Bitcoin Forum

Hello. I use bitcoinlaundry.com before any transaction to make it  more anonymous. One time I had send about 2 BTC to laundry and I hadn't received bitcoins to destination address. I've thought I made some mistake and that was the reason. I was trying to contact wiht Mike Gogulski, but he didn't answer.

However, tonight I've used bitcoinlaundry.com again. I've send 9.2983929 BTC, I've got 84 confirmations, but not money on destination address. The transactions ID's df01774c410a4e0a8d2585e965c0dac9d2b65f486bc7aa011dd067869c9ceb01. The destination address for clean bitcoins is 1GVdZDwU1VPsL1Z7tBgfnrhsCvhojcLbZR.

Is there any chance to recover my bitcoins?

Next time use the SR mixer, you will have less chances to be scammed (but there always is a chance when using third-party services).

LOL, what is that service good for? Why don't you just create a one time wallet if you want to be anonymous?
Since my Bitcoin7 experience, I will never keep BTC outside of my control.

One-time wallet is not enough, I need to lost the trace.

Could anybody contact with Mr. Mike Gogulski? He doesn't reply to my e-mail. This is him profile (http://www.bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2285) on BitcoinTalk.

google "send shared blockchain.info"

Always be wary of such services and send money in increments, check to see if the money arrives before sending any more.

And yes, SR has been reliable so far.

Hello,

Nothing is lost.

What I see is that the the scheme you created was for BTC 9.29799191. Only 9.29799190 has been received, so the service is waiting for you to send the remaining BTC 0.00000001 before it deducts the commission and send you the result.

In the interest of clearing that up, I just sent the full amount of BTC 9.29799190 back to you. The txid is 21170bc750c531469881505fd270f096c1a991014b512d1de13025a41b026309. I'm publishing the info here, since it would be easy enough to find the single 9.29799190 transaction on the blockchain anyway.

My guess is that the reason for the problem was a very simple cut-and-paste mistake, where the person sending the payment just missed including the final digit. I checked my code, using the same data you input, and got the expected results.

Now, about the previous BTC 2 you mentioned. I did see a message quite recently from someone saying that they had lost 2-something bitcoins in my laundry and wanted it paid back. In this case I may have made a mistake, and if that's so, I apologize. I took a quick look at outstanding schemes and did not spot anything which matched the info provided in the email. Now when I look, I see that there is an open scheme that has been only partially funded, for an amount between BTC 2 and BTC 3.

My error in this case: Very often, I get emails (often from tormail addresses) claiming to have lost bitcoins in one of my laundries. Almost all of these are attempted to trick me into paying someone who never sent anything at all. So, I thought your message was one of those and just deleted it like I do with the others. That was a screwup, and I'm sorry for it.

Anyway, the open scheme I mentioned expects to be funded with a value between BTC 2 and BTC 3. It looks like the person who sent Bitcoins to the scheme address might have "over-thought" things, because the amount that's been received is equal to the total scheme value minus the commission, down the the last decimal place. So, those coins are still there, but again waiting for the full scheme amount to be paid in.

To clear that up for you, I'll need you to send me (privately) either the BTC address you sent the coins to, or the BTC address you entered as the destination for the scheme.

Finally, it is possible that your BTC 2 scheme can't be recovered. From time to time I throw away the laundry's wallet file and begin with a new one, and it has happened before that partly-funded (and old) bitcoinlaundry.com schemes there just get forgotten. Hopefully not, in your case!

Peace,
Mike

Kudos to Mike for the explanation.

This is nothing more than ordinary duty to a customer, but I certainly do appreciate the praise.

Norbi and I should be sorted now. I'll check back here for a confirmation of that.

I've received all my bitcoins back. Thank you very much, Mr. Gogulski. I appreciate your kindness. :)

Excellent. You are quite welcome.

Inaba, take example from this man.

So you lost your bitcoins then tried AGAIN with a huge amount of bitcoins?  uh...

Is it somewhat peculiar that you have to go to an online money laundering service operation to find people doing business the way it should be done?

Everywhere else in the "real world" customers expect to be ripped off and treated like shit, and rightfully so.

Mikes future business depends on treating his customers well. This doesn't hold true for many big corporations, whose future business depends on being able to write regulation (law), fighting well in courts, having good marketing and, well, just being big.

Are you a parrot?

Hey Mike,

Yesterday I was experimenting with thebitcoinlaundry trying to see if it work tumbling directly into a bitpay request, which it doesn't look like it works since they chave a 15 minute window. I sent over 0.105 BTC to 12uAh99PHFitt7psw9RTkVfEvCvmm7SyDA and about twenty minutes later, after reading a thread where it seemed that the laundry was waiting for a tiny bit extra to make up the fee, I sent another 0.0011 BTC to the same address. It looks like these are just floating around the chain somewhere, and I realize this isn't your fault and that it almost certainly has everything to do with Bitpay... but if Bitpay sent those two transactions back to you or if they never made it out of the laundry, I'd love to get it back to the same address I sent it over from. More irritated at myself, and if you tell me that the coins are gone forever I understand and will just consider it a lesson learned.

-Dutch

Dutch,

The balance of your scheme after commission was paid out to an address starting with 18Q. Beyond that, unfortunately (and by design!), there's nothing more I can discover.

Peace,
Mike

I'd guess it's gone, sorry bro, wouldn't use them again.