[INFO] Updated Summary of malpractices and abuses of exchanges

[Trêvoid]

Further notes,

Exolix and Swapuz, both owned by ChangeNOW, were exposed for falsely claiming to operate separately. After being reported to Kycnot.me, they were delisted due to inconsistencies and because they lied to the community.

[1] https://asktom.cf/index.php?topic=5508552.msg64516309#msg64516309

[2] (search for 'Exolix') https://web.archive.org/web/20220213142831/swapuz.com/assets/index.223d937f.js

[paid2]

I have added two cases from the forum to the secondary list "Other resources" (perhaps they'll be added to the main list later if OPs share more evidence): BINANCE STOLE OVER $10K FROM ME – NEED HELP FROM THE COMMUNITY and SCAMMED by Bybit.com

[LoyceV]

As far as I know, this case was never resolved (@shasan?): Binance Stuck My withdrawal.
My (incomplete) summary:

Did I get this right? Is this what happened: 19 months ago you withdrew 300,000 Doge ($600) to someone else's address. Binance sent the transaction with a low fee, which didn't confirm. Then they made a new transaction with a higher fee, and you thought it was done. But the original transaction was kept in mempool, and the original inputs where never moved, so when the Doge network lowered it's minimum fee, the 300,000 Doge ($80,000 by now) transaction went through?

So basically Binance is asking to return a withdrawal from 19 months ago, after it's value increased 200x.

[paid2]

As far as I know, this case was never resolved (@shasan?): Binance Stuck My withdrawal.

Thank you for sharing this case, I didn't know it. I've added it to the second list. We can clearly speak of malpractice, the whole story is completely WTF... Funny how Binance talks and thinks in USD when it suits them.

However, I think the problem should have been solved somehow by now, because I think that shasan continues to use Binance (you can see it in his Lending topic where he shares Binance “internal IDs” with other users, as well as in some screenshots). I'll ask him about it, I wonder if it's really solved (and how), and also how he can still trust them.

[nonlogs]

hm, there is lack of transparency.

[paid2]

hm, there is lack of transparency.

Tell us more?

[sokani]

Hey paid2, you might want to check out this case if it should make your list: https://asktom.cf/index.php?topic=5509759.msg65263374#msg65263374

[paid2]

Hey paid2, you might want to check out this case if it should make your list: https://asktom.cf/index.php?topic=5509759.msg65263374#msg65263374

Thank you for sharing this link.

This case is now added to the list:

Apr. 25

Kraken

Acc. closure w funds

12

ETH

Funds not returned

Reference 1, Ref. 2

Further notes,

Exolix and Swapuz, both owned by ChangeNOW, were exposed for falsely claiming to operate separately. After being reported to Kycnot.me, they were delisted due to inconsistencies and because they lied to the community.

[1] https://asktom.cf/index.php?topic=5508552.msg64516309#msg64516309

[2] (search for 'Exolix') https://web.archive.org/web/20220213142831/swapuz.com/assets/index.223d937f.js

A link to your post has been added to the secondary list with the other ChangeNOW information.

I've also added a link about Boltz which blocks addresses linked to Coinjoin transactions.

The second list has been updated to make it easier to read.

[sokani]

Hey paid2, you should take a look at this one: https://www.reddit.com/r/TREZOR/s/0CSiApOMqQ

[fillippone]

I had a horrible Experience with MEXC.
I sent them some funds (pocket money), but those got blocked for no reason.
They want me to send ID's, and they don't want to disclose the reason why.
I suspect that the previous owner mixed those funds.
Of course, a big middle finger to them.
My privacy is worth more than that.

I don't have a reference for this, nor have I posted on a thread, but I wanted to share, here, as I have just discovered this thread and I find it very worth.

[SilverCryptoBullet]

I had a horrible Experience with MEXC.
I sent them some funds (pocket money), but those got blocked for no reason.
They want me to send ID's, and they don't want to disclose the reason why.
I suspect that the previous owner mixed those funds.
Of course, a big middle finger to them.
My privacy is worth more than that.

I don't have a reference for this, nor have I posted on a thread, but I wanted to share, here, as I have just discovered this thread and I find it very worth.

I did not know about this thread and I did not have it included in my thread, but today I discovered this one so it is added immediately to my thread.

Events made you scare about custodial wallets, centralized exchanges.

I am sorry for your terrible experience with MEXC but it is not strange though. Many events like this happened for years on centralized exchanges and even if you sacrifice your privacy, anonymity to do KYC, there is risky scenario of privacy lost, anonymity lost but your fund will be lost too.

Some other terrible deposits and account freeze actions on Binance, OKX were reported.

[paid2]

Two new cases have been added to the list:

Mar. 25

Mycelium Exchange

Withdrawals suspended

100

USD

Funds returned

Reference 1

May 24

Binance

Withdrawals suspended

15

BNB

Funds returned

Reference 1

(I found this one thanks to SilverCryptoBullet's thread)

Hey paid2, you should take a look at this one: https://www.reddit.com/r/TREZOR/s/0CSiApOMqQ

Thanks for sharing!
I've added it to the secondary list (some information are missing before I can add it to the main list).

Changelly: Changelly has been holding my funds for 3 months due to AML Review Without Transparency

I had a horrible Experience with MEXC.
I sent them some funds (pocket money), but those got blocked for no reason.
They want me to send ID's, and they don't want to disclose the reason why.
I suspect that the previous owner mixed those funds.
Of course, a big middle finger to them.
My privacy is worth more than that.

I don't have a reference for this, nor have I posted on a thread, but I wanted to share, here, as I have just discovered this thread and I find it very worth.

Thank you for taking the time to share your experience here. Luckily, it didn't seem to be too much funds apparently. I think you've done very well to avoid to give your data to these thieves, privacy is priceless.

I've added the link of your post to the secondary list.

MEXC: Bad experience with MEXC blocking funds

[sokani]

Thanks for sharing!
I've added it to the secondary list (some information are missing before I can add it to the main list)

Alright, I guess I've to stick to the info you mentioned in the op. Btw here's one from Godex: https://asktom.cf/index.php?topic=5540023.0

[paid2]

Alright, I guess I've to stick to the info you mentioned in the op. Btw here's one from Godex: https://asktom.cf/index.php?topic=5540023.0

Sorry for the delay. Thank you for sharing this case!

It's now added to the second list:

Godex.io: [SCAM WARNING] Godex locked my coins

By the way, it seems that it is becoming more and more rare for a CEX to be clear in their own terms of use AND to adhere to them for real...

[LoyceV]

By the way, it seems that it is becoming more and more rare for a CEX to be clear in their own terms of use AND to adhere to them for real...

Their terms are the exact opposite of what they advertise on their site and thread on Bitcointalk. That alone should be a very big red flag for any exchanger.
Now that I think about it: this could be worth a separate list, as a warning even before any exchanger freezes funds.

[examplens]

Their terms are the exact opposite of what they advertise on their site and thread on Bitcointalk. That alone should be a very big red flag for any exchanger.
Now that I think about it: this could be worth a separate list, as a warning even before any exchanger freezes funds.

How many instant exchangers honestly gave all the information here (or anywhere)? Everything ends up being taken at their word until the locking of the funds happens.
What is obvious, Whitebit, Changenow, and FF have the most developed network of resellers, and the most complaints are about them when it comes to freezing funds and additional KYC requirements. Every exchanger, new or existing, would have to provide accurate information about who their liquidity provider is. If it is one of the mentioned three, the exchanger deserves the "high risk" badge.

[LoyceV]

How many instant exchangers honestly gave all the information here (or anywhere)?

Only the good ones, I guess. The ones who don't say "no KYC" and then create long Terms that say they can ask KYC and more whenever they want.

[fillippone]

How many instant exchangers honestly gave all the information here (or anywhere)?

Only the good ones, I guess. The ones who don't say "no KYC" and then create long Terms that say they can ask KYC and more whenever they want.

I suspect the reason behind that is some sort of “blackmailing” by local authorities or, worst, by other exchanges. They tolerate those low regulated entities if they only nibble on their business. As soon as they want to scale up their business, and no KYC is a legit option for this, they clamp down on them, suffocating them (look what happened with exch).

[examplens]

Only the good ones, I guess. The ones who don't say "no KYC" and then create long Terms that say they can ask KYC and more whenever they want.

I suspect the reason behind that is some sort of “blackmailing” by local authorities or, worst, by other exchanges. They tolerate those low regulated entities if they only nibble on their business. As soon as they want to scale up their business, and no KYC is a legit option for this, they clamp down on them, suffocating them (look what happened with exch).

Why, for example, does it never happen that the exchanger shows a request from the authorities to request KYC of the user for a specific order? Somehow it's been going so far, they just freeze funds, with the explanation that KYC is required, the AML score is bad, it's following the regulation... But none of them shows an explicit request in which this is asked of them

[LoyceV]

Why, for example, does it never happen that the exchanger shows a request from the authorities to request KYC of the user for a specific order?

I'm not sure if this is a rhetorical question, but I assume there is no such request. If we're talking about national governments as authorities, there are about 200 different authorities on the planet. And none of them knows who owns the Bitcoin address you're sending to, so none of them can know which exchanger received your funds, so none of them can ask that exchanger within seconds to freeze your funds. This power is entirely concentrated with companies that sell the notion of taint, and none of them are transparent about their criteria. It would be trivially easy for them to publish a list of all "tainted" Bitcoin addresses, updated every block, so anyone who doesn't believe Bitcoin is fungible can easily see what to avoid. But that doesn't fit their business model, their core business is to sell that information one address at a time.
With fiat money, this would be utterly illegal! Governments protect their own money created out of thin air, and wouldn't want 90+% of all bills to be rejected because of the cocaine traces on them.

Somehow it's been going so far, they just freeze funds, with the explanation that KYC is required, the AML score is bad, it's following the regulation... But none of them shows an explicit request in which this is asked of them

But after you provide an unknown entity hiding in a tax haven a video holding your passport and a recent utility bill, everything is fine and your funds are okay