I have used coinbene for a few months or so without much issue, including KYC/AML.  So far absolutely no issue on coinbene just not much volume as I would like but, no issues encountered yet.  Until today... I tried to login and the cutesy puzzle verification came up but, I do not know kind of puzzle this is that I am to match.

https://imgur.com/UHseLc7

Fuck these losers, I for one am happy they got hacked after the way they treated me, karma is a bitch.  Fuck you kucoin.

They have allowed me to withdraw my coins however have frozen my account.  No loss I will not be trading there ever again.

Thank you I sincerely appreciate it.

I am thinking the same thing, so I sent an email after I posted and their response included was this:


I have been reviewing threads for many other kyc scam accusations and almost all of them end up going down this path, basically putting things off to an imaginary "department" that never seems to have an "update", passing the buck is the term I think.  Maybe I am being premature but, the timeline to return my funds is close to an end if not already passing. 

3rd update: Sept. 5, 2020 (funds still not released despite this email from them) The email I mentioned above which was communicated to me by "winnie" (this is the 4th communication from this person the same 1st one I spoke to claiming it was a technical issue then changed the reason to this kyc thing) stated this:


So I responded and I think this is the 8th or 10th time I told them same thing:

Their response:

I am under the impression that I would have received or had my funds released by now according to these communication because the 5 working days has passed and it may seem they have not made an internal decision to terminate the business relation because I can still login.  I have blatantly refused the kyc obviously here and I specifically stated so in multiple emails.  I am unsure of the wording because it seems to say to me that I should see the funds by 5 working days and in 15 days they may make a decision, again really unsure so I would like thoughts on this please.  Considering the last response and it's implied actions I do not think they are being honest yet and my funds are absolutely NOT "safe".  Thoughts?

It got posted and the reply is less than reassuring.  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5163269.msg55114854#msg55114854

Extremely disappointing they are being like this.

This is exactly what I was worried would happen to me, literally to the letter.  The interesting thing is that they also did this to me on a Friday, as Aug. 28th 2020 is that same day.  Which is why I became accusatory because I to knew the likelihood of a government authority involved in this was almost nil.  Our situations are very similar except I could not as you stated the reason above do it because it goes against everything I believe in as well.  Plus I have witnessed colleagues have bad things happen with their identities when this exact pattern emerged.  I cannot tell you how nervous this makes me but, I literally felt my heart going 1000 miles an hour as this brought back all the horror stories.

Agreed, and thank you for your involvement in both our situations as I thought what would happen if I complied is exactly what kaefergeneral is encountering which is frightening on different levels. Compounded with you really do not know who it is on the receiving end of your documentations when you complied and nothing happens plus the extra absurdities.

I did what was suggested by "nutlidah" as shown here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5163269.msg55090441#msg55090441 you can see they ignored it completely and continued on with another advertisement, no PM either, not that I am surprised because they blocked me from livechat I believe due to their inability to communicate properly.

I believe that the 11th email I recently got in which they claimed certain things would happen is a direct result of posting here because 10 emails prior they only repeated the claims of the inconsistent policies, again if possible attempt to produce some documentation because in the long run exposing these types of behaviors is essential to the community.

Considering that we are probably the first to encounter this it is possible there are others because all the policies regarding this behavior have been modified in Aug. 2020 and now there are people having issues, I do not think this a coincidence.

I cannot agree that they know what they are doing exactly, the behavior is extremely amateurish due to the nature of execution.  The policies being inconsistent is another highly amateur move as it shows lack of intellectual due diligence.

In banks and other institutions you are required to give ID documents before a pence drops in to any account, as I pointed out in their own policies they stated this as well however they contradict this by allowing deposits and in addition allowing the trading that occurred, therefore violating their own written policies.  Would this not qualify as suspicious so they now need to give me their ID documents?  So this is obviously not a professional move because it is either one way or the other, not in the middle unless you are running a scam.  Besides there is not a "huge amount of money" the fact still remains that it was only 9 deposits and 4 withdrawals.  Even looking at that amount you can immediately tell that I was focused on trading not withdrawing.  Considering you and others keep saying "large amounts" I do not know if you are ignoring the screenshots, work for them and are trying to justify their behavior or are incapable of viewing the screenshots and understanding what you see.

Compliance of this nature for convenience reminds me succinctly of this quote
Considering the core principles of all cryptocurrencies I would be doing myself a disservice as well as the community, I am not about to go against core principles of these financial instruments creator(s) that is disrespectful, disingenuous and patently wrong.

This behavior of the exchanges is identical to precrime punishments as depicted in many Orwellian nightmare scenarios.  Cryptocurrency in general regardless of the coin was intended to give control of personal finances back to the person, not another method of control by the controllers, they did not even create this instrument.  The irony here and the reality is that the methods these exchanges are using is absurd because accusations fly out hijacking the account and demanding you give you personal info to those who are wanting to steal at the same time from you.  The thoughts that really stick out to me is this:

What do these exchanges do with the funds they effectively steal from unsuspecting customers unaware of these scams?  If they are doing it for law enforcement/regulation purposes why do they not show that these funds have been transferred to the relevant authorities for investigation and subsequently released if no wrong doing is found?  When did any country, judge, judicial system or population put forth a vote or decree granting them government agent powers for this?  There is no trial, no judge, no jury, nothing they just take your funds.  If I did that to anyone and then claimed they must prove to me where the source of funds, etc. etc.. as a non-government agent I would expect to be charged with theft.

These exchanges doing this are not government agents of any type with no authority to do this, and claiming authority under suspicion of activities is exactly what Orwell strongly warns us about.  For an easy explanation of this "It is increasingly used in academic literature to describe and criticise the tendency in criminal justice systems to focus on crimes not yet committed. Pre-crime intervenes to punish, disrupt, incapacitate or restrict those deemed to embody future crime threats. The term pre-crime embodies a temporal paradox, suggesting both that a crime has not occurred and that the crime that has not occurred is a foregone conclusion."  source "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-crime"

If you believe this behavior is defensible then you should not be shocked when it happens to you because it can for any reason based on this premise and the actions being taken with this premise in mind.

It is noticeable you are invalidating the necessity of specifics in contract law, and your interpretation of the policy is implying withdrawals will be suspended.  This is a mistake you cannot assume anything in contract law, doing so is detrimental as it is required that specifics are outlined otherwise as you are doing any interpretation outside of what was written can be applied simply by one's emotions.

If you wrote this policy correct it, if not do not take personally what others have done it is self-defeating.

Thank you for your insights, you have made me more diligent in my thoughts on this and the motivations for making ambiguous contracts in addition to why I will avoid them in the future.

So they only refunded after you had posted?

As I read more and more of these kinds of threads this seems to be the case, no wonder many people are fearful of cryptocurrency.  Sad to see this happening so much.

Why are exchanges doing this after the user has engaged in business activities?  This behavior is very "bait and switch" like, get the users' funds whom you do not know in the first place and then make an arbitrary accusation putting the onus of exoneration on the victim.  Would it not be proper legal practice to request this information before any funds transfer takes place?  Can you provide intelligent explanation why you would do this this way and not sound like a thief?

Under the exchanges on "https://bitpr0.com/trading" page you have little numbers under the logos.  What do they mean?

Site does look cool, only thing is maybe spread those logos apart a few more pixels because I clicked on one I did not intend to.

It is very much a scam accusation because there are many holes not only in the multiple policies I posted links to from kucoin but, in addition their representatives not being consistent, posting this one policy simply adds to the ambiguity and inconsistency I will point out why.

The factual issues:

1) Terms were changed on 8/13/20 as per the link itself I joined before this date as can be attested by the evidence, Aug. 3rd 2020.  Interestingly enough any other organization I have been a member of immediately sends out changes to their membership base if they signed up before the changes, this did not happen, no one here has mentioned the simple fact that I joined on Aug. 3rd 2020, the terms changed and as a matter of fact it appears no one has been notified.  If you have a bank account as to which this is easily compared simply recall how many times they have sent you those annoying updated T&C, this is why.

2) They have specific terminology on the kyc process and the outcomes, specifically there are 3 reference points as links I have presented in the original post that they sent me themselves in the first response to my email support request, in contract law this is what is called ambiguity in which you follow the most referenced points in case of contradictions such as these.  Again in these specific references just like the link you sent with the excerpt in which I extracted the definition of "Services" and included the excerpt from the same link, there is not even the word or mention of withdraw.

3) They define the "Services" which clearly does not include withdrawals or deposits but, here it is right from the link you sent:

4) So going by their own rules on restrictions of "Services" as you outlined above and incorporating their definition of "Services" there is no exclusion or explicit outline of withdrawal restriction, it is very clear that trading of any kind or type will be restricted which is what they did and I discovered being restricted upon attempting to trade, this is the only thing consistent about this whole event and actually in line with their own policies.  Restricting withdrawals is not explicitly, nor clearly outlined or restricted in any policy that is written and available for review.  

If you have a chance to review contract law please do because you will learn that ambiguity is a common issue that causes problems with many companies, this is why for example a civil lawsuit can be successful.

In this example kucoin has either intentionally or unintentionally made it confusing thus leaving you the customer to learn about contract law or simply hire a lawyer to review the contract.  In either presentation of these anyone would be easily successful in proving lack of consistency in their actions.  It cannot be expected of the customer to know the intentions without clear, concise and explicit terms, this is not that.  Conclusively this leaves one to generate their own thoughts on these actions.

None I am aware of and far as can be told neither are others aware of.

You obviously did not even look or read anything that was presented.  9 deposits and 4 withdrawals is not mathematically equivalent or scaled to "thousands".  Where did you get "thousands of deposits and withdrawals" from?

I do not have an actual need for large numbers or transactions, as you can see in one month for example I only had 9 deposits and 4 withdrawals, those "extra" benefits are of no use to someone at my scale.

I would agree except that the very same support people I spoke with on chat are exactly the same people emailing me.  In fact "winnie" whom I spoke with 1st and 2nd is also the last person to email me which I referenced in my 2nd update in the original post.  I do not think they should have forced you at all and considering that you are stating what I am experiencing that does not bode well for the rest of the community under the same impression as I about kyc being optional with them in particular.  Nor does it set well when reading their policies that continuously claim that it is optional or in their own words "not mandatory".  Or if you look at the reddit link or the chat logs their own people say this repeatedly.