Localbitcoins now requires identification

[magneto]

So we all knew that LBC was already going down the path of forced verification for advertisers, and they made the move that all advertisers will have to verify themselves before they can trade back in January.. And then later there was a warning for all people who had a high trade volume and "recommended" that they verify their identity. But I never expected them to actually restrict somewhat high volume traders so fast, since I was greeted with this message:

You need to verify your identity before you can continue trading. Proceed to verify your identity

I mean, you could still create new accounts and trade from them anonymously, but it's a tedious process to go through email and phone verification all the time. And a lot of offers won't be available to you because of the fact that you can't consistently trade up for a good reputation.

Time to move to a new p2p trading platform?

[1715490798]

1715490798

[1715490798]

1715490798

[1715490798]

1715490798

[TheQuin]

Is there any announcement to go with that? I'm wondering if that affects all accounts if it is just trades over a certain amount or in specific countries.

[nc50lc]

I'm always expecting that LBC will require KYC verification soon.
Yes it's P2P but still a "widely known" trading platform,
regulators wont tolerate any crypto in their sights that has the potential to become a hidden sub-black-market trading ground

Time to move to a new p2p trading platform?

I never used LBC since it isn't available in our Country but we have local exchanges and
3rd party trading service providers that requires KYC verification even before this KYC "issue" became a Bitcoin-users' issue,
and I didn't have any problem with that (In my case).

If you wanted to trade Peer-to-peer anonymously, use other "methods".

[TryNinja]

Is there any announcement to go with that? I'm wondering if that affects all accounts if it is just trades over a certain amount or in specific countries.

This:

Yes the guide is currently missing the ID verification requirement.

A few months back we started requiring all users to be ID verified before they can create an advertisement.

https://www.reddit.com/r/localbitcoins/comments/8bzx00/identification_required_for_advertising/dxfw3d3/

But it looks like you also need to verify your account with ID if you have been trading a lot.

"Your trade volume has been significant in the past 12 months. Please, verify your ID to continue trading" WTF?

https://www.reddit.com/r/localbitcoins/comments/8abtct/your_trade_volume_has_been_significant_in_the/

[TheQuin]

Do you know what amount they consider to be "significant in the past 12 months"?

I verified my account ages ago so it doesn't affect me directly but I'm just curious.

[TryNinja]

Do you know what amount they consider to be "significant in the past 12 months"?

I verified my account ages ago so it doesn't affect me directly but I'm just curious.

No. Looks like no one from Localbitcoins has actually commented about this new "limits".

[piloder]

I think this is more related to decrease the growing fud over p2p crypto exchange with reversible payment methods. Don't know whether or not LBC will cooperate with law enforcement in case of scam but giving your identity to third party like LBC is quite risky. There is no point in using LBC instead of your local trading platform if they will make verification as mandatory requirement..

[Lanatsa]

I think this is more related to decrease the growing fud over p2p crypto exchange with reversible payment methods. Don't know whether or not LBC will cooperate with law enforcement in case of scam but giving your identity to third party like LBC is quite risky. There is no point in using LBC instead of your local trading platform if they will make verification as mandatory requirement..

The choices will be just the same where most users don't have any choice but to comply on what have been asked. If they would decide to leave LBC and go to traditional exchangers they would still need to comply KYC and now LBC do ask it also which means you don't have anymore ways to make yourself truly anonymous but somehow this thing or problem would be faced for those who do make transactions way beyond limits.

[LeGaulois]

I think this is more related to decrease the growing fud over p2p crypto exchange with reversible payment methods. Don't know whether or not LBC will cooperate with law enforcement in case of scam but giving your identity to third party like LBC is quite risky. There is no point in using LBC instead of your local trading platform if they will make verification as mandatory requirement..

The choices will be just the same where most users don't have any choice but to comply on what have been asked. If they would decide to leave LBC and go to traditional exchangers they would still need to comply KYC and now LBC do ask it also which means you don't have anymore ways to make yourself truly anonymous but somehow this thing or problem would be faced for those who do make transactions way beyond limits.

It's not true, you can still trade anonymously it's just that people are lazy to search or want to find the cheaper, or don't want to spend 30 minutes to learn. People want the spoon in the mouth directly
It's not so difficult to keep your privacy and to avoid the usual KYC process..

[squatz1]

Was bound to happen at some point, it was only a matter of time until the regulators came in and wanted their fair share of what was going on. They're going to want companies to keep the names of people so they're able to at some point tax people on what they're buying.

Sadly, the only thing people want to do is change companies -- which once the next company becomes big enough then they're going to force them into kyc. Who even knows if P2P could work with something like this.

[St4yInTh3D4rk]

So we all knew that LBC was already going down the path of forced verification for advertisers, and they made the move that all advertisers will have to verify themselves before they can trade back in January.. And then later there was a warning for all people who had a high trade volume and "recommended" that they verify their identity. But I never expected them to actually restrict somewhat high volume traders so fast, since I was greeted with this message:

You need to verify your identity before you can continue trading. Proceed to verify your identity

I mean, you could still create new accounts and trade from them anonymously, but it's a tedious process to go through email and phone verification all the time. And a lot of offers won't be available to you because of the fact that you can't consistently trade up for a good reputation.

Time to move to a new p2p trading platform?

And one more the traders are also asking for our ID to verify to the people who are selling bitcoins to them but most of the people are not confortable with these activities but what we can do it is their terms so we need to agree if we want to continue.

So don't sell any bitcoins anymore just hold it forever.

[Mister1k]

So we all knew that LBC was already going down the path of forced verification for advertisers, and they made the move that all advertisers will have to verify themselves before they can trade back in January.. And then later there was a warning for all people who had a high trade volume and "recommended" that they verify their identity. But I never expected them to actually restrict somewhat high volume traders so fast, since I was greeted with this message:

You need to verify your identity before you can continue trading. Proceed to verify your identity

I mean, you could still create new accounts and trade from them anonymously, but it's a tedious process to go through email and phone verification all the time. And a lot of offers won't be available to you because of the fact that you can't consistently trade up for a good reputation.

Time to move to a new p2p trading platform?

This does not like true information, I have been using the localbitcoins more than 3 years but still there is nothing has been asked from the localbitcoins site. If the trader have policy to trade along with ID verification means you need to go ahead with the Id card verification which is internationally accepted. That is how LBC policy works so far mate.
If the furnished information is true. First share the policy image which shows the details you mentioned.

[vintages]

Well, its about time. it will be a welcome development in time to come. Though, I still prefer the anonymous transaction system one gets when trading in localbitcoin but with the much fraud and scamming activities going on there, KYC might help reduce it to some extent. I just hope whatever  method they will be using won't be a tedious one and won't require much information apart from the phone and email verification.

[ManaMan]

I think this is more related to decrease the growing fud over p2p crypto exchange with reversible payment methods. Don't know whether or not LBC will cooperate with law enforcement in case of scam but giving your identity to third party like LBC is quite risky. There is no point in using LBC instead of your local trading platform if they will make verification as mandatory requirement..

True, if you don't need cash in hand it's far better to do KYC with well known exchange where you can even get better trades. LBC offered no verification needed and was nice place to go there even if rates where higher still it was comfortable to do trades. Seems they won't require from all users to verify if I understood well but this is indications that verification might be applied to all users in the future. Well they must have good reasons for doing this as well.

And one more the traders are also asking for our ID to verify to the people who are selling bitcoins to them but most of the people are not confortable with these activities but what we can do it is their terms so we need to agree if we want to continue.

So don't sell any bitcoins anymore just hold it forever.

Traders are doing this for the higher risky methods such as buying and selling with PayPal and such services where there is high risk involved. But yes if we want it to continue best is to follow up their requirements or else find another place.

[MiF]

Well, its about time. it will be a welcome development in time to come. Though, I still prefer the anonymous transaction system one gets when trading in localbitcoin but with the much fraud and scamming activities going on there, KYC might help reduce it to some extent. I just hope whatever  method they will be using won't be a tedious one and won't require much information apart from the phone and email verification.

That's a good ways to monitor bitcoin transactions at your local area, and as the development go further it will secure the funds of every user. All criminal can be tracked down because of the legitimate identification of every customers doing transactions peer to peer. However if all countries will be doing this, I think no more fraudsters will be able to be confident of doing such crimes like stealing money from other people through localbitcoins exchanges.

[Kemarit]

I'm always expecting that LBC will require KYC verification soon.
Yes it's P2P but still a "widely known" trading platform,
regulators wont tolerate any crypto in their sights that has the potential to become a hidden sub-black-market trading ground

Time to move to a new p2p trading platform?

I never used LBC since it isn't available in our Country but we have a local exchanges and
3rd party trading service providers that requires KYC verification even before this KYC "issue" became a Bitcoin-users' issue,
and I didn't have any problem with that (In my case).

If you wanted to trade Peer-to-peer anonymously, use other "methods".

As far as I know LBC is available in the Philippines as well. (https://localbitcoins.com/country/PH). But yes, since there is a local exchanges like coins.ph, not everyone knows that there also a lot of trading done in LBC Philippines.

Was bound to happen at some point, it was only a matter of time until the regulators came in and wanted their fair share of what was going on. They're going to want companies to keep the names of people so they're able to at some point tax people on what they're buying.

~snip~

Of course, just a matter of time, but I was quite surprise by the immediate action by LBC. Maybe they are really under the scrutiny as of late, and they can't do anything but to succumb to government's pressure to put KYC and verification. I don't know if there is a alternative to LBC though, there might be one out there but I'm sure it will take the same path when government take notice of it.

[sheenshane]

As far as I know LBC is available in the Philippines as well. (https://localbitcoins.com/country/PH). But yes, since there is a local exchanges like coins.ph, not everyone knows that there also a lot of trading done in LBC Philippines.

Yes, LocalBitcoin.com was here in the Philippines but mostly people well known was using a Coins.ph exchange it is easy for us to convert our bitcoin to fiat or paying bills and having a prepaid load for an instant, I think that's the reason why they must choose this exchange rather than LBC.
Well, that is expected that LBC having also KYC like Coins.ph, to have security in making a transaction or not having a transaction on illegal activities. Nowadays you can't be hidden on blockchain transaction or still anonymous, make a transaction that identifies in real you.

[milewilda]

I think this is more related to decrease the growing fud over p2p crypto exchange with reversible payment methods. Don't know whether or not LBC will cooperate with law enforcement in case of scam but giving your identity to third party like LBC is quite risky. There is no point in using LBC instead of your local trading platform if they will make verification as mandatory requirement..

The choices will be just the same where most users don't have any choice but to comply on what have been asked. If they would decide to leave LBC and go to traditional exchangers they would still need to comply KYC and now LBC do ask it also which means you don't have anymore ways to make yourself truly anonymous but somehow this thing or problem would be faced for those who do make transactions way beyond limits.

It's not true, you can still trade anonymously it's just that people are lazy to search or want to find the cheaper, or don't want to spend 30 minutes to learn. People want the spoon in the mouth directly
It's not so difficult to keep your privacy and to avoid the usual KYC process..

This is true which the things you do said was right.People do really love on being spoonfeed where they dont really bother theirselves on searching up other things and as you said there are lots of ways to remain anonymous without the need of complying such thing being asked on kyc. They are not just making a move or doing good search on possible ways.

[magneto]

Do you know what amount they consider to be "significant in the past 12 months"?

I verified my account ages ago so it doesn't affect me directly but I'm just curious.

No idea, but I didn't even trade that much over the past 12 months. I believe that my trading volume fell under the 2-5 BTC category, and I'd say that half of it incurred while BTC was still relatively cheap back in the first half of 2017.

I don't think that's that significant by any means, but I doubt that LBC wanted to do this either. Obviously doesn't make sense for them to do this voluntarily, and there had to be some sort of regulatory pressure be put on them.

This does not like true information, I have been using the localbitcoins more than 3 years but still there is nothing has been asked from the localbitcoins site. If the trader have policy to trade along with ID verification means you need to go ahead with the Id card verification which is internationally accepted. That is how LBC policy works so far mate.
If the furnished information is true. First share the policy image which shows the details you mentioned.

Search on the web. I'm sure you'll find a lot more cases. I wouldn't lie to the whole community for the sake of discrediting LBC, which was one of my favorite platforms to trade on.

Anyways, after a few days this suspension doesn't seem to be going. Time to move on.

[TheQuin]

No idea, but I didn't even trade that much over the past 12 months. I believe that my trading volume fell under the 2-5 BTC category, and I'd say that half of it incurred while BTC was still relatively cheap back in the first half of 2017.

I don't think that's that significant by any means, but I doubt that LBC wanted to do this either. Obviously doesn't make sense for them to do this voluntarily, and there had to be some sort of regulatory pressure be put on them.

That's what I was thinking. It makes me wonder if this has been applied everywhere or just in some countries where that pressure is coming from.

[timerland]

I haven't gotten any sort of notifications yet, probably because of the fact that my trade volume is still too low for them to consider my account worthwhile to suspend. It seems to have started to happen gradually, over the past few weeks as more and more accounts have been placed into restriction.

The only reason I use LBC right now is because of the fact that it doesn't require identification. If I'm forced into giving away my personal details, I'm definitely going to find somewhere else to trade.

No idea, but I didn't even trade that much over the past 12 months. I believe that my trading volume fell under the 2-5 BTC category, and I'd say that half of it incurred while BTC was still relatively cheap back in the first half of 2017.

I don't think that's that significant by any means, but I doubt that LBC wanted to do this either. Obviously doesn't make sense for them to do this voluntarily, and there had to be some sort of regulatory pressure be put on them.

That's what I was thinking. It makes me wonder if this has been applied everywhere or just in some countries where that pressure is coming from.

It could definitely be possible. The amount of info regarding these new rules released by LBC is next to none (or at least I haven't been looking in the right places). Perhaps it's only a region thing, but everyone seemed to have gotten warnings that had significant trading volume, if not a ban (who is not already verified).

[TheQuin]

The only reason I use LBC right now is because of the fact that it doesn't require identification. If I'm forced into giving away my personal details, I'm definitely going to find somewhere else to trade.

I understand why people don't what to verify, but for my use it doesn't really matter. I only use it to sell small amounts and as I'm using direct payment to my bank I have to give the buyer my name anyway. For larger amounts, I'd always use another exchange with better rates anyway. I guess it depends on what country you are in but for me, other exchanges means paying international wire fees and paying the spread on the currency conversion.

[zhekinsp]

The only reason I use LBC right now is because of the fact that it doesn't require identification. If I'm forced into giving away my personal details, I'm definitely going to find somewhere else to trade.

I understand why people don't what to verify, but for my use it doesn't really matter. I only use it to sell small amounts and as I'm using direct payment to my bank I have to give the buyer my name anyway. For larger amounts, I'd always use another exchange with better rates anyway. I guess it depends on what country you are in but for me, other exchanges means paying international wire fees and paying the spread on the currency conversion.

LBC is better to sell our bitcoins when the amount is small and I am also having no problem with providing my personal details,I did few times though.Some of the traders asked me to send the picture of an ID with picture in it and also they asking real name sync with LBC name to continue to trade but not all are asking the verification it depends upon the traders.

[timerland]

The only reason I use LBC right now is because of the fact that it doesn't require identification. If I'm forced into giving away my personal details, I'm definitely going to find somewhere else to trade.

I understand why people don't what to verify, but for my use it doesn't really matter. I only use it to sell small amounts and as I'm using direct payment to my bank I have to give the buyer my name anyway. For larger amounts, I'd always use another exchange with better rates anyway. I guess it depends on what country you are in but for me, other exchanges means paying international wire fees and paying the spread on the currency conversion.

Right. But the thing is that not everyone is willing to provide their ID regardless of the amount, and they'd rather stay anonymous. Localbitcoins even used to allow you to put out advertisements on their platform without ID, which is no longer possible. People who wanted to stay anonymous could even get above market price for their coins this way, and now, that is gone.

Also, I don't think that they have released enough information on when you're going to be asked to provide ID. Like what is "significant trade volume" anyways? At least release a precise schedule of at how much volume you'll be asked to provide ID.

All in all, this probably won't affect most established traders anyways, but it's a hassle if you don't want to give out your personal info and you want to trade actively. Also shows that regulations are tightening up on crypto everywhere.

[Thanasis]

The only reason I use LBC right now is because of the fact that it doesn't require identification. If I'm forced into giving away my personal details, I'm definitely going to find somewhere else to trade.

I understand why people don't what to verify, but for my use it doesn't really matter. I only use it to sell small amounts and as I'm using direct payment to my bank I have to give the buyer my name anyway. For larger amounts, I'd always use another exchange with better rates anyway. I guess it depends on what country you are in but for me, other exchanges means paying international wire fees and paying the spread on the currency conversion.

Right. But the thing is that not everyone is willing to provide their ID regardless of the amount, and they'd rather stay anonymous. Localbitcoins even used to allow you to put out advertisements on their platform without ID, which is no longer possible. People who wanted to stay anonymous could even get above market price for their coins this way, and now, that is gone.

Also, I don't think that they have released enough information on when you're going to be asked to provide ID. Like what is "significant trade volume" anyways? At least release a precise schedule of at how much volume you'll be asked to provide ID.

All in all, this probably won't affect most established traders anyways, but it's a hassle if you don't want to give out your personal info and you want to trade actively. Also shows that regulations are tightening up on crypto everywhere.

For the people who think they are anonymous in this world need to know that they are watched by some eyes even if they have personal infos carefully,we all have smartphones now a days and all our information are gathered by the mobile company and which are selling to the advertisement platforms,and all our informations in the social medias are also sold to the most of the companies who will target us with our desired product by someways like if I am an crypto related person so I will get lot of ads and products related to the ICO will come to my mobile through many ways.
SO don't hesitate to provide your information for a good cause which can earn you some money.

[magneto]

No idea, but I didn't even trade that much over the past 12 months. I believe that my trading volume fell under the 2-5 BTC category, and I'd say that half of it incurred while BTC was still relatively cheap back in the first half of 2017.

I don't think that's that significant by any means, but I doubt that LBC wanted to do this either. Obviously doesn't make sense for them to do this voluntarily, and there had to be some sort of regulatory pressure be put on them.

That's what I was thinking. It makes me wonder if this has been applied everywhere or just in some countries where that pressure is coming from.

That would be interesting to see, however I'm pretty sure that it's worldwide.

I understand why people don't what to verify, but for my use it doesn't really matter. I only use it to sell small amounts and as I'm using direct payment to my bank I have to give the buyer my name anyway. For larger amounts, I'd always use another exchange with better rates anyway. I guess it depends on what country you are in but for me, other exchanges means paying international wire fees and paying the spread on the currency conversion.

It'll definitely take away from their customer base for sure. However, you're right. Most people will remain unaffected by this change. Though if it was truly due to regulatory pressure from governments that Localbitcoins is being forced to do this, then is it going to in the future force identification upon all users, not just the high volume ones?

That would make sense considering the direction they're trying to go in at the moment.

[BingoDog]

This is not the surprise. Regulation pressure especialy in the KYC part as well as anti-money laundering and terorrism financing is geting stonger and they are actualy forcedto obey such regulations in order to keep their business and to run it legitimately. But this also represents certain level of protection for users, despite the lower level of anonimity.

[zhekinsp]

This is not the surprise. Regulation pressure especialy in the KYC part as well as anti-money laundering and terorrism financing is geting stonger and they are actualy forcedto obey such regulations in order to keep their business and to run it legitimately. But this also represents certain level of protection for users, despite the lower level of anonimity.

Yes,so it is good for the people who are earning money in legitimate ways and harder for the people who do it in wrong way.So I am free to provide any details reqired to continue to trade because I am not a whale or a millionaire.

But who is imposong these kind of restrictions to that site?their governments or the owner itself want the money laundering to be stopped.

[Baofeng]

This is not the surprise. Regulation pressure especialy in the KYC part as well as anti-money laundering and terorrism financing is geting stonger and they are actualy forcedto obey such regulations in order to keep their business and to run it legitimately. But this also represents certain level of protection for users, despite the lower level of anonimity.

Times has really changed and everyone's eyes is on crypto. I haven't imagine and never thought the Localbitcoins will also be targeted by regulators, unfortunately the worst scenario has happened and we can't do anything by to comply and be fully KYC compliant before you can do personal trades.

Well starting this 2018 crypto has been put into their radar specially when the price goes almost $20K and now governments are putting pressure on anything that involves crypto. I just don't like government saying that they are doing it to curb out scam, I'm sure that they want to tax us and have a piece of everything.

[magneto]

This is not the surprise. Regulation pressure especialy in the KYC part as well as anti-money laundering and terorrism financing is geting stonger and they are actualy forcedto obey such regulations in order to keep their business and to run it legitimately. But this also represents certain level of protection for users, despite the lower level of anonimity.

It's definitely not the surprise, but the surprise is how quickly they switched from "recommending" people with higher trade volumes to verify their ID, to actually requiring them to present ID before they can resume trading. That was surprising to me, I would have expected that process to take much longer than it actually did.

Also, it seems like that although I only got the ban a few days ago, people have been getting it as early as a month ago. Makes me wonder if this is actually a universal move across the entire platform.

All advertisers had to verify themselves before this anyways, and also since Localbitcoins was already protected by escrow (that's how it works), as well as the fact that LBC accounts will still be traded on the underground markets after this ban, I don't see how it really protects the users any more than it had previously.

[btccrusher]

Localbitcoins has been updated their terms and privacy policy. Here is a short list of significant change:
1. One user 1 Account. (Must be at least 16 years old)
2. Need Identity verification (The process is quite simple and fast)
3. Strict rules for account suspension.

Check out details changes here https://localbitcoins.com/gdpr

[TheQuin]

2. Need Identity verification (The process is quite simple and fast)

They still use the phrase 'may be required'.

Identity Verification
In order to ensure LocalBitcoins remains a safe platform for all of our customers we may require you to verify your identity to access part of the services we offer. Identity verification may be required when you create advertisements, pass certain trade volume limits, during trade disputes, fraud investigations, and to ensure account ownership. As part of our ID verification process we require you to provide us with your full name as well as documents and photographs that verify your identity.

In certain situations we may require enhanced identity verification. This may include requirements to verify details or sources of funds regarding payments you have made or received during trades on LocalBitcoins as well as bitcoin transactions that you’ve sent or received from your LocalBitcoins account.

ID verified accounts have a clear owner which makes it easy to return access to you if you lose all access to your account. It is very hard or impossible to return access to accounts that are unverified, even if you know your username, as it is difficult to identify the original account owner.

This still sort of indicates it isn't being done universally across all customers and/or locations. Paragraph 2 is a bit more disturbing.

[timerland]

In certain situations we may require enhanced identity verification. This may include requirements to verify details or sources of funds regarding payments you have made or received during trades on LocalBitcoins as well as bitcoin transactions that you’ve sent or received from your LocalBitcoins account.

Absolutely, that is very, very disturbing.

This means regardless of if you are unverified or verified, there is still the possibility that localbitcoins will ask you to provide proof for the fund sources, and that is a complete nightmare to have to go through as a AML measure. Just look at the amount of people currently getting their funds held up by HitBTC right at this moment, being asked for every detail of their source of funds.

I don't know if this clause was always there, or was only recently added. But the fact that the ID verification measures are tightening suggests that it could soon become much worse than what it is right now. Because this clause basically says that we can hold your funds, as well as you ban you from trading.

[TheQuin]

I don't know if this clause was always there, or was only recently added. But the fact that the ID verification measures are tightening suggests that it could soon become much worse than what it is right now. Because this clause basically says that we can hold your funds, as well as you ban you from trading.

I've had my account since 2013 which was probably the last time I read the ToS until I got that email yesterday. So I've got no idea if that's new or not either.

I never hold much coin there anyway, but that certainly doesn't encourage me to start doing so.

[timerland]

I don't know if this clause was always there, or was only recently added. But the fact that the ID verification measures are tightening suggests that it could soon become much worse than what it is right now. Because this clause basically says that we can hold your funds, as well as you ban you from trading.

I've had my account since 2013 which was probably the last time I read the ToS until I got that email yesterday. So I've got no idea if that's new or not either.

I never hold much coin there anyway, but that certainly doesn't encourage me to start doing so.

Right.

But yeah, I agree. If there is such hidden clause that is completely vague with no definitions of when this clause will ever be applicable, and the fact that your account balance can be frozen at any given time just based on baseless assumptions without proof, and as a result you having to go through a sophisticated verification process, even if you are already verified, then holding big amounts of coins on there is dumb.

Whether or not this is a newly added clause, hopefully traders, specifically traders with large volume realize that there is this risk involved in storing large amounts on LBC, and LBC has demonstrated that they are tightening the rules, which further increase risks of a suspended/frozen account.

[pugman]

Whether or not this is a newly added clause, hopefully traders, specifically traders with large volume realize that there is this risk involved in storing large amounts on LBC, and LBC has demonstrated that they are tightening the rules, which further increase risks of a suspended/frozen account.

This is really bad. LBC is one of the very best platforms for trading,and the risk involved is comparatively lesser than other trading platforms because of the presence of an online escrow.I don't see why verifying is a problem here,as it is you are already revealing your name,bank account details etc for every trade. Only LBC's staff will be able to look through your details(its not good but it is not that bad either for such to happen). If you're willing to trade more than atleast 1BTC,you might as well verify your account right from the beginning.

[Leonard2016]

Does it consider affiliate profits too?
I made an account there and didn't pass the KYC yet but I got bunch of referrals there  , Now I need to pass kyc to withdraw my profits from my referrals?

[magneto]

Does it consider affiliate profits too?
I made an account there and didn't pass the KYC yet but I got bunch of referrals there  , Now I need to pass kyc to withdraw my profits from my referrals?

Most likely not... The restriction that is placed on you after you hit a trade volume threshold only restricts your trading, and doesn't restrict you withdrawing your BTC from the platform. At least, not yet.

Plus, I doubt that the bunch of referrals that you have will generate you any sort of significant earning anyways, and right now LocalBitcoins is only targeting users with significant amounts traded over the past 12 months.

Again, keep an eye out for new rules etc., LBC has changed a lot over the past few months.

[ajochems]

So we all knew that LBC was already going down the path of forced verification for advertisers, and they made the move that all advertisers will have to verify themselves before they can trade back in January.. And then later there was a warning for all people who had a high trade volume and "recommended" that they verify their identity. But I never expected them to actually restrict somewhat high volume traders so fast, since I was greeted with this message:

You need to verify your identity before you can continue trading. Proceed to verify your identity

I mean, you could still create new accounts and trade from them anonymously, but it's a tedious process to go through email and phone verification all the time. And a lot of offers won't be available to you because of the fact that you can't consistently trade up for a good reputation.

Time to move to a new p2p trading platform?

I had using this LBC more than a year,the main advantage of this site is they will provide escrow for every trade.The compulsory submission of Identity is good from my point of view.Because ,no fake account will be created.If they have multiple accounts,the trader may scam with any one account.I like the system of One Account for one user.With all this,you can get back the bitcoin .If you released before the transaction by contacting to Support of LBC.

[Kakmakr]

The unfortunate side of this is that people will have to turn to the more shady platforms to trade <Peer-to-peer> anonymously.    You can still use these platforms for smaller trades, but it is risky in countries where Bitcoin is being "banned". <Like we saw happening when China temporarily closed the Bitcoin exchanges>

I have built up a "trusted" network of friends for these Peer-to-peer trades over time and I can even trade with them, without using escrow services, but newbies will unfortunately not have that privilege. 

[TheQuin]

I have built up a "trusted" network of friends for these Peer-to-peer trades over time and I can even trade with them, without using escrow services, but newbies will unfortunately not have that privilege. 

It could end up making the currency exchange board on this forum far more active.

[glowing10]

The unfortunate side of this is that people will have to turn to the more shady platforms to trade <Peer-to-peer> anonymously.    You can still use these platforms for smaller trades, but it is risky in countries where Bitcoin is being "banned". <Like we saw happening when China temporarily closed the Bitcoin exchanges>

I have built up a "trusted" network of friends for these Peer-to-peer trades over time and I can even trade with them, without using escrow services, but newbies will unfortunately not have that privilege. 

With this policy I think people will move away form localbitcoin slowly and steadily and will start using some other exchange or their is a huge scope for something like localbitcoin to come up and capture the market easily. So the market is now wide open for new players to eneter in this space.

[magneto]

The unfortunate side of this is that people will have to turn to the more shady platforms to trade <Peer-to-peer> anonymously.    You can still use these platforms for smaller trades, but it is risky in countries where Bitcoin is being "banned". <Like we saw happening when China temporarily closed the Bitcoin exchanges>

I have built up a "trusted" network of friends for these Peer-to-peer trades over time and I can even trade with them, without using escrow services, but newbies will unfortunately not have that privilege. 

Yes, there are definitely shadier alternatives that I'd rather not use, but people may be forced into using. A lot of current casual buyers/sellers may also have to turn to centralised exchanger services with no escrow protection, which is a big concern.

For whoever that doesn't know yet, Localbitcoins gave out an entirely new and updated terms and conditions a few days back as well: https://localbitcoins.com/gdpr

These restrictions don't really affect newbies yet, though. They still have a chance to trade without significant volume. Although key word is *yet*. We don't know if Localbitcoins is going to follow current guidelines forever.