[Weexchange issue] The fall of Ukyo III - Updates and references

[ninjaboon]

I had some withdraws stuck on weexchange, but on the claim sight it says 0 balance stuck 0 available 0 withdrawn 0 and I can't log into the origional site at all.

same problem here...where are my BTC?

[Pompobit]

I think there has been enough speculation now.
The short of it, is that the funds are not available for distribution.
This is fact. Reasoning behind it won't change this.
We are doing what we can to make funds available to users.
The holidays have greatly disrupted any if not all potential business activity for the past few weeks.
Right now my biggest goal is to get AM claim system up while keeping everything else moving as best as things allow in the mean time.

I will post an update as soon as the AM claim portal is ready.

Thank you for your continued patience.

-Ukyo

[Zubilica]

Balance Stuck   0.00000000   Available   0.00000000   Withdrawn   0.00000000

[glendall]

So going on three months for some folks, they deposited money to WeExchange, and the coins 'magically vanished' and we still don't even have an excuse why they went missing.

And most people are oddly thinking that they will somehow get their coins back, I suppose? 

Just doesn't make much sense.  This was about the easiest, most painless multi million dollar scam that I have ever heard of in my life.  Ukyo Jon Montroll does not even have a negative trust rating.  And I'm guessing only 1/10 of the people he scammed even know of these threads existence.  What a sad new big scam for the world of bitcoin.

[Sledge]

I'ma let you finish, but look, "glendall", Danny Brewster of Neo & Bee is involved and he doesn't say it is a scam.

[Bitdust]

I'ma let you finish, but look, "glendall", Danny Brewster of Neo...

Lol, how is it that all but 2 of your posts are white knighting Jon?

One shyster propping another is a form of pack hunting, time you learned of how this shit works.

[runam0k]

Balance Stuck   0.00000000   Available   0.00000000   Withdrawn   0.00000000

For me too.

[Zubilica]

now is fixed but my BTC is still stuck there

[Sledge]

I'ma let you finish, but look, "glendall", Danny Brewster of Neo...

Lol, how is it that all but 2 of your posts are white knighting Jon?

One shyster propping another is a form of pack hunting, time you learned of how this shit works.

Instead of attacking the poster, why not just think for a half second and respond to the actual post, that Danny is involved. A far better response would be pointing out some reason you think it doesn't matter if Danny is involved, or anything intelligent really, other than trying to attack the poster.

Take care.

[Bitdust]

I'ma let you finish, but look, "glendall", Danny Brewster of Neo...

Lol, how is it that all but 2 of your posts are white knighting Jon?

One shyster propping another is a form of pack hunting, time you learned of how this shit works.

Instead of attacking the poster, why not just think for a half second and respond to the actual post, that Danny is involved. A far better response would be pointing out some reason you think it doesn't matter if Danny is involved, or anything intelligent really, other than trying to attack the poster.

Take care.

I will explain.

When I said "One shyster propping another is a form of pack hunting," i was not attacking you, but rather your reasoning.  Danny claimed that NeoBee is involved in resolving this "problem," and then retracted his claim once it has served its purpose.  That was the first of many such statements made by Danny.
Danny's involvement here serves his needs.  He's a businessman, aspiring to become a banker.  If I gave you the benefit of the doubt, your naivete would break my heart.

If your account age is an indicator of the time you spent on the scene, crypto finance may seem like a fun fuzzy playpen.  It is not.  Money is in play.  There are established players, whose ties and interactions you do not know or understand.   This lack of understanding lends your posts the hapless tragicomic quality that makes this forum what it is.

If, on the other hand, your account is not an indicator of your involvement with the scene, the comedy becomes a bit darker.

[SebastianJu]

I dont act because ukyo is still my best option. Persons that know what happened tell me thats the best way. If everything fails i still have enough time to sue ukyo the next years. The harm is already done so no need to rush things now. The only risk involved is losing time.

[Sledge]

If, on the other hand, your account is not an indicator of your involvement with the scene, the comedy becomes a bit darker.

Get ready for some pretty dark comedy. (But there is a bright side, I was chuckling when I noticed your own account is even younger than mine.)

[Bitdust]

If, on the other hand, your account is not an indicator of your involvement with the scene, the comedy becomes a bit darker.

Get ready for some pretty dark comedy. (But there is a bright side, I was chuckling when I noticed your own account is even younger than mine.)

Lol, yes - a burner.  Alt accounts are not only commonplace but acknowledged and accepted here.
Out of the closet and into the streets, snowflake!
Embrace your sockiness.

[pascal257]

Persons that know what happened tell me thats the best way.

They should go ahead, create a sockpuppet, post whats going on and let others (the victims) decide.

[GTR_JOEY]

Instead of talking shit for another 2 pages, has anyone claimed more then one allotment of btc from their weExchange accounts?

I withdraw the first amount a couple of weeks ago (less then 7% of the total balance), it really shouldn't be taking this long I would have thought.

[WeexUser]

Instead of talking shit for another 2 pages, has anyone claimed more then one allotment of btc from their weExchange accounts?

I withdraw the first amount a couple of weeks ago (less then 7% of the total balance), it really shouldn't be taking this long I would have thought.

No, everyone has only been able to withdraw 6.175% so far.

Wild speculation
Assuming that this is indeed a legal issue it could easily be related to bitfunder which was closed for unknown reasons (right?). The weex coins are obviously involved because a big part of them was used for trading on bitfunder.
All the coins could either have been seized or more likely Ukyo could have been ordered to hold them until the legal issue have been resolved.

From IRC about two weeks ago:

<nsa_> Are you able to say where the available coins came from btw?
<kanoi> yes but he wont
<Ukyo> Kanoi is correct that this get's into issues where I have to tread very carefully. Those were paid out because I believed it was the right thing to do.

Assuming that Ukyo is speaking the truth, it sounds like the dispersed coins were different to the unavailable coins in some way. Saying "I believed it was the right thing to do" makes it sound like he got into a bit of trouble by paying out those coins.
Danny said that amount of available coin were 386 btc. There was about a month between Ukyo said "shit has hit the fan" and Danny making this statement. The deposit addresses had been removed from the site before that period, which means that the available coins probably isn't deposits made during that period.
The available coins could come from the withdrawals made since bitfunder closed. 386btc is a quite small amount for an exchange but that makes sense because fewer people would deposit knowing that bitfunder was closed. It would also make sense that Ukyo would believe he could pay out those coins because they could not have been involved with bitfunder since it was already closed.

Again, remember that the above is just speculation. I am not trying to justify anything. I am just trying to find the story that requires the least assumptions(Occam's razor). I am yet to find a scammer story with less assumptions.

[SebastianJu]

Instead of talking shit for another 2 pages, has anyone claimed more then one allotment of btc from their weExchange accounts?

I withdraw the first amount a couple of weeks ago (less then 7% of the total balance), it really shouldn't be taking this long I would have thought.

No, everyone has only been able to withdraw 6.175% so far.

Wild speculation
Assuming that this is indeed a legal issue it could easily be related to bitfunder which was closed for unknown reasons (right?). The weex coins are obviously involved because a big part of them was used for trading on bitfunder.
All the coins could either have been seized or more likely Ukyo could have been ordered to hold them until the legal issue have been resolved.

From IRC about two weeks ago:

<nsa_> Are you able to say where the available coins came from btw?
<kanoi> yes but he wont
<Ukyo> Kanoi is correct that this get's into issues where I have to tread very carefully. Those were paid out because I believed it was the right thing to do.

Assuming that Ukyo is speaking the truth, it sounds like the dispersed coins were different to the unavailable coins in some way. Saying "I believed it was the right thing to do" makes it sound like he got into a bit of trouble by paying out those coins.
Danny said that amount of available coin were 386 btc. There was about a month between Ukyo said "shit has hit the fan" and Danny making this statement. The deposit addresses had been removed from the site before that period, which means that the available coins probably isn't deposits made during that period.
The available coins could come from the withdrawals made since bitfunder closed. 386btc is a quite small amount for an exchange but that makes sense because fewer people would deposit knowing that bitfunder was closed. It would also make sense that Ukyo would believe he could pay out those coins because they could not have been involved with bitfunder since it was already closed.

Again, remember that the above is just speculation. I am not trying to justify anything. I am just trying to find the story that requires the least assumptions(Occam's razor). I am yet to find a scammer story with less assumptions.

Its plain wrong that deposits werent possible anymore. Depositing to weexchange was possible all the time. It sounds very probably to me that those 386 coins + the ones paid out manually before are the coins deposited after all other coins were gone. That those were spread to all users even though they belonged to single persons directly might be not a big crime to some but to the owners of these coins for sure. In case of a court case thats how i will move since thats nothing a company is protecting against.
Of course i dont know if thats the case but it sounds the most matching to me. A seizing or theft wont take some coins only and leave some behind.
If its really seized then i wonder what ... person traded at bitfunder and then claimed he lost money because it was an illegal exchange. What a person... trying to get his loss paid by other users.
But then again... this shouldnt be possible. The funds dont belong to bitfunder or weexchange. They are owned by their owners. So i doubt a court can decide that a trader that lost money on an exchange should be paid by the escrowed money that belongs to other users. Instead ukyo had to pay a fine but he couldnt pay it with users money.
So i doubt that its seized. Because its not the funds of a company. The remaining possibilities would be stolen or ukyo made an error and sent all btc in error to someone.

[kano]

...
Wild speculation
Assuming that this is indeed a legal issue it could easily be related to bitfunder which was closed for unknown reasons (right?). The weex coins are obviously involved because a big part of them was used for trading on bitfunder.
...

No.
This would constitute criminal actions by Ukyo.

Using the Weex funds, held in trust, elsewhere constitutes criminal action.

At a guess, embezzlement probably best defines what it would be and you can even look up the jail terms involved.
http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/crime-penalties/federal/embezzlement.htm

Edit: After a long discussion with a lawyer, firstly, it's probably Fraud and not Embezzlement,
however, the target of our demands or charges would not be Ukyo, they would be the directors of Weex.

It would be up to Weex to make demands of or lay charges against Ukyo.
Lucky Aus has extradition laws with USA

Since we have the ACN and ABN of Weex, the next step would probably be to call ASIC and ask them what should be done about a company that will not divulge the whereabouts of millions of dollars of funds held in trust and will not return them all when requested.

... and an aside ... as may be obvious from my link above, a criminal charge of Fraud or Embezzlement can include 3 things: fines, jail and (normally) a requirement to repay the funds.

[SebastianJu]

...
Wild speculation
Assuming that this is indeed a legal issue it could easily be related to bitfunder which was closed for unknown reasons (right?). The weex coins are obviously involved because a big part of them was used for trading on bitfunder.
...

No.
This would constitute criminal actions by Ukyo.

Using the Weex funds, held in trust, elsewhere constitutes criminal action.

At a guess, embezzlement probably best defines what it would be and you can even look up the jail terms involved.
http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/crime-penalties/federal/embezzlement.htm

I dont think that ukyo took it for personal gains. He always wrote he didnt take the bitcoins. Which means for me that the bitcoins cant be seized too since government cant take the bitcoins without ukyo giving them to them. Of course ukyo might see seizing not like he took the coins because they have them.

The coins used at bitfunder never left weexchange so all funds used for trading were always in posession of the owner of these coins while ukyo only escrowed the coins.

By the way... if the coins really were seized then i believe that later deposits would have been seized too. I dont believe that they seized and then let ukyo move on with other funds he received later. That doesnt sound correct for me. So seized coins sound unlikely to me.

[kano]

...
Wild speculation
Assuming that this is indeed a legal issue it could easily be related to bitfunder which was closed for unknown reasons (right?). The weex coins are obviously involved because a big part of them was used for trading on bitfunder.
...

No.
This would constitute criminal actions by Ukyo.

Using the Weex funds, held in trust, elsewhere constitutes criminal action.

At a guess, embezzlement probably best defines what it would be and you can even look up the jail terms involved.
http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/crime-penalties/federal/embezzlement.htm

Edit: After a long discussion with a lawyer, firstly, it's probably Fraud and not Embezzlement,
however, the target of our demands or charges would not be Ukyo, they would be the directors of Weex.

It would be up to Weex to make demands of or lay charges against Ukyo.
Lucky Aus has extradition laws with USA

Since we have the ACN and ABN of Weex, the next step would probably be to call ASIC and ask them what should be done about a company that will not divulge the whereabouts of millions of dollars of funds held in trust and will not return them all when requested.

... and an aside ... as may be obvious from my link above, a criminal charge of Fraud or Embezzlement can include 3 things: fines, jail and (normally) a requirement to repay the funds.

... since I edited this on the previous page ...