Bitcoin Forum

This is a scam report against CryptoXchange, who has stolen $100,000 USD+ from me and refuses to return it. He told me he had sent the money to me months ago, but that was a lie. To this day I have not received it. Worse yet, he refuses to refund me the BTC I paid to him and refuses to reply on his chats. I am treating this like a legal case and though it is not my responsibility I have taken on the burden of proof in this case against Crypto. I have detailed, highlighted and explained logs ranging from January this year to June of this year in which you will read about how he's scammed and run off with my money. I am asking for a commercial settlement with Crypto, but until then I will continue to make sure everyone knows of the scam he is capable of. His partner in crim currently is Mahin. I hope you all read my story and empathize with it. I would hate to see this happen to another member. This is my story:

1: I was told on January 12, 2012 that I would get the money the next day
https://i.imgur.com/DZUeA.png
2: I was told to message him once I received the transfer. I was then told Ken wanted to say "Hi"
https://i.imgur.com/XdXZI.png
3: I was even offered a business oppurtunity
https://i.imgur.com/aBgaz.png
4: On the 13th I was told had received partial payment. $1746.86 and 3096.03
https://i.imgur.com/Zfzcx.png
5: Shortly after the excuses started "he was sick" "volume had increased"
https://i.imgur.com/xudSa.png
6: I was then told that payments would be sent daily to me I had received nothing and was given yet another excuse "MLK day"
https://i.imgur.com/zPXOi.png
7: This time he tried to cipher more money from me, asking if I was ready to do more trades before he had even paid for the last one! He then inquired about my job and told me that Mahin wanted to talk some more.
https://i.imgur.com/It2vF.png
8:  He told me Mahin loved my site and wanted to discuss it with me. I admit, there are a few red flags I should have seen. For one: He told me he dealt with my transactions manually, yet he kept saying that his "banking guys" would deal with this and that. Secondly: He kept asking for me to "trust him" that he had "reputation to keep". I should have seen the red flags...
https://i.imgur.com/K2mEw.png
9: He tell me that "unlike other exchangers he treats his clients right"  and that "there was no risk with them" He then asks for more BTC to which I stupidly obliged. I sent him 2k, he tells me he is processing payments with his infamous "Banking guys"
https://i.imgur.com/Ugp0V.png
10: More excuses he tells me he has sent the payment, but I have not received. I ask for proof to which he says he will "consult" with the "banking guys". He then enquires once more about my website and asks to link it.
https://i.imgur.com/iGkse.png
11: Nothing significant here, just the same old red flags. His interest in my website and excuses and empty promises. Include for burden of proof.
https://i.imgur.com/1KO1W.png
12: I was told $18.3k had been sent was introduced to a new excuse "his banker was away so there was a build-up" I told him no wire came through and asked what had happened.
https://i.imgur.com/Cf9SG.png
13: More excuses. I was told that I was their "#1 priority" He told me he had chatted with his "boss" on my behalf. I asked him if there was proof of payment such as a receipt. He side steps the question. I think that he may possibly have wired to the wrong ban so I ask where it was sent. He gives me my bank info and it's 100% correct. So there is really no excuse.
https://i.imgur.com/cL8ev.png
14: Five days, no money and no him.
https://i.imgur.com/iVt2S.png
15: I am informed that his company had an issue with fraud, someone used stolen New Zealend bank accounts to buy BTCs and Crypto Coupons from him. I suppose this is where trouble started. He lost a lot of money and BTC from that I suppose. So no he was more adament against releasing my funds. He told me he had already sent them though. Lies. He also wanted to know where I got my coins. Red Flag.
https://i.imgur.com/OsUq0.png
16: He wanted to know where I got my coins. He wanted me to sell him coins for cheap... An exchanger wants this? Really. RED FLAG. How stupid I was to ignore it.
https://i.imgur.com/7PqRz.png
17: They had been stalling for weeks, I kept receiving more excuses. That it had been sent but they didn't know what was going on.
https://i.imgur.com/0Fi5h.png
18: In the meanwhile they were off having weddings, while I awaited my payment. A new excuse was also presented. They were waiting on Mt. Gox to "lift their limits".
https://i.imgur.com/I656C.png
19+20: No news on my wires more than a month later. Just more excuses, this time he presented me with a 10k Mt.Gox code. Then he stops replying, ten days later on the 29th he is finally back. I am once again told my wires have ben sent. The "banking guys have put a trace on them.
https://i.imgur.com/sfKoR.png
https://i.imgur.com/W6Pnb.png
21: He tells me about how Mt. Gox is fucking them over and being anti-competitive he then tells me that the wires will be sent and that they would never "fuck me" over.
https://i.imgur.com/vESx3.png
22 + 23: More excuses
https://i.imgur.com/7MtOL.png
https://i.imgur.com/DFQDD.png
24: Included for burden of proof.
https://i.imgur.com/Y3ItO.png
25+26: Offers to help me with my friend's Mt. Gox account. Empty promises.
https://i.imgur.com/3Jclj.png
https://i.imgur.com/yXfSL.png
27: Burden of proof. More excuses.
https://i.imgur.com/8W8O2.png
28: Several months since I sent the coins and I have still received nothing on the initial $100,000 transaction. The second one I did for 2 $25,000 is the one he is saying was with stolen BTC.
https://i.imgur.com/0AK9Q.png
29: This is where things get interesting looking back. He says the last batch of coins I sold him, that he hasn't even paid for yet are stolen. He then tells me to chase down the Mf**** because he is unable to sell the coins on Mt. Gox. My question is, at this point, "Why not return the coins?". If he is unable to sell them why didn't he return them to me so I could attempt to get a proper refund. Regardless he owes me money from the legitimate $100,000 worth of BTC I sold.
https://i.imgur.com/DB9RT.png
30: READ THE TOP: "Mahin and I know you're legitimate" It seems as though everything he warned that Mt. Gox would do to me, he did to me. Kept my coins and my money.
https://i.imgur.com/i9YBB.png
31: You can see here he's had no issues selling the coins he hasn't paid me for.
https://i.imgur.com/EGWge.png
32: He linked me to this thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=67091.0
https://i.imgur.com/TnfDL.png
33+34: Included for burden of proof.
https://i.imgur.com/0IYob.png
https://i.imgur.com/NaQcG.png
35: It's now he starts asking for natarised docs, this was not required before and I never agreed to this new term. Additionally, the transaction took place prior to this "update" of TOC so I was not bound to it.
https://i.imgur.com/NFiBc.png
36: He then tells me that my ID and Bank Account don't match. More lies.
https://i.imgur.com/tujbA.png
37: At this point, I recognize I've been scammed 3 months with no money and no coins. The gut feeling is there, finalized. He refuses to return my coins and refuses to issue my money. What right do they have to do that?
https://i.imgur.com/5yFAP.png
38: He keeps saying he'll talk to "Mahin". Excuses, excuses.
https://i.imgur.com/eSx6B.png
39: Never saw the "proof" and he never sent back the coins or the money. They also blocked my account.
https://i.imgur.com/FGkJH.png
40: At this point I'm just sick and tired. Even if they do unblock my account, it will just take them another 2 months to send my money? I wanted to terminate business right there and leave with what was rightfully mine.
https://i.imgur.com/qsJCc.png
41: My documents need to be verified? They were, in January when we first started doing business all my info was verified.
https://i.imgur.com/ixTCJ.png
42: He then brushes me to the side and tells me to contact legal, who by the way has been contacted several times by my lawyer to no avail.
https://i.imgur.com/YH5td.png
43+44: I ask if my money will be sent when I send in notarised copies and he says he needs them posted as well. I'm thinking at this point, that they've stolen my money and at this point I just want to be told directly. It's been months since they received the coins. I even offer to pay him 10% of the money he owes me to just send the thing! No avail.
https://i.imgur.com/JGLBy.png
https://i.imgur.com/COMSB.png
45: No e-mails from "legal" as promised. No replies from him or the company. Weeks go by. Still nothing no more replies. Which brings me here.
https://i.imgur.com/FonfA.png

Hey Ken.  When did you lose your capacity to speak and write English?

Very Simply:

This person has submitted fake identification which wasn't picked up until we had a request to withdraw to another bank account.

It has been requested at least 7 times that this person sends in Notorized & Opistilled Documentation in both upload and post.

We would also like to note this account was monitored and suspended due to suspicious circumstances in which the Notorized & Opistilled Documentation were requested.


Regards

Crypto X Change

Addition: WME, simply send the documents requested numerous times, Notorised & Opistilled, email copy and also please post the copies, we won't be replying constantly about being accused of scammers because we are not.

You have our contact Email WME

TL;DR

+1

Big guy takes down the small guy. Typical. Looking at the logs you obviously owe him cash which you are not giving him. Why not just give him his money back? Can't wait to see how this plays out.

EDIT:

Yup, image 29 you call him legitimate. Why the change of story?

We have requested Notorised & Opistilled documents and have been waiting, also amount is not 100K.

WME: Please send through Notorised & Opistilled Documents as requested several times.

It is that simple.

Crypto X Change

Why won't you reply to his lawyer? I don't blame him for not wanting to send you his docs, you guys had him balling around for months. Who's to say you won't do it again? Fact of the matter is you should give him back the money you owe. From your replies I can see the issue is that you want his notarized documents, not that the BTC are stolen as you claimed in the chats. Seems to me like you are just formulating new excuses. I'm sorry but I've been called out so much on this forum, now that there is actually a scammer I'm happy to ham down.

EDIT: I wonder if you used his BTC to buy VIP... shame.

Just send him back his BTC and quite trying to be the fucking Bitcoin Police, you scamming idiots.

No Sir,

There is much, much more to this than is being shown here. Our solicitors have advised to request Notorised & Opistlled documents, as there are many underlying issues here, WME refused on many occasions by various staff to provide us with the Notorised & Opistlled documentation AML / CFT information and not release any private information on the transactions of this person which we have not.

WME: Simply send in the Notorised & Opistlled documents via Email + Postal to our PO BOX.



Regards

Crypto X Change

Simply send back his BTC. He sent them to you, correct? If you don't want to pay for them, send them back. Like dude are you serious?  It also says all his info was verified. This is actually funny. Wow.

EDIT:

Funny because you guys are doing to him what you bitched mt.gox was doing to you :o

Whatever...

Your shitty little exchange still depends on MT.Gox, and once they pecker-slapped you guys, you began making your client's life difficult in order to buy time.

Why would anyone want to go through another middle man ? just another point of SCAM or FAILURE in the Trade/Payment process.

Judging by your trade volume (laughable at best) it's safe to say that a fuckup of this magnitude WILL NOT be increasing it any time in the near future.

People can jump through HALF the hoops and simply submit Docs ONCE to MT.Gox and cut you guys right the fuck out of the loop.

What a joke.

The trouble as always is the requirement for AML and bending over to take it up the ass from governments.

I would think the OP is still entitled to his coins back at the very least. Or can they just run off with $100,000?

Caught something here. They advised, keyword: advised. Meaning that it's completely up to you whether or not to comply with their advice, return the guys money. Stop making excuses.

Advised = if you don't do it, you'll go to jail. That's what it means in this case.

This guy may or may not be the Linode hacker, but he sure as hell knows who the Linode hacker is.

def not gonna use this exchange

 :o I feel pretty good about my measly 37 BTC theft  :o

http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h148/Bigblock462/Stephen-Colbert-Popcorn.gif

Who are you referring to OP or CryptoXchange?

Liberty Payout,

You have absolutely no idea what has actually gone on here. As we've stated above were not going to continue replying to this garbage, we are not scammers, please go and find people that are not happy with our exchange!

AML / CFT / KYC is very important in Australia, there is a lot more to this than is shown, we are doing what we legally have to do, WME - Send the documents please!

Yes he does, and this is a separate matter all together!

The OP. Try reading between the line. The red-flags of money laundering here for the OP are numerous.

That's probably the best way out of it.

So Crypto should return the coins. There is no law against that.

Has it occurred to you that this all happen because of the police? The wire was stopped at the bank, not CryptoXchange. The bank is the one that is requiring the documents. And they can't just convert the funds to BTC, because MtGox is on their ass too.

CryptoXchange,

Just so we can better understand your viewpoint on this can you explain why you legally need his proof of ID?

Most likely it means that they will not be protected by the safe harbour provisions of the AML/CTF Act if they do not perform appropriate ongoing customer due diligence in relation to this customer - that requires them to take satisfactory measures to establish the true identity of the customer and the destination of funds according to the AML/CTF Rules Instrument which derives its authority from the Act.

That's not what "cryptoxchange" wants. They'll do whatever, as long as they get to keep the money and the coins.

I guess everyone has a price, and $100,000 was enough for cryptoxchange.

Care to show what's not shown?
Have you received a court order or a police order telling you to seize this money or freeze this account?

And why telling him that the money's on the way if it isn't? The same way he's refusing to send you notarized documents, it seems by the pictures you've avoided sending him wire receipts.

+1. Let's see how he replies.

You know this for a fact or you're supposing?

I have a hard time believing the bank would be aware of "stolen bitcoins". Red flags would only be raised on their end if perhaps the account the wire was going to was "marked" somehow.
And if that was the case, I guess CryptoXChange could just say that and relief the burden of his shoulders ("it's the bank, not us! here's proof..").

Here's the thing with AML law: CryptoXchange legally can't tell someone that they're being investigated.
Because the money was on the way. It was the bank that flagged the transaction, after the wire request was submitted.

+1. You bastard! You beat me to posting the same.

~Bruno~

Assuming that Ken wasn't lying in the logs, it is just about a fact. If you read the logs carefully you'll see that this is mentioned indirectly several times.

Nothing about the logs makes me think that Ken is lying.

Why can't he provide receipts then. Some evidence to feast our eyes upon.

And it's clearly seen that that is why Ken has initiated each and every conversation, keeping his client well informed. That fact alone makes me believe that WME is trying to pull a fast one.

~Cackling Bear~

Because the wire never left the bank - it was only ever a request, and the bank denied it.

Wire requests normally produce receipts too.
Posting the receipts would prove CryptoXChange was telling the truth about having submitted the wires. And I can't believe that's illegal...

1) They can't directly say that the bank is who triggered the AML request. Showing the receipt would absolutely prove that.
2) They submit the wire requests in large batches. Giving us the receipt would reveal the transactions of others.

Honestly, this is an issue that's well beyond the court of public opinion. I support the OP in wanting to do a lawsuit, as that is the only way that both sides could lay all their cards on the table.

Image 16. If Crypto thought he was laundering why would he ask the OP to help him get cheap coins, why try to engage in a joint venture with the OP's business?

Because stolen coins are cheap and Ken apparently knows how to properly launder the coins so that he can make some nice, hot, cash.

You're assuming there's an official AML investigation on the way. Posting the receipts would just prove they send the money which is now stuck at the bank, for whatever reasons. In no way that states there's an AML investigation on the way.
I really doubt that's illegal.


Please, just blur the other names.


You're probably right on that one.

The thing is, OP being a thief or not, I'm very uneasy with a btc exchange "playing police", tainting coins and all that. If CryptoXChange would show us the bank is at fault here for not sending the wires, we could at least rule that out.

The OP could make a complaint to AUSTRAC if he genuinely believes that CryptoXchange is abusing AML/KYC requirements in order to keep his funds for themselves.  Of course he might have some explaining to do if he took that option.

So why does OP post once or twice, and then some unknown members take over the discussion for him in his favor? Smacks of major sockpuppetry and fraud, to say the very least. I'm fairly sure there is a lot more at work here than many folks realize.

Those of you that want to perform actions in direct defiance of governmental or regulatory mandates, please go start your own exchange and see how far you get.

I guess you could always just send the coins to the police to sort out but they would need a bitcoin address first  :D

Isn't it so very interesting that Liberty Payouts has such a passionate interest in this issue, when he has been "dealing" in similar amounts of similarly tainted and misappropriated funds? What's up Liberty, worried that one of your colleagues in crime might be getting slapped down while laundering stolen funds? Feel a little too close for comfort to see vigilante justice?

Funny how the scammers all stick up for each other.

It's not just a question of AML law it's also a question of privacy laws etc here. A company that is required in case of AML/KYC laws etc to hold customer information, and bank accounts/recipts/statements are very much customer information, are in most civilized countries severely restricted in what they can and can't do with such information and suggesting that they post such on the internet is frankly kinda fail.

In Australia the rules are quite clear: http://www.privacy.gov.au/materials/types/infosheets/view/6541#k (http://www.privacy.gov.au/materials/types/infosheets/view/6541#k)

What you're suggesting is in legal terms under AUS law the same as your bank suddenly deciding to post everything they have on you on the internet. Not really a smart move at all.

I wonder how many transactions happened between bitcoinica withdrawal and crypto deposit of the coins ?

Well. I would like to add few cents here....

Actually if payment was done via SWIFT network, it is quite easily to track it. And sender who is doing his job correctly (i.e. sending wires at the same dates as they write in admin screens, etc.) could easily provide proof.

Sender of such payment can ask from bank copy of swift message. And still value date can be in the future,
basically SWIFT message transmitted from sender bank to receiver bank within few seconds to 15-20 minutes depending on
correspondent bank accounts. So if receiver has good relationship with his bank, he could see incoming payment
in minutes... Not in days... And look what "value date" will be.

That's SWIFT message today is standardized and called SWIFT MESSAGE MT-103 ... So copy of this SWIFT message by CryptoXChange would clarify everything. And studying more about SWIFT system would actually help to find international wires, as if some of corr. banks by some reason not transferred to recipient because OF SOME ERROR IN ORIGINATING SWIFT MESSAGE, like wrong account number or wrong company name, this can be easily and quickly resolved.

The swift message copy usually costs between $0 to $25 and contains all required information, with stamp and signature from bank. This swift message - is like GPG-signed email, which can be lawfully enforced if banker screw things. This also negates rumors about "batches"... As even if you sent to your bank "batch", it will be processed message by message using MT-103 transfers. That's why wire costs so much... And wire is irreversible.

More about SWIFT:
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_MT_103-23
http://www.globalgrainsvn.com/GGSVN/MT103.html

Please read also this (so you will see how it looks like.... Quite different from these shitty online forms, isn't it ? Actually bankers take responsibility for the transfers... And will be liable by laws if they screw transfer...):
http://www.wallstreetfunds.biz/bankers/MT-103format.htm

That is from google... Usually banks don't copy whole message, but only part with amounts, value date, corr. banks, etc.
They could also put signature and seal on it (useful in case if you have to deal against receiving bank, and have proof that money were actually transferred there - with small and bad banks this works very well, as when they know that you have signed swift message on hands)

Another moment - this not looks like police investigations, as usually you'll get your wire as expected with slight delay, but then you'll likely be arrested when getting these funds. If claims that false passport was used are true for example, then receiving bank would cooperate and receiver of funds would be likely under investigation. If fake ID happened on side of receiver bank, they would perform further tracking until transaction would get to recipient. This is called "paper trail"... Knowing the details helps a lot to locate crooks and then their assets as well... However that may be expensive to perform large-scale investigations.

On other side - WME is running exchange services for years, and it seems that he would not risk with CLIENTS' money by providing fake ID. Putting $100k on fake ID is like complete nonsense today, as if it would be truly dirty money, which "launderer" would know of - he would provide real person with paying him about $500-$1000 for laundering, or this transaction would be structured in smaller pieces. Although it is strange - is that WME is actually same WME ? Because being 10 years in exchanges, and not asking first for proof of transfer via asking for swift message or other similar form for systems like ACH for US accounts or SEPA for EURs is quite strange. However other side seems to have ad-hoc behavior with multiple lies. It looks more like both operate in "gray" biz zone not knowing well what they actually do.

It looks more like CryptoX stopped their money either by their own investigation, without authorities involved or they simply decided to rob WME. Maybe that is "rob the robber" action... I don't know - it's all fantasy without CORRECT investigation by authorized and trained persons (i.e. investigators, experts, etc). But in case if they're just robbing money - many would think that they are nice target for robbery as well, as they would have difficulties to deal with police then, and simply bigger and more powerful robber could take their "bank". And that fact makes additional risk to it's users.

About "stolen bitcoins" - that's the question - who is the judge - stolen they or not ? That cannot be determined from blockchain alone. If exchanger claims the right to be judge - then - what reason to use that exchange ? Somebody pays you, and then cry on forum - oh - they were stolen, I haven't sent that payment... Is it legit to trust such claims at all ?
Isn't purpose of bitcoins was to fix this issue ? If you want refund ability - then go with VISA or paypal - they have it!
Say these "hacks" in exchanges - are they hacks or security exploits by owners or insider personnel, who just decided to steal some coins knowing in advance that it is coins and unlikely there will be any legal consequences, as I written above, that would likely happen if you for example steal money from bank account and wire it even to account with fake ID.

This also raises question - is it possible to trust using bitcoin exchange 3-rd parties that aggregate clients money and operate without tight law framework, that actually protects customers (i.e. maintaining liquidity, etc.) or bitcoin exchanges should be done more in p2p manner, making p2p transactions between persons using real banking institutions that has strict regulations.

Thanks for your attention!

2 Bigpiggy01: If customer wants to disclose his private information - he could, and he could authorize doing that.

WME himself has already made the details public. So I guess he wouldn't mind giving authorization to make the receipt public as well.

Funny how the scammers stick up for each other? Funny how when there is actually a scam on this site you guys have nothing better to do then come after people like me for no reason at all. There is a mound of evidence against Crypto. Point of the matter is someone is out $100,000 which is a lot of money, and until someone starts explaining why this is, rather than making some baseless assumptions I'm going to assume Crypto is a scammer. Is that not what all you idiots were saying? That you have to "assume" until proven otherwise? Well that's what I'm doing. You guys also need to stop riding Crypto's dick so he can come in here like a man and explain himself.

Liberty Payout: One question--- how do you feel about anonymity and living in New York city?

I don't understand your question. If you have questions PM me. In the meanwhile I want this thread on topic. People have explaining to do. I want to see how an actual scam report plays out on this site. At this point I'm pissed the fuck off, because so many of you were so adamant about me when I didn't do anything, and now that there is an actual scammer you're all lollygagging which makes the fact that you tried to persecute me my first few days here on the basis of "protecting each other" bullshit.

haha you said I was on ignore.

Anyway, the reason no one is jumping up and down is because this is not the first thread WME has tried to make noise in. Go check the other thread. The solutions were all presented, the OP doesn't want to do what he has to do.

I wish the alleged scam report were a little more concise.  It's too difficult and long-winded to follow.

The first paragraph should state a precise dollar/btc amount and a date since which it's been owed and how it came to be owed (deposit? proceeds of btc sales? etc.).  Everything coming after that should support the original allegation.  All of the inline screenshots are noise - to the extent they have evidence value, they should be linked as offsite references.

It's really not that simple, which is why when people go to the media about their bank having allegedly done something terrible the bank only comments in general terms along the lines of "looking into the complaint".  There really isn't a blanket authorisation for public disclosure of financial information which a customer can give - the authorisation needs to be insanely specific and it needs to state the lawful purpose for which the information can be disclosed (providing information to a message board so they can form an opinion wouldn't count as the kind of "lawful purpose" required by the various privacy acts).

OP really needs to get his lawyer to file a complaint with AUSTRAC.  There'll be no problem getting his funds released if AUSTRAC determines that his identity verification documents meet the required standards for AML/KYC compliance standards and that his transactions are legitimate.

From what I know about these matters it would be extremely expensive for the OP to take this to court and may yield little benefit. If my assumptions about Crypto are correct they are a company that is heading into the gutter whether by lack of funding or some other source and they simply don't have the funding to pay. Yes the OP could take this to court but in the end Crypto may end up declaring bankruptcy to no avail of the OP or may end up paying but at a large monetary loss of the OP. Either way Crypto goes down and the OP loses a significant amount of money.

Crypto is not going down. OP needs to file his paperwork.

I think they are. You can't just pull off scams of this magnitude with sensitive currency such as BTC.

I also highly doubt this is the first or the last time Crypto has done something like this. Only a matter of time before others come out.

You "think"? "Sensitive currency such as BTC"? "Scams"? Oh god I lol'd

Complying with government regulations under threat of force isn't a "scam". Grow up and get a clue.

Complying with government regulations? Where is there proof of that? That was an assumption of a user.

AML/KYC are regulations enforceable by various governmental agencies, amirite?

This is true, but can we get a statement from Crypto proving that this is the case? Anyone can use AML/KYC as an excuse to suspend funds. I also don't understand how that stops Crypto from returning the OPs coins.

So, an organisation that asks for notarized ID before transferring $100k is a scammer? Even if they were possibly forced to do so, by law?

Have I not read the thread properly, or is this what Liberty Payout is claiming?

Liberty PayFlaps- you are under constant scrutiny because your approach to this community, and your wounded sense of pride that anyone would question why somebody so noble as yourself would want to take a 35% loss just to establish a reputation is just so much bullshit.

You have been outed as a scammer, trying to bring the proceeds of your scams here to launder the money.  And now you want to cry outrage because another strongly suspect story WITH THE SAME AMOUNT OF MONEY INVOLVED is pissing and moaning because he doesn't want to confirm his identity, and is stressed out that he is receiving the same coins that he deposited andhave been identified as the ones stolen in the Linode heist back?

Please, you are filthy with guilt, and your comments only wriggle you that much deeper in the shit of your own making.

No, a organization that claims to have sent the money several times over the course of  6 months is a scammer. They should have stated a notarised ID was required from the jump. I'm sorry but Crypto is still at fault.

The OP doesn't need to take this to court.  AUSTRAC is the body in charge of regulating and enforcing AML/KYC/CTF compliance.  They are absolutely the people to complain to if a service provider is suspected of using AML/KYC requirements to steal user funds and perfectly capable of determining whether the OP's ID documents are authentic.  If AUSTRAC says the documents and transactions are fine, CryptoXchange has no AML/KYC grounds on which to retain the funds/BTC.  If the OP would rather write off $100,000 than subject his ID documents to AUSTRAC's scrutiny, people need to ask themselves why that might be the case as all international funds transfer instructions must be reported to AUSTRAC anyway, regardless of value.

+1, OP i suggest you look at this.

WTF is Opistilled?! Just look up the damn word.


I am not sure why Crypto is claiming false documents, but Russian names sometimes appear differently in English documents. So far I saw a delaying tactic from the beginning, but Alex's responses in Skype weren't making any sense also. 100k is a lot money in Russia, hell it's a lot of money anywhere.

Yes.  Primarily AUSTRAC.  There's a positive obligation to comply with the requirements of the AML/CTF Act and the Rules Instrument - which means that it's mandatory for services to whom the Act and Rules apply to take certain kinds of actions and report certain matters without any request from AUSTRAC being required.  They are additionally required under the Act to co-operate with "requests" from AUSTRAC - AUSTRAC does not require a court order to compel such co-operation as their authority is written into the Act and non-co-operation is an offence.  Information obtained by AUSTRAC may form the basis of criminal prosecutions by other agencies.

Under the Act "tipping off" is an offence.  A reporting entity must conduct ongoing customer due diligence and apply enhanced know your customer requirements if "suspicious" circumstances a rise, but it is an offence to disclose to a customer that a Suspicious Matters Report has been filed with AUSTRAC.  Requiring additional identification and proof of control of the funding account does not count as "tipping off" and neither does asking the customer about the source and destination of funds (in fact verifying these as legitimate can be a requirement of OCDD under certain circumstances).


It probably wasn't required from the jump.  There's a minimum amount of KYC information which must be collected from all customers but all sorts of things can trigger the requirement to obtain additional information/proof of identity etc.  While many large financial institutions continue to use the 100 points ID system - it was mandatory at one point and their systems are already set up for it - many smaller organisations only apply enhanced KYC protocols when the need arises because it's a large administrative burden.  Where a customer fits on the risk matrix can change with a single transaction, and when it changes different requirements apply.

Having been subject of a money laundering inquiry from a bank previously, subscribing.  Helped that one of the people I was working with was the ex-boss of the head of currency that had manually held up the transaction.

I prefer the latter. Not for the reasons you said in your original msg, but to avoid things like what we see in this thread (submitting personal data, account seizures and freezings, lack of privacy, government interference, taxes, tainting of coins etc etc).

I understand some people need the liquidity, and perhaps can't afford to search for a trustworthy trader every time they need to trade. But if you don't have such needs, then avoid escrowed exchanges and go person-to-person.

Dude.. return his coins!!! Don't you understand this will ruin your business if not solved immediately..
First he was a trusted customer, and then you come up with a story about his IDs..??? How could you then transfer money to him in first case??
How can you say those bitcoins are stolen??? prove it! I thought bitcoin is anonymous... Correct me if wrong...
And like some one said before... You are not the bitcoin police... Return the money.

Just out of curiosity, would you mind telling if the inquiry you've been subject of had anything to do with bitcoins?

What kind of unprofessional guys are you that you attend a wedding or stay sick but you don't pay attention to your clients?
I mean it's 100k, the image you guys are giving is horrible.

i think there is something fishy on both sides.
the customer didn't provide the aml doc
exchanger was happy with that and keep the money

No, it was well before bitcoins.  Simply a transfer of money from one country to another.  We had raised funds in New Zealand from local investors and were sending it to Australia where the operational business was located.  Due to the size of the particular transfer it was flagged for inspection.  When it cropped up, we were asked to prove what we were doing and it was fairly simple to resolve via a phone call because the people involved knew each other.  That is, one of the other directors was an ex-head of corporate banking from one of the main trading banks, and he knew the head of retail banking at the bank we were using (because he had employed him some time earlier).

When doing IMTs (international money transfers) there are several places it can get stopped.  As an example, I shifted some AUD back to NZD , did all the paperwork, paid the fees and had my receipt etc, went back to my office in Melbourne and noticed I had made an error.  Walked back to the bank, fixed the error and the funds went through correctly - definitely not instant, and having a receipt doesn't necessarily prove the transaction is made.  Also, the receiving bank can hold the funds before depositing it into your account - that's part of the SWIFT system.  ie, out of your account to the bank - transfer of value/fx - receiving bank account, distribution to recipient = four accounts and plenty of places it can be scrutinised.

Don't know how you came to that conclusion I have seen the crypto people on numerous occasions tell this fool to provide the proper documents if he wants his money so far he has not complied. So sorry about his scammer luck he obviously does not to reveal his true identity so his scam is done with for now..

true on that. but how come the cryptoxc guys didn't pay him the money back?
yes lets say he is a scammer but that doesn't mean the cryptoxc guys should keep the money right?

::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ....no. CxC can keep it. Scammers deserve to rot.

On a transaction of this size they need to know who the money is going to to report for AML purposes this transaction has not one hope in hell of ever going through without that confirmation. And I know if someone had $100k of my money and all I had to do to get it was provide the proper docs well as soon as humanly possible I would have it in their hands. Oh and nowhere have I seen the crypto guys say they will not give the money to him only he has to provide the proper documents to get it.

yea but so far he didn't send any aml doc, that doesn;t mean he is a scammer.
for 20k he can pay a con artist and send as many aml documents crypto guys want. i think there is something more there with that exchange.

Ultimately they can't keep the money.  He'll either satisfactorily identify himself and the origin and destination of the funds as required by AML/KYC laws and his fund will be returned to him or eventually his funds will be transferred to one of the government unclaimed money funds from which he can recover ti upon providing proof of his identity and the legitimacy of the funds.

What CryptoXchange cannot do is simply ignore suspicious matters.  If they fail to carry out OCDD and enhanced KYC in relation to suspicuous transactions/accounts, they are liable to huge fines if it turns out that the account was being used for illegal purposes - and unlike Wachovia, I doubt  that CryptoXchange can afford huge fines or that the prospect of imprisonment is an attractive one.


And CryptoXchange can pay a certified document examiner to check the authenticity of the documents.

Yes like the one reply I read in one of these topics on this subject where I seen the crypto guys say his faked documents were worthless as proof or the other reply by him where he said he got the coins from a third party. So there is more here than meets the eye who knows where the truth is but I would put my money on this idiot being in the wrong more than the reverse being true..

will see how it ends. very curious what kind of documents he provide

We can already see how it is going to end he is not getting the money, it has been at least a month now that he has been on this thing all the time not providing the required docs and I don't see him changing course anytime soon after continuing on this path all along. He seems to think that by going down this route of making BS posts to try and hurt their reputation will get him somewhere, well that only works when you have right on your side and have done the correct things necessary to get done what needs to be done in the proper manner. Only then do you have the chance to get it done, may not always work if the people your dealing with are a piece of shit but until you get there having done it all according to the proper procedures you will never know.

I'm beginning to think there needs to be an "AML/KYC and You" sticky at the top of this forum.

Agreed these people around here seem to think they are immune from them laws well hate to break it to them they are not and BTW the taxman wants to know what your up to as well..

I have to say that after reading all of WME's post for a second time, I have a hard time believing that he is a liar, as far as to his (initial) investment(s) is concern that is.

~Bruno~

Im sure when this guy comes up with the required documents he will get his money.

looks like cryptos earnings has increased 100k.. with 100k in my pocket a scammer tag would be the last thing on my mind.. watch where you put your coin people!

Oh, I believe this bit.


The problem is that it obscures the true origin of the funds and that pretty much automatically triggers more stringent AML/KYC requirements.  It also sounds like the OP tried to change the destination of the withdrawals.  Once anything "suspicious" like that comes into play, the onus is on the customer to provide proof of their identity and of the legitimacy of the transaction and the funds.  Service providers ask for specific documents in order to help the customer prove those things and to prevent themselves being fined for non-compliance and/or prosecuted for aiding and sbetting money laundering, tax evasion, terrorism financing or whatever.

I dont see where they are claiming they will keep the coins. If I had that much money invested I would be doing everything possible to comply with the document request.

Personally I think its crazy to put that much money through one exchange :)

I do too because even if you're perfectly legitimate, it only takes one suspicious transaction detected by a bank or other financial service provider for the account/s containing customer deposits to be frozen.  Hell, the DoJ can even seize the domain if they believe it's being used to facilitate crime and nobody's going to be moving funds in or out any time soon if that happens.

It's estimated that tens of billions of dollars were exported from Russia illegally last year.


For that reason alone, large transactions originating either directly or indirectly from Russia or which involve Russian nationals are closely monitored by FATF member countries world-wide.

Look at the dates..  (Use this http://masterrussian.com/vocabulary/russian_months.htm )    This guy had a ton of cash in the exchange and then for 2 months got the run around about his withdrawl wires, Mtgox is f'n us, we sent the wires, you didn't get them??.. Then after 2 months of excuses he gets, we need your apostille docs and we have suspended your account..  Because the last 2k of coins he put in were tainted..

Seriously..  Something fishy is going on here on both sides.  I like how Ken cusses out the mtgox exchange owner multiple times, and blames not sending wires on them (basically admiting they didn't have the money to pay), real professionalism there   ::)

The fact that WME will not hand over documents is troubling indeed.

I believe that if Crypto were to return all his "stolen" bitcoins, they would be at least civilly, if not criminally liable wrt to the theft of bitcoinia.

On the other hand, this is one hell of an unprofessional business being run here, if the delays are because of the excuses.

That bit - at least - does make sense.  If the origin of that deposit was questionable, then CryptoXchange would be required to review all previous transactions, to review the original KYC information collected, and to apply enhanced verification requirements to the account - in essence, they would need to do the whole KYC process all over again but applying the far more stringent "high risk" requirements.

It's also possible that for some reason the bank refused the transaction/s pending more thorough KYC/AML information.

Wether the OP is scammer or cryptoexchange gone rogue is up for discussion but lets face it all the comments made by mahin and ken during the epic OP is absolutely terrible.

Even if it was all cookie cut, as I am sure Ken would claim, just the wording used by them looks like they are more upset right now being publicly posted about their swindlings which looks criminal on its own than anything else..

It seems like CxC had a hidden agenda from the jump, especially because they've been spinning him in circles for so long. I wouldn't want to provide them anymore information either, who knows how they would use my information? Especially with the web of lies they had been playing around for months? I don't blame the OP. I don't know who is in the wrong here, but for now I think Crypto's fucked up. Let's also not forget that Crypto ignored his lawyer and e-mails and never had their legal team get back to him. I mean really, what kind of image does that leave?

+1

This echos my sentiments completely. It's akin to somebody loaning me $100,000 in twenty dollar bills, and when during the time they start asking for their money back, I somehow get another $2K from them in twenties. After giving the runaround for a couple months on how I have not yet been able to refund their money, I come up with another angle. It seems like that last $2K given me has a funny looking dye on it, as if they came from a bank robbery. It now looks like I won't be repaying back a single bill, for I now have concerns as to where the rest of the funds came from. But if you supply me all the information I've asked of you, thus proving you are who you say you are, I will gladly give back to you every single twenty dollar bill I have right here on this funky coffee table. As you can see, I'm a reasonable guy, and trustworthy, whereas you, my friend, are a scumbag. (forgive me for going from 2nd person to 1st, or whatever it is, but you get the gist of what I'm trying to relay).

~Bruno~

Edit: (spelling of dye)

+1, dye*

When this amount of money/bitcoin is involved his best course of action is a lawsuit. It's even possible he would have to provide less identification than CX is asking for, or at the very least provide that information to a separate entity unlikely to divulge full ID details to CX, especially if he is just asking for the return of his BTC instead of currency.

Lets assume OP is legit, if it all comes down to it he will provide all the details now magically requested by cryptoexchange since its really a decent size chunk of money.

Im curious what cryptoexchange will request next once they receive those docs, my best guess is they will claim they never received it over and over.

OP if you are legit and still have money left then book a ticket to Australia with a decent international criminal lawyer and take cryptoexchange on directly. If your claim is honest and legit you have alot more to win out of this case than what they actually owe to you.

From wme.cc's own ToS regarding AML compliance.


I therefore presume that WME knows the identity of the person who sold him the allegedly stolen Bitcoins and has reported the suspicious activity.

From their own ToS regarding refunding of unverified accounts.


Well what do you know.  If you don't complete the registration and verification process to their satisfaction, they mightn't refund your deposits.


So you can pay money into your account in cash without verification, but transfers and withdrawals must be made through their bank accounts, which requires you to be a verified customer.


Criminal lawyers defend people accused by the state of having broken the law.  If the OP believes that a crime has been committed, then he needs to report it to Australian law enforcement.  You can't bring your own criminal lawyer to prosecute a criminal case.  Whether charges are laid and prosecuted is up to the Director of Public Prosecutions.   He could certainly try to recover his funds by civil action in the NSW courts system, though.  Hell, if the case ever got as far as even being listed for mention I'd show up for a front row seat each day.

What does it feel like, when you know you can't do anything.

...knowing no one here can do anything, and wouldn't if they could without getting a large percentage.
Welcome to Bitcoin.

You can indeed do that in a common law country which Australia is.


http://www.legallawyers.com.au/legal-topics/criminal-law/private-prosecution-in-new-south-wales/

Do you really think that a complaint which is essentially "they won't release my money because I refuse to identify myself as requested under AML/KYC requirements" is going to be found to 1) have substance or 2) have a reasonable prospect of success?

Even assuming that a court didn't outright dismiss the proceedings, they can be terminated by the Attorney-General or taken over by the DPP.

I would honestly like very much to see one of these cases go to court, just as I'd like to see alleged Bitcoin thefts investigated by traditional law enforcement agencies.  The reality seems to be that those who complain the loudest avoid these options because they don't want to be subjected to independent scrutiny which they can't control.

No I don't think this clown has any chance that is not what I replied to it was your assertion that you could not bring a criminal case on your own when you can do it.

There could still be a problem even if he sends documents which are accepted as authentic.  There's more than one AML/KYC issue with this story but, yes, if the OP can satisfactorily identify himself then the possibility that CryptoXchange can simply make a complex Suspicious Matter Report to AUSTRAC and return his funds is there. 

Believe he also claims to have lawyer as well which if the case the lawyer would be taking care of this matter and he would not be posting on a forum trying to get "his" cash back. As well just about every time the crypto people post they ask for said documents yet he fails to provide any updated ones, you would think his lawyer would be doing that and the crypto people would not have to be asking repeatedly for them. In short I think this is a thinly veiled attempt to pressure the crypto people by putting out false information about them so they will just give him the money to shut him up, well I don't think that will turn out to be a winning strategy for him.

If it's to do with "suspicious matters" as defined by the AML/CTF Act, Cryptoxchange literally cannot tell the OP any specifics, let alone a bunch of people on the internet - disclosing that information would be a criminal offence under the "tipping-off" provisions of the Act (most FATF countries have similar provisions).  They can ask him to verify his identity and control of the funding account and they can ask him to prove the source and destination of funds, but they can't tell him that they suspect him of tax evasion/money laundering/financing terrorism or whatever other financial activity is illegal under the Act (the people/organisations to whom they can disclose that information is extremely limited).

I'd like to see just one of the people who claims that an exchange has robbed them of a large amount of money take the matter to court - they all seem curiously reluctant to do so though.

This exactly.

I've done non btc business with Ken and his crew, as well as using their exchange and I find the entire concept of them holding onto funds without being forced into doing so ridiculous.


Yup that would be the right place to settle something like this. Splashing childish nonsense all over a public forum is just idiotic. Furthermore taking a developers attempts at support and reading anything authoritative into them is just as ridiculous.

Nor do I like the idea of exchanges acting like the police if anything is going to kill off BTC it will be that idea, once people don't trust that the coins they receive can be sold/traded anywhere it is dead and buried. This would already be in court if he had leg to stand on it has been as I said over a month I think since I first saw this pop up now supposedly he has lawyer but I have seen no mention of papers being served or even the attempt to get proceedings underway. Just the same tired old BS they got my money and won't give it too me and BTW I am not going out of my way to make sure they have everything needed to get the money too me thrown in for good measure. Now I don't know about you but for a $100k I would have been on plane to the land down under long time ago with my passport in hand in person at their offices to get my damn cash if this was the case and I would not be leaving until I had it in hand or the police removed me from said offices in fact I would bring the police with me in the first place which I would think would be a prudent thing to do.

I have a few prongs of interest in this case.
1: I used to run a business in Australia governed by their financial services act (and am aware of the non-disclosure rules that exist in some of the Australian legislation).
2: I have legal proceedings against someone running though the legal system in Sydney for an unpaid debt.
3: I use CryptoExchange as my exchange of choice and haven't encountered problems like those mentioned above.
4: I have recently completed a review of how people resolve legal issues (it was a meta study looking at five different countries).

On #4, of the thousands of people surveyed, there was no mention of a successful resolution from trying to pressure someone via an internet forum.  Seeking help from police, citizens advice, Government departments, lawyers, friends/family, employers, self-help and others were covered.  But the approach adopted here - no mention.

And on #2 above, in retaining legal counsel I needed to provide ID, and there are sworn documents filed, but it is an expensive and drawn out process.

Thanks Patrick.

It appears to me that the OP is just trying to get attention and with the help of sock puppet #239402 Liberty Payout, basically trying to smear the exchange to put pressure on it to cave. The problem with that is that we all know Ken is honest and that CryptoXChange has a flawless reputation.

OP is a scammer who got burned by working with an exchange legally required to ask questions and like most scammers, underestimated the consistency of law abiding businesses. If he could provide the proper documents, he'd get his money, but I happen to know exactly why he won't and it's a doozy.

@OP: Why don't you bother showing the people here some proof of this supposed $100k you're missing, because that too is a lie.

That's what I'd like to know too.

Once AML flags go off, they can't legally send money to these scammer clowns even if they wanted to.

If that was the case, they shouldn't have sworn the money was on its way for weeks/months.
And "stolen bitcoins" alone wouldn't trigger an AML investigation on the bank side. Something more would be necessary.

Anyways, it's pointless to discuss this here.
The best option is trying to stay away from centralized exchanges, if possible.

I believe CXE has already sent them funds before and were unable to continue to do so because they were cockblocked by their own solicitors who demanded more information due to reported stolen accounts etc. Not to mention these scummyfucks are more than likely associated with the Linode hack. Who knows. These clowns are trying to pass off CXE's lack of response to the issue as some kind of denial, but they are legally bound to deal with the customer only and the customer continues to bring their slop to the forums instead of go through normal legal channels.

Kind of a no brainer who's lying here.

I think most people agree that if you want even quasi-anonymity and zero risk of your funds being frozen, then AML compliant organisations cannot guarantee those things.

I had that feeling from about page 1 or 2. Stuck out like a sore thumb to me. I would love CryptoXChange to be able to release the funds without fear of repercussions, but I doubt that will happen unless OP releases documents.

I doubt we will ever find out though, both parties have stopped posting.

I don't think the people reading this thread actually know some of the nice things the legal system does.  I attended a neat compliance seminar some years ago where it was spelt out quite clearly that:  If you were under investigation or helping with an investigation, innocent or not, if you told anyone including your employer, another legal representative of the Government, or even your spouse that you were being investigated (or helping), you could be jailed.

One of the traps was not knowing if the discussion docs for possible policy were actionable (ie, they could prosecute you for breaching a guideline), or actual law/policy.

At the lower end of the scale, because the company I was with didn't file a correct FSL return, and I was commuting to/from Australia, I could have been arrested (personally) and jailed until the issue was sorted out - fortunately I could run my section remotely and it got sorted out. 

I'd recommend people read the MtGox AML/KYC Process Explained thread.  It addresses some of the issues which people frequently ask about and the process is pretty standard in most FATF member countries (although countries may have domestic laws which go beyond the 40 + 9 recommendations).

+1

Indeed, those KYC procedures are unfortunately reasonable and exchanges have to play ball unless they want to be prosecuted.

OP, if you can show sources of funds and confirm your identity and explain any potential discrepancies (if any) with previously submitted documents, then I have a very good suggestion for you.

Stop bitching on forums, lawyer up and sue the begeesis our of whoever has wronged you. I can understand forum bitching over 1k$, over 100k$ not so much.

If the thing that you say is true, then non-AU users should be afraid to use Australia-based exchanges. Simply not right jurisdiction for such international exchange. Maybe Panama, Brazil or Hong-Kong etc. could be way better.

The problem with using offshore finance centres is that they're often on the blacklists of compliant countries and incoming transactions from them will be flagged.  They're fine if you're prepared to spend your offshore funds within the offshore jurisdiction, not so much if you want to be able to spend the money in the country where you reside.  Services located in offshore financial centres are often set up to cater to clients moving huge amounts of money via wire transfer, whereas Bitcoin users are often looking to minimise fees as much as possible.  And of course you have the risk of such businesses being opaque, as was the case with MyBitcoin.

The combination of losses from fraud, fraud prevention measures and AML/KYC/CTF compliance pose a significant financial challenge for exchanges and I suspect that few have any realistic idea of just how high that overhead will be when they start an exchange with a couple of people.  Not only will they always be targets for fraud and hacking attempts, they will become bigger targets the more successful they become and more money will need to be spent on protecting themselves from various threats to their viability.  Locating offshore does nothing to minimise the risk of fraud or security breaches, both of which can send an exchange broke just as surely as banks freezing their funds.


Another fun thing is that AUSTRAC doesn't tell you specifically how you must assess risk and precisely what measures you must put in place but if you get it wrong you're open to being fined or prosecuted for non-compliance.

The government here is fucked up beyond repair and treats us like the convicts that first came here on boats. I dont blame anyone for avoiding it.

Definitely not Brazil!
Brazil might a good place to hide yourself if you're wanted by the police abroad (particularly if you're a leftist terrorist wanted for multiple murders), and even of that I wouldn't be 100% sure - if someone in the government sees an advantage for himself in turning you over, and there's nobody who would have an advantage in protecting you, then you'll likely be extradited.

Brazil is definitely not the place to hide your hard-earned money from predators, that's for sure. It's a tax hell, not a tax haven.

It seems like this is a battle between two exchanges: http://wmirk.ru.

~Bruno~

Boy am I glad I don't trust ANY of these exchanges. There's plenty of red flags associated (IMO) with CryptoXchange, especially on the money laundering front (not to say they are, but I do suspect it's a very distinct possibility, and I won't tie my money up with them for fear that THEY will have THEIR funds seized, and that would include mine - how many other exchanges were trying to partner with casinos? - yeah I smelled a scam long ago)

OP - sorry to hear your story. Attorneys are in order - hire one and get your money out of harm's way.

IMO, if this customer had 100K there, how likely is it that the exchange actually has the funds to pay? I'm more than a little suspicious of ALL exchanges running fractional reserves, and being unable to meet their withdrawal demands.

This seems more than a little suspicious. Probably the most suspicious is that CXE is "the ethical exchange"
FFS, if you have to use it as a tag line, what are the odds it's actually true?

+1

Well since the 20k+ of BTC is claimed to have been transferred into it I would say good chance they have the cash in one form or another ie. either still have those coins they can sell to get it or the cash from the sale of them is just sitting there still.

Yesterday exchanged for test 83 BTC with Cryptox, then transferred CryptoXChange code to AurumXChange, and then got  payment to Liberty Reserve successfully. This is not $100k though. For such amount I would transact only if I knew personally owners, otherwise I would go with small transactions to lower risks.

So I would like to say that at least AurumXChange trusts CryptoX codes, and probably there are good amounts flowing there. And AurumXChange as well maintain enough reserves to grant immediate payout using liberty reserve. This means there trust exists between Aurum and CryptoX.

Can we coin a term "Dwollad" for things like this? Funny how this and the Dwolla vs Tradehill situation occurred in the ~$100K range.

Malta is nice,  they make good offer for poker players from USA to establish residency there

this thread:

мoзг взpывaeтcя

I think they're all broke it's always something.. >:(

subscribing for entertainment

but seriously I hope this gets resolved well

I wouldn't say they have a flawless reputation.  We don't all know that.  

I've heard rumors that they had major litecoin solvency issues which they swept quietly under the rug, and that is why you can't trade litecoin anymore.

Another rumor I heard was that their registrations and compliance are overstated and that they don't have any financial service business registrations and they are effectively registered as a software company.

I don't know if either of those are true, could have just been trolls.  Heard from anonymous internet strangers, so take that as you will.

Doesn't matter to me though, I've never liked their business style (excessive ads, "24-hour support" that isn't always available, gold coin pricing errors, etc.) . This thread just seals the deal.

I think this may be the end of CXC

It's a bit difficult to distinguish rumours from news on the internet but it's not very difficult to do a google search:

http://www.abr.business.gov.au/SearchByAbn.aspx?abn=12140244828
http://www.search.asic.gov.au/cgi-bin/gns030c?juris=9&hdtext=ACN&srchsrc=1&acn=140244828
http://whois.domaintools.com/bitcoinminingrigs.com.au

These sites confirm what is posted on the CryptoXchange website:

Australian Owned and Operated by Kenseycol PTY LTD,
Trading as “Crypto X Change”
64 McNamara Street Orange,
New South Wales 2800
Australia
Business Registration Information

So unless they pasted a random company's info, it looks legitimate.

In reference to liquidity, unless the exchange(s) used customer's fiat deposit for personal use, I fail to see how an exchange would become illiquid.

Chargebacks.

I've just received a wire from them today so I'd hardly call them illiquid.

100,000$ goes a long way, now they can run there ponzi a little longer.

Just wondering how you got $100,000... Seems rather a lot of bitcoins!

It's called being successful, I currently have quite a good amount of funds myself. Many people on here have these large amounts.

They're not that large for serious investors.

Hedge funds like the one I have an interest in drop serious amounts (much more than $100k) into ventures if the business model works for us.

Having pulled another few thousand out of crypto this week (24 hours for an international wire is one of the fastest I have received), the scammers are still the Australian banks charging 8% currency spreads costing me extra hundreds of dollars going to their profit margins.  Locally it's only 4% and other places are even less.

Didn't see any liquidity problem.

this is getting good!!!  ;D

8%!!!

I'm sorry for your loss but is this just another attempt at controlling the market price?  ???
Just for the record Opistlled is a really annoying word.  :(

The worst I've ever seen was at Brisbane Airport where the AUD/USD buy/sell spread was 30%.  It's cheaper for me to buy Australian cash outside of Australia than doing so locally.  Similarly, for the money I have in my AUD account in Aus, it's too expensive to send back to my local account, so I'll wait until I pass through an airport and visit the closest ATM and extract it.

As for the back on topic - other than a trading glitch I saw on the BTC/USD screens a few days ago, have not seen any other problems with CryptoX or them being taken out of circulation by the OP's actions.

30% o_0, are you sure you didnt walk into some loanshark cage :P

That seems highly criminal and suddenly it makes our foreign exchange that peaks at 3% seem outragiously low.

We know WME very well
He big trader at btc-e.com
We never holding any payments of our clients!

Start accepting bank transfers and after that we'll talk again.

+1

They actually accepted bank wires but only for a few days than they stopped ;D

I guess they realised most of their russian customers were thieves lol

We accept bank transfers.

Do you? I went to your site and the only ways I found to deposit USD are Liberty Reserve, Interkassa.com and Webmoney.
Where is the IBAN for your bank account posted?

Email support@btc-e.com if you want that feature it seems ...

Oh... right... ::)

wtg.
sue those scammers! >:(

Eww. You actually believe something a random, anonymous user on the forum says and don't even stop to think for a second that they're using CryptoXChange in combination with dozens of stolen bank accounts to steal money and probably got caught doing so, and are now just hiding behind a cheap lawyer in hopes of getting some cash?

I'm gonna go type up my own letter from a random law firm saying that you stole money from me. Would you believe you did then?

Why would anyone having an outstanding 100K worth of legit money post such a letter to an internet forum ?

If you have that amount of money, I think the case would've been solved without posting it to this forum.

I sure as hell know if I had that amount of money to throw around, I wouldn't bother posting it on this forum to have a case resolved.

Why would they post a low resolution copy when they would have been sent a PDF or Word copy of the document by the lawyers?

Perhaps someone should contact that law firm and ensure that the document isn't forged?

Should be easy as there are at least three people there.  I notice the document doesn't have the kind of information I would have expected and appears very preliminary, but then maybe because I'm using a larger firm in Sydney.

A boutique law firm is certainly an odd choice.

Ken knows whether or not he received the phone calls referred to in the letter and I assume that he's smart enough to have rung back to confirm that the calls came from the purported caller.

It's certainly an odd piece of correspondence for a letter of demand, and if I'd ever typed a formal letter so sloppily I would have been fired on the spot.  And yes, there is information missing which I would have expected to see.

Unfortunately, a lawyer can't break privilege in order to satisfy the curiosity of internet strangers.  There are a number of reasons I suspect it's forged.  Ken, I'm in Sydney so if you wanted to authorise me to view the original documents then I'd be willing to do so (and sign the confidentiality agreement).  I suspect that ringing to make an appointment for that purpose might get a "wtf" response.

I've been away for a while.
This thread is probably not what is fueling the recent rally in BTC.

I can't wait to see what document he posts next.

This is interesting, I don't know who to believe.. Both parties have valid arguments. Getting some popcorn and will enjoy the show...

I hate every single one of you <3

In all seriousness, I do think you two are trying to tick me off <<

Moi!?  :o

Hoax!

Crypto really gone.
This an excerpt from a letter from lawyers:

I would suggest you get better lawyers.  People that can't differentiate between a business registration and someone with multiple businesses across the web/Australia and are easy to find need sacking.

It took a few seconds for me to pull up Ken's home address, phone number and work history.

Indeed, these have never been secret.  For that matter, Colin's contact details are not secret either. 

I'd seriously suggest that you find a new lawyer.  Yours seems unable to put together a business letter to you, the client - I wouldn't entrust them with writing an important letter to someone else.  Their paralegals are apparently totally inept when it comes to research, too.

Holy shit, What a crappy story.... (ordeal?)

I am curious :)

I think there is something fishy with all of Bitcoin.  I won't be indulging anymore.  Thought it was a cool idea and novel, but I have no reason to trust any exchange or anyone anymore, it's too easy to scam people and I can't afford to lose money just to use a novelty currency.

Edit :  No offense to everyone involved, just the bad ones.  I know there are good people that partake in BTC as well.

Finally, a Bitcoin Success Story!

I have complet of docs which crypto ask me.
Crypto running from my lawyers who want to transfer documents.

Provide the necessary evidence to substantiate your claim.

With appropriate evidence you can request a scammer tag for the users representing the CryptoExchange in this forum.

 ::)

Here we are all these months after you claim to have involved lawyers in this and you're still trying to transfer documents?  Why haven't your lawyers taken legal action to recover your funds yet?  You claim to have plenty of evidence as well as the money to take legal action, why hasn't this been taken to court already?

Your lawyers aren't very good if they don't know that all legal documents can (and most should) be sent to the registered office of a company and that a simple search of ASIC records provides the address of the registered office.

You're asking us to believe that your lawyers can't locate someone in a town of 40,000 people.  Someone who is very well known in that community.  Why the hell are you still paying these apparently inept lawyers?

At registration address of Kenseycol PTY LTD nobody, that fake, where i must to send docs? (I want to hear that from crypto, but no anwer)
At address of owner nobody
By phone Ken afraid talk...

WME if you aren't spinning a web of lies you should probably dismiss your legal counsel for incompetence:

https://connectonline.asic.gov.au/RegistrySearch/faces/landing/bn/SearchBnRegisters.jspx?_adf.ctrl-state=8bpxea805_4

Address for service of documents:   67 Hewitt Cl Orange NSW 2800

Holder(s) details:   
Holder Name:   KENSEYCOL PTY LTD
Holder Type:   Body Corporate
ABN:   12 140 244 828


Took 5 minutes of internetting. Send your own certified letter there and if it gets bounced back report them to ASIC.

By law the official address for the service of legal documents for a company is the address registered with ASIC.  A statutory demand sent to that address will be deemed to have been served and if the defendant does not respond within 21 days in the manner required by the Corporations Act (Section 459E) a legal presumption of insolvency applies.  In fact in order to serve a statutory demand you must provide proof of having conducted an ASIC search to establish the creditor's registered office.  All of this is laid down by statute - it's not negotiable.  You lawyers can absolutely go to court and get a default judgement if there is no response to a statutory demand within the period required by statute.  They can even apply for the company to be wound up in insolvency on the basis of non-compliance with a statutory demand if you're willing to spend the money to go that route.

I simply don't believe that your lawyers are too incompetent to know this - it's business law 101 stuff.

Thank you for information, i know all public addresses
But crypto gone from that address:(
And no way to contact with Ken and other staff
He afraid

Do you have the letter which you solicitor sent to the address? Could you scan the letter and post here?

Could you also disclose receipts of the funds transferred to Cryptoxchange?

You must gather much proof as possible to prove that Cryptoxchange is holding your funds.

But please, post the originals, redacted if you wish.

I know that English isn't your first language but can you not read?  It doesn't matter whether they are still at that address or not.  It's the responsibility of the company officers to advise ASIC of any change in the address of their registered office.  Legal notices sent to the address on file are deemed to have been served.  If they don't actually receive the documents because they didn't update their address with ASIC, that's their problem - you win by default because they don't respond.  

There is no way that your lawyers don't know this.  There is also no way that your lawyers cannot locate Ken.  Orange has a population of 40,000 people and he's well known in the town.  What attempts have they made to locate Colin?

Either you're lying or you have totally incompetent lawyers.  If your lawyers thought you could prevail in court they'd have issued a statutory demand months ago.  

BTW, Mr Bitcoin is operated by KenseyCol and they have a different registered address than CryptoXchange.  A lawyer would have found this as their ABN and ACN records are both linked to the KenseyCol record.

All copy of my docs which crypto ask send already at summer not one time to all legall address's of crypto
No answer from crypto by mail by phone
They don't pick up phone
They run from law

I hope you've refused to pay your lawyers.  They sound beyond incompetent.

^ ? Why do they sound incompetent?


What else are they supposed to do for him other than send letters and call?  Did you see the copy of the letter they sent?


Lawyers are not supposed to go beat people down.

They're supposed to take the next step in the process and issue a statutory demand.  A company literally has to respond to a statutory demand within 21 days or it is legally presumed to be insolvent and can be forced into liquidation on the basis of not responding to the demand (they must respond in one of a few very specific ways which are restricted by statute).  For the amount WME claims to be owed, there's simply no way that a competent lawyer would not have issued a statutory demand by now if they believed they could prove that WME's debt is legitimate.  I've even given this information to WME so that he can discuss with why no statutory demand has been issued but I suspect that he already knows the answer.

How do we not know this hasn't been done? Crypto did shut down... He may have been waiting to see if he had anything returned.. Most people would prefer keeping matters out of court.

 

Because the manner in which a statutory demand must be responded to is defined by law.  The statute requires it to be responded to in very specific ways within 21 days.  You can pay the debt or make an agreement to pay the debt.  You can put the company into voluntary administration/liquidation (this has not happened - notice of all liquidations/administrations is published on the ASIC website within a couple of days at most and often on the same day).  You can apply to the court to have the statutory demand set aside.  You can ignore the statutory demand and a legal presumption of insolvency will arise allowing a creditor to seek appointment of a liquidator.  

Those are literally the only options available to a company which has been served with a statutory demand and no lawyer would advise their client to "wait and see" for many months when the amount involved is over $100,000.  Nor would any lawyer advise a company to ignore a statutory demand (even solvent companies have been forcibly wound up in the past for ignoring statutory demands).

If WME's lawyers had issued a statutory demand which had not been complied with and were seeking to have the company wound up, they would make him aware of that.  Instead, he just keeps complaining about them not acknowledging receipt of his ID documents.  Statutory demands are used all the time here and for much smaller amounts than WME claims to be owed.  It should have been one of the first strategies his lawyers proposed - unless they knew damned well that the validity of the debt is questionable and that the statutory demand would be set aside by a court.  Also note that the purported letter of demand talks about the release of USD not BTC, so the usual "courts won't acknowledge BTC as a debt" bullshit can't be claimed in this case as a reason for not taking the further legal action they were threatening back in July.

From what I read Crypto never denied owing him this sort of money.


Seems crazy...

To get adequate service for a statutory demand, postal delivery isn't sufficient.

For this, you need a process server to deliver the documents to a company director.

If you can't find them, it becomes very difficult to serve them.

It is possible to obtain a judgement in absentia/claiming you have had service, forcing the part(y/ies) to come forward to dispute this (and they will win) but that will present an opportunity to serve again as documents can then be served on their lawyers/them personally.

Caveats on any properties held in sole (or joint) titles is usually a prudent measure ...

This is not true.  The ATO - for instance - serves all of their statutory demands by mail to the address on record with ASIC, as do many businesses which issue statutory demands on a regular basis.  This is one reason why not keeping your details current on the ASIC registers is potentially catastrophic.  It's also why it's a good idea to list your lawyer or accountant's office for service of notices because statutory demands are not issued through courts and many people ignore them assuming that they're just a letter of demand because they don't realise their significance.

Where issuing a statutory demand through a lawyer can be tricky is the requirement that the affidavit be sworn by someone who has personal knowledge of the circumstances of the debt -this is obviously somewhat more difficult if the lawyer cannot get the client into their office to swear the affidavit as any deficiency in the affidavit will make render the statutory demand invalid.

Caveats are messy and easily set aside unless you have a true "interest in land".  The onus is on the caveator to prove that such an interest exists and that the caveat is being used for a proper purpose.  Trying to obtain a caveat in relation to the personal property of a company director in regard to a company debt which has not been proven (as opposed to an interest held by a mortgagor, a spouse, a joint property owner, a property purchaser, etc) is asking for the caveat to be set aside with an award of costs against the person who sought it.

How can you determine if coins are stolen?

ATO and ASIC are able to. Your own lawyers aren't.

I've been down this road many times and I've had people have judgments overturned due to inadequate service. Fortunately, once their heads come up (by way of their lawyers) we serve the lawyers. Fixed.

mt gox thief crying that he got scammed, gotta love Bitcoin, you couldn't make a better story up than what's gone on in Bitcoins short life.
Stealing coins from gox and depositing them back onto gox wasn't the smartest of moves although it is quite funny that you used gox to launder their own hack, but ultimately it's what led to your downfall.

So this is the guy who got arrested earlier today ?

Years of golden hours of reading bitcoin has provided me, long may it be so

Sure is. Alexander Vinnik, one of the co founders of BTC-e, and the hacker of MtGox: http://blog.wizsec.jp/2017/07/breaking-open-mtgox-1.html

Going back to the first couple pages of this thread, and you will find the official BTC-e forum account backing him up :D

You really couldn't make this shit up.

Now u believe ??

thats the best part :)

So most of the participants in this thread from June 07, 2012 onward took (WME | Alexander Vinnick | the MtGox mastermind)'s side against Cryptoxchange, demanding that they return his money. And when Cryptoxchange protested that they couldn't yet do so due to an ongoing investigation, the folks here reflexively decided in favor of someone who is shaping up to be one of the world's most notorious criminals ever.

And although all of that would make this story pathetic (at best), it's likely that some of the folks who defended the OP here were themselves the OP's victim in the half-billion dollar MtGox heist.

Surely some of these individuals owe Cryptoxchange a humble apology at least.

A bit confused by this thread... Did anyone ever recover their coins? I had about 10 BTC there  :-\

WOW!!! Three major scammers in this space talking among themselves. What are the odds? _vvv

wow the Mt.gox btc thief, impressive!! :o