FCA Warns reclaim-experts.com: 7 Checks Before You Pay
The UK regulator classified the website as a clone of an authorised firm on 28 August 2026. The FCA says the genuine Reclaim Experts Ltd has no connection with the clone.
简体中文
繁體中文
English
Pусский
日本語
ภาษาไทย
Tiếng Việt
Bahasa Indonesia
Español
हिन्दी
Filippiiniläinen
Français
Deutsch
Português
Türkçe
한국어
العربية
اردو
Abstract:Amidst an ongoing legal battle, Tristian Talbot and Harri Jean David Sawicki, reportedly overseeing Funded Engineer and its crucial website, face dispute resolution in Palm Beach County, Florida, over alleged contractual breaches following an FPFX audit revealing manipulative practices, triggering significant revenue losses and terminated agreements.

Tristian Talbot, based in Thailand, and Harri Jean David Sawicki, residing in Vietnam, allegedly oversee Funded Engineer and its website, which are at the heart of an ongoing legal dispute. The legal proceedings are set to take place in Palm Beach County, Florida, in accordance with the original agreement's dispute resolution clause.
FPFX‘s complaint outlines that under a software services agreement dated June 2, 2023, the defendants were granted rights to utilize FPFX’s software, with obligations to pay monthly fees and other specified amounts. However, an FPFX audit conducted in January 2024 revealed alleged record manipulation by the defendants, aimed at reducing payments owed under the agreement. This included the creation of fabricated trading accounts and participation in “wash trading,” practices resulting in an estimated revenue loss of $700,000 for FPFX.
In response to what FPFX labels as “nefarious, illegal, and unethical activities,” the vendor terminated the agreement on February 7, 2024. In March, FPFX initiated a demand for mediation in accordance with the contracts terms to resolve the dispute.

The investigation identified various fraudulent actions conducted by Funded Engineer, including the creation of fictitious trading accounts, bypassing Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Know Your Customer (KYC) protocols, engaging in wash trading, and fabricating payouts. These activities aimed to overstate the firms payment activities, thus misleading traders and FPFX Tech.
Specific findings from the audit revealed that Funded Engineer manually created seemingly fake user profiles in their administrative portal. These profiles, lacking any payment history or billing details, were directly provided with funded accounts, circumventing the firms usual requirement for traders to complete a challenge before obtaining such accounts.
Further infractions included manually overriding AML/KYC checks, allowing individuals to be approved for funded accounts without standard due diligence. Additionally, Funded Engineer‘s personnel engaged in wash trading, solely to inflate the firm’s pay-out statistics.
The audit also revealed that despite approving pay-outs in the system, Funded Engineer did not disburse any funds to these fictitious accounts. Instead, the prop firm purportedly pretended to make payments through cryptocurrency wallets and global payroll services without corresponding blockchain transactions.
FPFX Techs probe concluded that Funded Engineer had overstated its pay-outs by more than $2 million, a fact promoted by one of its founders, Tristian Talbot, on social media.
Following FPFXs decision to terminate its licensing agreement, Funded Engineer issued a series of updates addressing the situation.
The firm expressed disappointment over the abrupt termination and the subsequent negative public relations campaign launched by FPFX Tech, noting that this occurred without warning or an opportunity for dialogue.
Funded Engineer expressed surprise and concern over how their services were terminated and how they were removed from all past communications by FPFX Tech. The firm criticized the lack of communication prior to the action and the negative PR campaign that ensued, adding that they were not approached for comment on the allegations.
Regarding the allegations, Funded Engineer stated that the matter has become a legal case, limiting their ability to share further details publicly. However, the firm assured its community that it is treating the situation with the utmost seriousness.

Disclaimer:
The views in this article only represent the author's personal views, and do not constitute investment advice on this platform. This platform does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness and timeliness of the information in the article, and will not be liable for any loss caused by the use of or reliance on the information in the article.

The UK regulator classified the website as a clone of an authorised firm on 28 August 2026. The FCA says the genuine Reclaim Experts Ltd has no connection with the clone.

People searching GODO regulation or regulation GODO should separate overseas licensing from permission in India. The Reserve Bank of India Alert List, updated 19 November 2025, names “GoDo FX” and godofx.com. RBI says listed entities are neither authorised to deal in forex under FEMA nor authorised to operate an approved forex electronic trading platform. GODO's legal documents name GODO LTD and a Mauritius FSC licence, but that overseas status does not create RBI authorisation. No cited court ruling proves fraud. The main checks are jurisdiction, domains, leverage, and withdrawals.

Most traders who have opened accounts with Succedo Markets, a Saint Lucia-based brokerage entity, have reported withdrawal request denials after a pleasant first experience. Traders globally, including those from India, have made these complaints. Meanwhile, some traders have reportedly taken legal recourse to recover their stuck funds. The critical nature of these complaints made us share this in-depth Succedo Markets review. This review does not only examine user allegations but also shed light on its regulatory framework.

Did you encounter trade-related concerns with Tattvam, a Mauritius-based brokerage entity? Several users have reportedly accused the broker of cancelling profitable trades, allegedly citing scalping as the reason. At the same time, traders have reportedly expressed concerns over the lack of understanding among the broker officials about critical trading aspects such as copy trading. In this Tattvam review, we have carefully examined user-reported allegations. Additionally, we have given a regulatory overview of the broker.