Abstract:The Malaysia Securities Commission (SC) has issued a formal alert, warning the public about a newly identified investment scam that uses fraudulent Information Memorandums (IM) to deceive potential investors. This scheme falsely claims that the companies involved have either submitted their IMs to the SC or received approval from the Commission, thereby creating a false sense of legitimacy around their investment offerings.

The Malaysia Securities Commission (SC) has issued a formal alert, warning the public about a newly identified investment scam that uses fraudulent Information Memorandums (IM) to deceive potential investors. This scheme falsely claims that the companies involved have either submitted their IMs to the SC or received approval from the Commission, thereby creating a false sense of legitimacy around their investment offerings.
In accordance with the Capital Markets and Services Act 2007 (CMSA), unlisted companies are required to submit their Information Memorandums to the SC within seven days of presenting them to potential investors. The purpose of this process is to ensure transparency and compliance with regulations, safeguarding the interests of investors. However, the SC emphasized that merely creating or submitting an IM does not imply the Commissions endorsement, as companies must still undergo rigorous scrutiny before any approval is granted.

In a recent case, the SC uncovered that a company had deliberately misled investors by claiming it had submitted an IM to the Commission, hoping to bolster the credibility of its investment scheme. The company had not, in fact, submitted any such documentation, raising suspicions of fraud. The SC believes this could be part of a wider, coordinated scam designed to exploit investors' trust.
As soon as this fraudulent activity was discovered, the Securities Commission took swift action by reporting the company to law enforcement and adding it to the SCs Investor Alert List. This list is designed to inform the public about companies and individuals involved in dubious or illegal investment schemes. The SC considers such behaviour particularly dangerous, as it misleads investors into believing that the investment product is legitimate and has been reviewed or approved by the authorities.
The Securities Commission strongly urges the public to remain vigilant when evaluating any investment opportunities, especially those that claim to be associated with the SC or its officials. Investors are advised to carefully verify the legitimacy of any investment offer by consulting official sources or contacting the Commission directly.
Additionally, the SC encourages anyone who encounters suspicious investment activities or misleading information to report such cases promptly. By doing so, the public can help prevent others from falling victim to these potentially harmful scams, thus contributing to the overall protection of investors.


The Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation’s website will be temporarily unavailable for three days from June 26-28, 2026, due to a scheduled system migration. The retirement body has intimated its over 290 million subscribers through a pop-up alert on the portal. It is titled - Important Notice: Scheduled System Migration and Temporary Service Unavailability. The EPFO expects users to maintain patience during the scheduled downtime.

IUX, despite having an operational presence for approximately a decade, continues to face allegations from users regarding its several trading aspects. These include complaints on withdrawal processing, deposit failure, and even wide slippages that eat into users’ margins. For some, withdrawals were never executed, for others, withdrawal processing remained only on paper. On the other hand, some’s deposits fail to show on the IUX login even after 45 days of the transaction initiation date. Concerned by these seemingly suspicious trading incidents, users hit out on several review platforms such as WikiFX. This IUX review examines these user allegations while providing a regulatory framework the broker adheres to.

A brokerage operation history of over six years without any clarity of the accounts offered. This stunning fact allegedly applies to ForexDana. While this has been a major concern on the transparency front, user experiences concerning suspicious deposit failures and trade manipulation have not been good for the broker’s reputation either. In this ForexDana review, we have attempted to find the reason behind the growing user frustration, not only through their complaints but also what possibly could have led to these complaints. Yes, you heard it right! We are going to probe the ForexDana regulation status. This will help you make the right financial decision.

As you look forward to reading the Saxo reviews, you come across both positive and negative user experiences concerning trading. However, what makes prospective users dwell more is the significant insight shared through negative experiences compared to positive ones. The negative experiences are more detailed around fund withdrawals and deposits. Although they are allegations, they represent a disturbing picture. For example, we came across a case where a user highlighted the inability to trade an instrument, which is actively traded in the market. We have examined the recent allegations against the brokerage firm in this in-depth review. At the same time, we have provided a thorough look into the broker’s regulatory framework