It could be an option  but not enough for EU AML and Italian directives we must follow.

But, again, the OP accepted our new TOS released last April 2018 where it is clearly stated the following:


https://www.therocktrading.com/en/service_terms/3

8. AML REQUIREMENTS

1. When registering on the Website, the User is required to provide any necessary information and/or documents that TRT deems, in its sole discretion, to be suitable to maintain compliance with any law, regulation and internal policy (see the Anti-Money Laundering Policy adopted by TRT).

2. During the account verification process, the User must provide all documents that will be required. In particular, by registering an account on the Website, the user agrees to provide TRT, or another party delegated to carry out the anti-money laundering obligations imposed by law on behalf of TRT, with updated, accurate and complete information as required by the registration process, as well as to keep this information updated.

3. In the event of anomalous or not completely transparent operations on the User's account, TRT may request further information from the User, including but not limited to document authentication, and may also freeze all transactions pending the performance of the appropriate checks on the account.

4. TRT is entitled to block, suspend and close accounts of Users who have not been properly verified, notwithstanding any useful efforts by TRT to contact the User and urge the completion of the due verification process.

5. Documents, data, photos and other information material collected during the registration and verification of an account are subject to the retention requirement that TRT has to comply with under the anti-money laundering regulations, also using the services offered by a third party provider.

6. TRT applies regular checks on user accounts also through the request to provide information on the origin of the Assets if and when expressed or converted into virtual currency or legal tender currency. In addition, TRT is entitled to block or freeze any User account, at its discretion and without prior notice, in case of suspected illegal origin of the Assets.

Also, reading our AML policies, you'll read:

LEGISLATIVE GROUNDS
Following the implementation of Directive 2015/849/EU (known as the Fourth AMLD) into our legal system, the relevant national legislation has been significantly amended, extending its scope to service providers relating to the use of virtual currency, limited to the performance of the activity of converting virtual currencies from or into legal tender currencies.

The IV AMLD has been implemented in our legal system with the Legislative Decree. 90/2017, which amended and supplemented the Anti-Money Laundering Decree. The Anti-Money Laundering Decree consists of three main pillars:

    proper customer verification;
    retention of customer data and information;
    suspicious transaction reports.

The regulatory provisions of the Anti-Money Laundering Decree provide for an accurate identification of customer information and introduce the concept of a "risk-based approach" according to the "sensitivity" of customers, comparing customer due diligence obligations with the risk related to the customer, the product and the geolocation.

Authorities at national level called upon to supervise compliance with the regulations are the Ministry of the Economy of Finance, the Financial Information Office (FIU) at the Bank of Italy, the Supervisory Authorities of each sector where the parties required to apply the regulations operate, the Anti-Mafia Investigative Directorate (DIA) and the Tax Authorities.

---------------------------------------------

In case of an inspection by the Authorities we cannot say " ohhhh we checked the signature...." They would simply fine us....

Or, after releasing the funds, IF and I repeat IF the OP was impersonating the real owner and, suddenly the real owner claim the assets, we cannot say " I'm sorry but we released funds based on a transaction signature...." (btw, according to our forensic analysis it would be quite difficult to do so)

She would have 100% reason to sue us for wrong doing and, she would be right to do so....

Not easy tu run a FIAT/Crypto exchange in a regulated area.....

Anyway thank you for the suggestion!

Non e' semplice.... il presunto cliente ha una vocazione scrittoria seriale......  Comunque, se per fine mese non avremo delle risposte certe, provvederemo a fare una denuncia alla Postale perche' possano indagare su questa grottesca storia...

a killer??? I hope not    The worst for me is that she is no longer in control of her account and someone else it is.  Don't be dramatic.....

there are only 2 situations in your case:

1) You are the owner of the account

or

2) You control an account which belongs to another person and, most likely, she is not aware.

But let's think positive! If you opened the claim with the Arbitrator we should have a contact soon before we will have to open a case with the Police to investigate the issue.

In this case, because you'll have to provide docs proving you are the real owner, we will quickly resolve the issue.  We will have what we are looking for and you'll have your funds released. On this you can be sure.

btw, the arbitrator must reply to you in 72 hours from the moment you opened the claim in order to tell you if they accepted the claim.  Did you receive the confirmation mail or, also this information is top secret to know.....?


Thank you!

edit: yes, I confirm that the ODR was opened with the same name we do have on the account. However, in opening a claim with the ODR, the OP does not have to provide docs.  Also, I confirmed the Euro amount the OP is claiming making it official.

Sempre in attesa.....  Infatti, se per fine mese non saremo contattati, faremo una denuncia alla Polizia Postale in modo che possa essere avviata una procedura di ricerca

Hello,

I confirm that a case was opened with the ODR by the OP as suggested on our TOS.

However, the ODR suggested to the OP to chose an entity capable to pursue the case and, among the suggestions the OP chosed the Italian Arbitrator which is very good in my opinion.

But, as of today, the Arbitrator has not been in contact with us and, this is quite strange. This is why we are willing to wait till the end of April, in order to give some extra time to the Arbitrator before filing a report with the Italian Police.

Thank you

Cofermo. L'arbitro richiedera tutta la documentazione e, se gli verra' regolarmente fornita, non prevedo problemi a rilasciare i fondi.

Grazie

Non ho dichiarato che non rispettero' la decisione dell'Arbitro.  Ho detto che quando l'Arbitro richiedera' i documenti KYC, ho dei dubbi che saranno forniti.

Spero di sbagliarmi.

Comunque, come gia' detto, se per la fine di questo mese d'Aprile non saremo stati contattati dall'Arbitro, provvederemo a fare denuncia alla Polizia Postale in modo da attivare una ricerca e verifica della situazione che, a nostro giudizio, ci lascia molto perplessi.

Grazie

I'm saying that, up to now, we had no contacts from the Arbitrator so no proof of the claim.

The OP could verify with the Arbitrator the claim status.  When we will receive the claim, we will have a precise time frame to reply as you can read at page 8:

https://www.arbitrobancariofinanziario.it/presentare-ricorso/guide-e-moduli/abf-in-parole-semplici.pdf

Sorry it is in Italian..... but I know you can translate it.

We will publish the documents openly in order to prove our good faith (@coinfan do not worry, we will erase your sensible data).

But, again, if the Arbitrator won't contact us, there is nothing we can do it aside filing a claim with the Police.  We decided to wait the end of April just to give the Arbitrator enough time.

Much easier! Just do your KYC/AML procedure like everybody else and you'll be able to withdraw your funds or, just wait for the arbitrator to do his work as you requested to do it.

I never said that I will not respect the Arbitrator decision. I said that the Arbitrator will require you to do KYC/AML procedures.  If, this is the case,  will you follow his request?  I don't think so.....  but, I hope, to be wrong

Thank you

Thank you.

just for everybody information, we are following what our lawyers are telling us in order to be in compliance with the law.  The OP has another opinion? Ok, we asked her multiple times to open a case with the authorities and let them decide who is right.

As of now, it seems that the OP filed a request with an Italian Arbitrator which, in our opinion, is a very good idea.  Up to now, we have no news from the arbitrator so we asked the OP to request an update.

In conclusion, we all have to wait for the arbitrator to contact us and solve the situation.

If, by any chance, by the end of this month we won't have any reply (which is impossible if the OP opened a case), we will file a police report in order to open an official investigation about this case.


Regards

PS: from 2007 till 2011, TRT was only a role game playing platform in Second Life and had no legal connection in the real world.  Second Life is a private company and it is fully ruling all activities inside their platform.

Anyway, because there is now an Arbitrator, we should all wait his contact.

As I wrote before, the OP should request an update of the procedure in order to try to speed up the resolution.

As a matter of fact, I authorize the OP, if she is willing to do so,  to freely post here the request she made to the Arbitrator (without her sensible information obviously) in order for all of us to be up to date.

Thank you

No, no revenge at all. As a matter of fact I do now respect Jolly for his work.

But, because there is now an arbitrator in the middle, why we cannot all wait for his investigation?

PS: The Italian moderator, Hostfat, has been in the btc world since day one and he is one of the most respectful person in our Industry so, I'm sorry but, If I have to listen to someone, I trust him more than Jolly.......

Nothing personal

To our readers: Please note, Jolly receives a pay fee in order to defame as per the post of the following BTC talk moderator:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5025233.msg50340436;topicseen#new

Thank you

We can release funds only and only if we comply with KYC/AML and have a guarantee of the account owner existance. This is a basic rule. Or, if a Judge order us to do so.

Up to know, we haven't received any request from the arbitrator and this is quite strange.  So my question to Ms. Susana is: Do you have any news?  Could you please request an update and let us know?

To answer your question more precisely, this is the first time since 2011 we had such a case.

So we will proceed as follow:

1)  Wait for the arbitrator to be in contact with us so we can solve it.  The OP declared she made the claim and I hope it is a true information...

2)  In case we are not going to be in touch with the arbitrator because the OP bluffed....  we will look for legal advice how to handle the issue in accordance with the law and update you (the Community) about their reply.  Let's decide a target date:  If by the end of April we will have no contacts from the Arbitrator or authorities in general, point 2 will be execute it.

3) Last but not least, by the end of April, we will file a missing person report with Polizia Postale (in Italy it is in charge of Cyber crimes), providing them all the information we do have (including this chat and others) and requesting them to activate an international search to locate Ms. Susana which, if point number one is not happening, unfortunately we are assuming the worst for her.

Thank you

Why we should "desperately" hold 35k euro  when we have been in business since 2011 and processed thousands of bank transactions ?  No, we are just looking to find a solution which is legal and, at the same, time guarantee customer funds.

About Susana approval, yes I agree with you. If she is going to provide us requested docs and give us a written approval to publish her correspondence I'll be glad. But, by know, if she doesn't want to provide docs for 35k euro, I doubt she'll do it for some mails...

However, correspondence is available to authorities upon request.

Thank you

PS @jolly : is a mercenary paid by customers to defame people as per the post of the following moderator: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5025233.msg50340436;topicseen#new

Actually you cannot.

@OP can you provide a signature from a wallet you used to fund you account? Or alternatively can you prove ownership of a bank account you used to fund your account earlier, by doing a new transfer of a predetermined small amount (a few cent).
[/quote]

no.... I wish but, actual AML laws do not allow this option.  As a matter of  fact they don't even have the idea of what we are talking about.....

As far as the KYC, back in 2013, when we made the bank wires, KYC use to be very light. Today is another world

But, no more than few months ago, when Coinfan filed a claim with the arbitrator, she indicated the same name we had on file since 2013. 

So, we can assume, it is the same person due to 3 separate events:  Name on file, wire transfers and recent claim.

Please note: The name on the bank wire must be correct otherwise the bank is returning the transfer.  This is a basic rule in AML.

Thank you!

PS: I cannot post private correspondece with Susana on a public chat as you can understand.  But they are quite clear about it ... at least back in 2013/2014

Thank you for your request.

We do have some past data which is the following:

1) Name and Last Name
2) We sent some wire transfers in the same Name and Last Name in a EU Country
3) On the claim she filed out she is putting the same name and last name
4) We do have correspondence, Ip, emails, ecc on file


Therefore, we could safely say we do have the real name and last name.

So, the moment we will receive matching documents, for us KYC will be completed and funds promptly released.

However, among the matching docs which we are requiring, we do ask a Selfie with the ID and a paper with a unique phrase we are going to provide upon request.

This could be difficult to obtain if the owner is no longer in control and, at the same time, very easy to produce if all is ok as I hope so.

So, aside AML/KYC directives which we must follow, we must be sure we are doing the right thing to protect our customers assets.

Regards

Jolly, you are not a scammer, for you is business only : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5025233.msg50340436;topicseen#new

For your client Coinfan the solution is easy.  As soon as we will receive docs  from Coinfan or the authorities we will release funds

But, is Coinfan Susana (the account real owner)??

1) Why Susana should refuse to provide her documents when we do have past correspondence where she wasn't against to do so?
2) Why Susana should risk to collect over 35 k euro just for a principle when it is standard procedure to provide KYC?
3) Why Susana should pay you to help her to defame us?

4) Last but not least, is Susana in control of her account?? I hope so because, otherwise, something happened to Susana......


Thank you

Because Jolly come out to be a paid mercenary as stated by one of the most important btc talk moderators.... 

As far as you, you are entitled to have your opinion and, even if negative, it does not mean you are paid by someone and I respect it. 

The issue won't be solved till the account owner or the authorities will provide us with requested KYC docs and, believe me. I really hope it is going to happen soon!

Thank you