Need help 3.5 btc scam

[Amadues]

he buys some account to show the real interest in loan.
but every moves was only a scam attempt.
For example He ask in mp a loan without collateral after we talk, but meanwhile he ask a collateral one in public.
More and more people trust users without collateral, and btc is a good way to scam!

[1714162282]

1714162282

[1714162282]

1714162282

[1714162282]

1714162282

[pjsonowal]

This wasnt a scam for 3.5 bitcoin.

You practically gave it away.

Agreed with you @markj113.You already said that he was red-flagged,so why it was for basically?obviously must be for a scam accusation and so that next time users don't get into any trade further.Also whatever info. you were being provide may come out to be false.

For example He ask in mp a loan without collateral after we talk, but meanwhile he ask a collateral one in public.
More and more people trust users without collateral, and btc is a good way to scam!

Well this can be stopped if lenders give half of the amount of the account price if that guys wants a loan without collateral.(Account with Trust)

[flagpara]

Here's some update. I know it might seems a bit strange but I feel like it's important to keep the info clean.

The user didn't contact me on his own. So I filed a European complaint and sent him a registered letter with the file. A week later the user contacted me again apologizing for the inconvenience.
Seems like the user had some trouble that's for sure. But he said he wanted to repay. I didn't really believe him at first but I'm making an update because he started repaying huge amount.

I lent around 1500€ to him. Considering the interests and the delay, we agreed on 1800€ to be repaid. Currently 1.5 btc were repaid, which is aorund 600€.

While not the whole amount, only a third of the sum, I see no reason to not trust this user wil finish repaying me. Why even starting to repay if he doesn't want to do it until the very end?

So this is just and advice for every European here. Fill a contract before lending, requiring quick and multiple proofs. In my case, the use clearly didn't want to repay, but hadn't the choice as a legal contract was made.

The European process for debt recovering is extremely easy, just make sure the contract is correct (some characteristics have to be ok, check that on google).

I'll just bump when the amount is paid as a whole. Feel free to ask any question.

[flagpara]

This wasnt a scam for 3.5 bitcoin.

You practically gave it away.

Thanks again for your reaction Makj113. Fact is that when two persons make a contract and one break it it's called a scam. That's the main definition of a scam in fact. You don't know the amount of precaution I took you just consider them as not being enough. On which you might be right, I don't know and I don't care, but that's still scamming.

If you let your door open while being gone, I can enter and take whatever I want? It's not a theft, you practically gave it away?

[kyren]

This wasnt a scam for 3.5 bitcoin.

You practically gave it away.

Thanks again for your reaction Makj113. Fact is that when two persons make a contract and one break it it's called a scam. That's the main definition of a scam in fact. You don't know the amount of precaution I took you just consider them as not being enough. On which you might be right, I don't know and I don't care, but that's still scamming.

If you let your door open while being gone, I can enter and take whatever I want? It's not a theft, you practically gave it away?

Actually, that's not a "scam" as you say.  It's only a scam if one party intentionally defrauded the other.  I'm sure there is a more technical term for that.

In this case though, it seems like you did indeed get scammed

[markj113]

This wasnt a scam for 3.5 bitcoin.

You practically gave it away.

Thanks again for your reaction Makj113. Fact is that when two persons make a contract and one break it it's called a scam. That's the main definition of a scam in fact. You don't know the amount of precaution I took you just consider them as not being enough. On which you might be right, I don't know and I don't care, but that's still scamming.

If you let your door open while being gone, I can enter and take whatever I want? It's not a theft, you practically gave it away?

Well your insurance company would say that you failed to take adequate security precautions and refuse to pay out your claim.

You only need to take one look at the scam accusation thread to realise how many scammers there are on this forum, feels like a kick in the nuts but you will never get that bitcoin back and will have to put it down experience and move on a little older and wiser.

[Amadues]

This wasnt a scam for 3.5 bitcoin.

You practically gave it away.

Thanks again for your reaction Makj113. Fact is that when two persons make a contract and one break it it's called a scam. That's the main definition of a scam in fact. You don't know the amount of precaution I took you just consider them as not being enough. On which you might be right, I don't know and I don't care, but that's still scamming.

If you let your door open while being gone, I can enter and take whatever I want? It's not a theft, you practically gave it away?

Actually, that's not a "scam" as you say.  It's only a scam if one party intentionally defrauded the other.  I'm sure there is a more technical term for that.

In this case though, it seems like you did indeed get scammed

well this is ... a fraud? a loan scam? a loan fraud?
Calling this as you want but the meaning doesn't change.
But by the way flagapra you go at least to a police station to sue what happened here with this user?
If not I can't understand how you have a probability to get such btc back....
I know also a legal sue is anything but it's a first approach!

[flagpara]

This wasnt a scam for 3.5 bitcoin.

You practically gave it away.

Thanks again for your reaction Makj113. Fact is that when two persons make a contract and one break it it's called a scam. That's the main definition of a scam in fact. You don't know the amount of precaution I took you just consider them as not being enough. On which you might be right, I don't know and I don't care, but that's still scamming.

If you let your door open while being gone, I can enter and take whatever I want? It's not a theft, you practically gave it away?

Well your insurance company would say that you failed to take adequate security precautions and refuse to pay out your claim.

You only need to take one look at the scam accusation thread to realise how many scammers there are on this forum, feels like a kick in the nuts but you will never get that bitcoin back and will have to put it down experience and move on a little older and wiser.

Well in fact as I precised above, the precautions I took were enough as the user started repaying. But I understand your point.
Difference is that it's still a theft. You would only not be paid back by your insurance that's all.

[flagpara]

This wasnt a scam for 3.5 bitcoin.

You practically gave it away.

Thanks again for your reaction Makj113. Fact is that when two persons make a contract and one break it it's called a scam. That's the main definition of a scam in fact. You don't know the amount of precaution I took you just consider them as not being enough. On which you might be right, I don't know and I don't care, but that's still scamming.

If you let your door open while being gone, I can enter and take whatever I want? It's not a theft, you practically gave it away?

Actually, that's not a "scam" as you say.  It's only a scam if one party intentionally defrauded the other.  I'm sure there is a more technical term for that.

In this case though, it seems like you did indeed get scammed

well this is ... a fraud? a loan scam? a loan fraud?
Calling this as you want but the meaning doesn't change.
But by the way flagapra you go at least to a police station to sue what happened here with this user?
If not I can't understand how you have a probability to get such btc back....
I know also a legal sue is anything but it's a first approach!

As I said above, I followed the European process of debt recovery and the threat of being sued seemed enough. The user started repaying, he already repayed 1/3rd of the amount and the interests so it's going the good way