BakeLab

🍪 Baking recipes & tips | Công thức & mẹo làm bánh
⚖️ Recipes in grams | Định lượng chuẩn
🧁 Easy baking for everyone | Làm bánh dễ hơn mỗi ngày
🇻🇳 Vietnam

[BakeLab @BakeLabVn]

🚨 QT FUNDED — ENOUGH WITH “HIGH MARGIN USAGE”. SHOW THE EVIDENCE.

I’m making this case public because I am still waiting for a clear answer from QT Funded regarding my $2,205 payout.

Account: 10602089
QT POWER 2-Step Funded
Initial Balance: $25,000
Payout: $2,205
Transaction ID: 18624

QT Risk Team rejected my payout and claimed that my account exceeded their “intended risk parameters” due to:

“Excessive margin utilisation.”

Fine.

Then show me exactly where the breach happened.

I have repeatedly asked for the basic information needed to verify this decision:

❌ Which trade allegedly breached the rule?
❌ What exact time did it happen?
❌ How much margin/exposure was used?
❌ What was the maximum allowed?
❌ What calculation shows that I exceeded it?
❌ Which exact rule/version was applied?

So far, I have not been given those details.

And there is something QT needs to address:

I ONLY HAD ONE OPEN POSITION AT A TIME.

My MT5 history contains multiple trades, but those trades were not held simultaneously. They were opened and closed individually.

Yet QT is telling me that my account had “excessive margin utilisation.”

Then show me the position that caused it.

This is also not the first time I have received a “high margin usage” explanation from QT. I previously had a separate issue where QT cited the same type of reasoning.

At this point, I am not interested in another generic statement saying:

“The decision is final.”

A final decision does not answer the underlying question.

If QT believes I breached a risk rule, then the evidence should be straightforward:

EXACT TRADE → EXACT TIMESTAMP → EXACT EXPOSURE/MARGIN → EXACT LIMIT → EXACT CALCULATION

That is all I am asking for.

I am not asking QT to ignore its rules.

I am asking QT to show me which rule I violated and prove the calculation used to reject my $2,205 payout.

If the breach exists, show it.

If the calculation is correct, show it.

But simply saying “excessive margin utilisation” without identifying the actual event that caused the breach does not give me a meaningful way to verify the decision.

QT FUNDED — SHOW THE EVIDENCE.

I will gladly address the exact breach if you provide it.

Until then, I am asking for transparency regarding my account, my payout, and the basis on which my profits were forfeited.

@Finn_QTFunded @AlexQuantTekel @JamesQuantTekel @QtFunded @PropFirmsGuru

#QTFunded #QTPOWER #PropFirm #PropTrading #Payout #Trading #PayoutDispute

[BakeLab @BakeLabVn]

Another reason for this case im impressed w this propfirm 🤡
@QtFunded @Finn_QTFunded @JamesQuantTekel @AlexQuantTekel
Well i need a refund now

[BakeLab @BakeLabVn]

@JeremyofCrypto @EquityEdgeUK I can see u have osb already mate

[BakeLab @BakeLabVn]

@FXCK932 @EquityEdgeUK Yo so how much u risk mate

[BakeLab @BakeLabVn]

Wait 1 months for this case solve, asking abt evidence and got blocked in discord. No one assist, i even give a solution to solve. Wait 6 days business to get respone on last email and discord they even closed all my ticket. What the fuxk this firm doing ?
@Finn_QTFunded u told me feel free to dm so if i dm u u should check that mate, dont ignore like that ?
@QtFunded @AlexQuantTekel @JamesQuantTekel

[BakeLab @BakeLabVn]

🚨 QT FUNDED — ENOUGH WITH “HIGH MARGIN USAGE”. SHOW THE EVIDENCE.

I’m making this case public because I am still waiting for a clear answer from QT Funded regarding my $2,205 payout.

Account: 10602089
QT POWER 2-Step Funded
Initial Balance: $25,000
Payout: $2,205
Transaction ID: 18624

QT Risk Team rejected my payout and claimed that my account exceeded their “intended risk parameters” due to:

“Excessive margin utilisation.”

Fine.

Then show me exactly where the breach happened.

I have repeatedly asked for the basic information needed to verify this decision:

❌ Which trade allegedly breached the rule?
❌ What exact time did it happen?
❌ How much margin/exposure was used?
❌ What was the maximum allowed?
❌ What calculation shows that I exceeded it?
❌ Which exact rule/version was applied?

So far, I have not been given those details.

And there is something QT needs to address:

I ONLY HAD ONE OPEN POSITION AT A TIME.

My MT5 history contains multiple trades, but those trades were not held simultaneously. They were opened and closed individually.

Yet QT is telling me that my account had “excessive margin utilisation.”

Then show me the position that caused it.

This is also not the first time I have received a “high margin usage” explanation from QT. I previously had a separate issue where QT cited the same type of reasoning.

At this point, I am not interested in another generic statement saying:

“The decision is final.”

A final decision does not answer the underlying question.

If QT believes I breached a risk rule, then the evidence should be straightforward:

EXACT TRADE → EXACT TIMESTAMP → EXACT EXPOSURE/MARGIN → EXACT LIMIT → EXACT CALCULATION

That is all I am asking for.

I am not asking QT to ignore its rules.

I am asking QT to show me which rule I violated and prove the calculation used to reject my $2,205 payout.

If the breach exists, show it.

If the calculation is correct, show it.

But simply saying “excessive margin utilisation” without identifying the actual event that caused the breach does not give me a meaningful way to verify the decision.

QT FUNDED — SHOW THE EVIDENCE.

I will gladly address the exact breach if you provide it.

Until then, I am asking for transparency regarding my account, my payout, and the basis on which my profits were forfeited.

@Finn_QTFunded @AlexQuantTekel @JamesQuantTekel @QtFunded @PropFirmsGuru

#QTFunded #QTPOWER #PropFirm #PropTrading #Payout #Trading #PayoutDispute

[BakeLab @BakeLabVn]

@QtFunded @Finn_QTFunded @AlexQuantTekel @JamesQuantTekel solve my case thanks

[BakeLab @BakeLabVn]

🚨 QT FUNDED — ENOUGH WITH “HIGH MARGIN USAGE”. SHOW THE EVIDENCE.

I’m making this case public because I am still waiting for a clear answer from QT Funded regarding my $2,205 payout.

Account: 10602089
QT POWER 2-Step Funded
Initial Balance: $25,000
Payout: $2,205
Transaction ID: 18624

QT Risk Team rejected my payout and claimed that my account exceeded their “intended risk parameters” due to:

“Excessive margin utilisation.”

Fine.

Then show me exactly where the breach happened.

I have repeatedly asked for the basic information needed to verify this decision:

❌ Which trade allegedly breached the rule?
❌ What exact time did it happen?
❌ How much margin/exposure was used?
❌ What was the maximum allowed?
❌ What calculation shows that I exceeded it?
❌ Which exact rule/version was applied?

So far, I have not been given those details.

And there is something QT needs to address:

I ONLY HAD ONE OPEN POSITION AT A TIME.

My MT5 history contains multiple trades, but those trades were not held simultaneously. They were opened and closed individually.

Yet QT is telling me that my account had “excessive margin utilisation.”

Then show me the position that caused it.

This is also not the first time I have received a “high margin usage” explanation from QT. I previously had a separate issue where QT cited the same type of reasoning.

At this point, I am not interested in another generic statement saying:

“The decision is final.”

A final decision does not answer the underlying question.

If QT believes I breached a risk rule, then the evidence should be straightforward:

EXACT TRADE → EXACT TIMESTAMP → EXACT EXPOSURE/MARGIN → EXACT LIMIT → EXACT CALCULATION

That is all I am asking for.

I am not asking QT to ignore its rules.

I am asking QT to show me which rule I violated and prove the calculation used to reject my $2,205 payout.

If the breach exists, show it.

If the calculation is correct, show it.

But simply saying “excessive margin utilisation” without identifying the actual event that caused the breach does not give me a meaningful way to verify the decision.

QT FUNDED — SHOW THE EVIDENCE.

I will gladly address the exact breach if you provide it.

Until then, I am asking for transparency regarding my account, my payout, and the basis on which my profits were forfeited.

@Finn_QTFunded @AlexQuantTekel @JamesQuantTekel @QtFunded @PropFirmsGuru

#QTFunded #QTPOWER #PropFirm #PropTrading #Payout #Trading #PayoutDispute

[BakeLab @BakeLabVn]

@yourboykeri @QtFunded U r lucky man congrats bc they not scam u

[BakeLab @BakeLabVn]

@MonaTradesFX Idk why they can pay u but cant pay me

[BakeLab @BakeLabVn]

🍪🍰 3-INGREDIENT OREO CHEESECAKE

You only need 3 ingredients. Seriously. 🤎

• 24 Oreo cookies
• 300g cream cheese
• 2 eggs

Crush the Oreos → mix everything → pour into a lined pan.

🔥 Bake at 160°C for 25–30 min.

Let it cool completely before slicing.

🇻🇳 Chỉ 3 nguyên liệu:
• 24 bánh Oreo
• 300g cream cheese
• 2 quả trứng

Nghiền Oreo → trộn đều → đổ khuôn → nướng 160°C trong 25–30 phút.

Save this for your next dessert craving. 🍪

#BakeLab #Cheesecake #EasyRecipe #baking

[Prop Firm Shinobi @PropFirmShinobi]

🚨 THIS WEEK: 3 QT Funded payout cases still open

@QtFunded

@BakeLabVn says his $2,205 payout was rejected for excessive margin. He says he used one position at a time and asked for the actual calculation behind the decision.

@realBull007 says his $500 payout was rejected over high margin. His side says it involved 3 trades and around 1% risk.

@Agent1nk says his $1,000 payout issue has been going on for around 6 months. He says a reset was promised, then the account was breached, and now another 30-day cycle was proposed before reviewing the old payout.

Three traders. Three separate files.

But the question is pretty simple:

What exactly was the calculation behind each decision?

@AlexQuantTekel @JamesQuantTekel

Show the numbers and let the evidence speak.

#QTFunded #PropFirm #Trading #Payout

[BakeLab @BakeLabVn]

@saveonpropfirms @propfirmnation1 They denied to provide where and why i violation mate

[BakeLab @BakeLabVn]

@Agent1nk @QtFunded @JamesQuantTekel @AlexQuantTekel @StepnCheck Soon they gonna ban u like man, what a shame @QtFunded u guys treat w clients like this eh ?

[BakeLab @BakeLabVn]

🚨ALL THE CASE ON MY PAGE

@QtFunded @JamesQuantTekel @AlexQuantTekel @StepnCheck

I’m asking for one simple thing:

Provide the specific evidence that my account violated your rules.

Identify the exact trade, timestamp, margin utilisation, calculation, and rule that was allegedly breached.

I have reviewed your published Prohibited Strategies rules and requested this evidence multiple times, but it has not been provided.

If QT cannot provide evidence demonstrating the breach, then please release my $2,205 payout and the profits generated on Account 10602089.

I’m not asking for special treatment — I’m asking for evidence supporting a decision that resulted in my payout being forfeited.

@PropFirmsGuru @propfirmnation1 @propfirmeye @PropFirmShinobi
@theproptruth
#QTFunded #PropFirm #Payout

[BakeLab @BakeLabVn]

@DntThi Mốc 500k căng tay quá :((

[BakeLab @BakeLabVn]

@StepnCheck Check my text if u can, thanks

[BakeLab @BakeLabVn]

@propfirmsupdate @QtFunded Thanks for your support mate

[BakeLab @BakeLabVn]

@propfirmeye @QtFunded Thanks for your all support

[BakeLab @BakeLabVn]

@Rakesh__139 Understand your feeling mate, collect all proof from your side and attack them hard with right thing man

[BakeLab @BakeLabVn]

@Faded_Propfirm @QtFunded Thanks for your support mate

[BakeLab @BakeLabVn]

@MudiChanakira @QtFunded @Finn_QTFunded @JamesQuantTekel Let collect all of this and we gonna exposed this dirty firm mate

[BakeLab @BakeLabVn]

🚩Hello guys im gonna update my case and call all the traders got scam or rejected by @QtFunded. Please expose thiss propfirm more and more so no one get stuck on this situation anymore. They gonna ban me on discord and consisder closed my case w 0 evidence

🚨 QT FUNDED PAYOUT DISPUTE — $2,205 FORFEITED

I’m sharing my experience with QT Funded and asking for transparency regarding the rejection of my payout.

Account: QT POWER 2-Step — $25,000
Account No.: 10602089
Payout requested: $2,205
Transaction ID: 18624

Here is what happened 🧵

1/ I completed the account and requested a $2,205 payout.

After the payout request, QT Risk Team later informed me that my account had been found in breach due to “excessive margin utilisation.”

The account was subsequently closed and the $2,205 payout was forfeited.

2/ I asked QT to show me exactly what I did wrong.

I explained that, according to my trading history, I was not running multiple positions simultaneously.

I also provided my MT5 trading history for review.

My request was simple:

Show me the specific trade and evidence that constituted the breach.

3/ QT’s response was that multiple positions are NOT required for an excessive-margin finding.

I accept that a single position can theoretically use a large proportion of available margin.

So I am not arguing that “one position = automatically compliant.”

That is not my point.

My point is:

Which specific position breached the rule, and how was that determination calculated?

4/ I specifically requested:

• The trade(s) considered excessive
• Date & timestamp
• Instrument and position size
• Account equity at that moment
• Margin used / available margin
• The calculation used to determine “excessive” margin utilisation
• The specific QT POWER rule that was breached

QT responded that they would provide no trade-level report, timestamp breakdown or internal calculation.

5/ QT also clarified that the 2.5% exposure rule I previously referenced does NOT apply to my QT POWER account.

I accept that clarification.

That leaves one central question:

What objective threshold or standard did QT use to determine that my margin utilisation was “excessive”?

6/ There is another issue: the payout.

QT rejected and forfeited my $2,205 payout.

I have therefore also asked QT to provide the specific basis for the payout rejection:

• What rule made the payout ineligible?
• Was the payout rejection solely caused by the alleged breach?
• What provision authorises forfeiting the $2,205?
• What evidence connects the alleged breach to the payout forfeiture?

7/ QT’s final position was essentially:

The Risk Team confirmed the excessive-margin finding.

No further trade-level report, timestamp breakdown or internal calculation will be provided.

The account will not be reinstated.

The $2,205 payout remains forfeited.

The decision is final.

8/ This is why I am making the case public.

I am not asking anyone to blindly take my side.

I am asking QT Funded to show the evidence behind a decision that resulted in:

Account closed + $2,205 payout forfeited.

If I genuinely violated a clearly applicable rule, then show me:

WHAT TRADE → WHAT METRIC → WHAT THRESHOLD → WHAT RULE → WHAT CONSEQUENCE.

That should be a straightforward explanation for a payout dispute.

9/ My position is simple:

I am not asking QT to reveal proprietary risk systems.

I am asking for the factual evidence supporting the breach determination and the contractual basis for rejecting my payout.

Until that evidence is provided, I believe traders should be aware of how this dispute has been handled.

I will update this thread if QT provides substantive evidence.

QT Funded — I’m still asking for the evidence.

#QTFunded #PropFirm #PropTrading #Trading #Payout #Forex

@Finn_QTFunded @AlexQuantTekel @JamesQuantTekel @PropFirmsGuru @propfirmnation1 @theproptruth @propfirmeye