Austria’s FMA identified fxmarketpro.io with Velmon Enterprise Ltd, trading as FX Market Pro, on February 5, 2019. It said the provider lacked permission for the banking transactions described in Austria. Malta’s MFSA also records an Italian CONSOB order concerning investment services to the Italian public.
The Majuro Contact Details
The Austrian notice listed a Trust Company Complex address on Ajeltake Road in Majuro, Marshall Islands, along with support@fxmarketpro.io, compliance@fxmarketpro.io and +44 2037694110. These details can help match correspondence from the period. They do not independently verify incorporation, local occupancy or present control.
What Survives of fxmarketpro.io
The registration lookup for fxmarketpro.io returned HTTP 404. The Austrian notice independently establishes use of the address in 2019. The original registration and expiry dates remain unknown.
Account and Custody Questions
Neither national notice supplies a minimum deposit, a commission schedule or the conditions for closing a Velmon account. The Majuro address alone cannot establish where client assets were held.
Direct HTTP and HTTPS requests could not resolve fxmarketpro.io on November 4, 2026.
Follow Velmon Across the Notices
The Austrian warning connects FX Market Pro with Velmon Enterprise Ltd. That gives a reader a legal name to compare with an account agreement. The Maltese bulletin reporting an Italian measure is a separate source and should be attributed to the jurisdiction that took the action.
Three Places in One FX Market Pro File
A reader investigating Velmon can encounter Austria, Italy and the Marshall Islands within a single set of documents. Each place appears for a different reason. Austria is the jurisdiction of the FMA finding about the banking transactions it described. Italy is the market addressed by the CONSOB measure reproduced in Malta’s bulletin. Majuro appears as an address listed for the provider. Combining those references into a claim that three authorities investigated the same bank account would go beyond all of the documents.
The distinction becomes practical when checking an old solicitation. If its footer gives the Trust Company Complex on Ajeltake Road, compare the full line with the FMA notice and note the date of the solicitation. A match helps identify which presentation of Velmon the customer saw. It still leaves open who signed the agreement and where the deposit went. In particular, the address where a business said it could receive correspondence need not be the address of the bank or custodian that handled a payment.
Reconstructing the Route From Support to Payment
The FMA’s two email addresses offer a way to organise a scattered customer file. Search the original mailbox for both the support and compliance addresses and sort the results by date. A support reply may identify the trading account or a requested action. A later message presented as a compliance request may contain different payment instructions. Keep the complete messages with their attachments so a reviewer can identify which sender supplied which instruction. A display name copied into a screenshot loses much of that context.
Where a message asks for payment, compare its beneficiary, currency and reference with the transfer confirmation. If the two differ, describe the difference before attributing either account to Velmon. If no payment took place, the original invitation can still help establish the terms on which the provider approached the recipient. These are distinct questions: matching an invitation to FX Market Pro, identifying an account that received money, and establishing what happened to that money afterwards. The historical warnings answer the permissions question most directly.
A particularly useful exhibit would be the message that first introduced the beneficiary. It could establish whether that name appeared in the original offer, surfaced only after registration, or changed between the invitation and the deposit.
Which Contact Detail Belongs to Which Record?
A letter headed FX Market Pro might contain the Majuro address, a British-format telephone number and an instruction to pay an account elsewhere. Those details can all appear on one page while referring to different things. Compare the telephone number and correspondence address with the Austrian notice first. Then record the beneficiary exactly as the bank displayed it. The FMA notice provides strong identifying details for the historical solicitation. The bank’s record can add something the notice does not provide: the destination of that customer’s transfer. A useful exhibit would show the return address as well as the sender’s display name. The former can be compared directly with the mailboxes listed by the Austrian authority in its historical warning.
Frequently Asked Questions
What Was the Scope of the Austrian Finding?
The FMA addressed banking transactions requiring a licence in Austria, including commercial trading for the provider or its clients. The Italian action described by the MFSA concerned investment services offered to the Italian public.
Conclusion and Reporting Guidance
Velmon is identified in two regulatory records. A fresh corporate extract, a current contract and evidence of present control would be needed to connect a later approach to that historical entity.
If you received a message using either listed mailbox, retain its headers and the beneficiary details before reporting the approach to your regulator.
How to Report Financial Fraud · EU Investor Rights