Claim: ₹1,28,500 (₹40,500 in fees plus ₹88,000 in trading losses) Core Violation: A firm registered as a Research Analyst used past profit screenshots to sell a premium tip group, gave direct market calls instead of research backed reports, and repeatedly promised recovery instead of pausing the losses. Forum Used: Direct negotiation with the firm, with the loss component still under active pursuit. Recovery Secured So Far: ₹40,500, the full fee amount. Gregory Furtado (name changed) is from Thane, Maharashtra. The first phase of his case is closed. His fees are back in his account. The second phase, the actual trading loss, is still being fought for.
Gregory was drawn into a paid premium tip group run by a firm registered with SEBI as a Research Analyst. The pitch leaned entirely on screenshots showing past profits earned by other subscribers.
Convinced by those numbers, he paid a total of ₹40,500 across his time with the group.
What he received in return looked nothing like the research-backed service the screenshots had implied.
Live Calls With No Research Reports: A Direct SEBI Violation
Rather than research reports supporting each recommendation, Gregory received direct buy and sell calls delivered live, positioning him into trades with no documented analysis behind them.
No risk disclosure accompanied any of these calls. No suitability check ever asked what level of risk actually matched his financial situation before he was pushed into high risk positions.
Anyone receiving live trade calls in place of documented research can file a complaint against research analyst conduct exactly like this, since the absence of a research report behind a paid call is itself a violation.
The Recovery Trap: How False Guarantees Compounded the Losses?
As losses began appearing, the response followed a familiar script. Gregory was told the losses would be recovered, then given a new call under the same reasoning.
Each new call added to the losses rather than reversing them.
By the time he stepped back to total the damage, his trading losses had reached ₹88,000, more than double the fees he had already paid into the group.
Our Legal Plan: Decoupling Fee Recovery From Loss Pursuit
With a fee component and a loss component both in play, this case needed to be structured so that one did not stall while waiting on the other.
Step One: We Separated The Fee Claim From The Loss Claim
The ₹40,500 in fees and the ₹88,000 in trading losses were documented as two distinct heads of claim, each capable of moving forward on its own timeline.
Step Two: We Anchored The Fee Claim In The Screenshot Inducement
The past performance screenshots used to sell the tip group were preserved directly, since using historical profits to induce a paid subscription is a clearly defined violation on its own.
Step Three: We Built The Loss Claim Around The Missing Research Reports
Every live call Gregory received was checked against the requirement for a documented research report. Their absence formed the foundation of the ongoing loss claim.
Step Four: We Sent A Legal Notice Covering Both Claims Together
Our notice set out the fee violation and the loss violation side by side, with the exact regulation each one breached, giving the firm a clear deadline to respond to both.
Step Five: We Secured The Fee Refund First
Direct negotiation moved the fee component to resolution quickly, since the screenshot based inducement left little room for the firm to argue.
Step Six: We Continue Pursuing The Loss Component Directly
With the fee recovered, our team is now focused entirely on the loss claim, using the same documentation of missing research reports and repeated recovery promises to press the case forward.
Direct negotiation has already returned the full ₹40,500 in fees. Work on the ₹88,000 loss claim continues.
Told Your Losses Would Be Recovered With Just One More Call? Our Team Can Help
Gregory’s fee came back first because the screenshot evidence was airtight. If your case has both a fee and a loss component, start by separating the two in your own records today.
Register with us and we will take it from there.
Conclusion
If a paid tip group caused both subscription fees and heavy trading losses, treat them as two distinct claims. You do not need to wait for trading losses to settle before claiming your fees back.
We often recover fees much faster using evidence like misleading profit screenshots, while continuing to fight separately for your trading losses.
Separating your case speeds up results and protects your rights.
Report. Recover. Stay Fraud Free.
Frequently Asked Questions
No. Using historical profits or performance examples to induce a client into a paid subscription is a specific, well defined violation under SEBI's research analyst rules.
A research report is the documented basis a Research Analyst is required to maintain behind every recommendation. Its absence is a violation regardless of how the call ultimately performed.
Yes. They can be pursued as separate heads of claim, and one component often resolves faster than the other depending on the strength of evidence behind each.
Treat it as a pattern rather than a plan. Save the message and pause further trades before the pattern repeats again.
Yes. A fee refund does not resolve the separate trading losses caused by the calls themselves, and that claim can continue independently.
Add us as a preferred source on Google »
