SCAM EXCHANGE: Openchange (Openchange.cash) (PARTIALLY SOLVED)

[LoyceV]

No exchange can confiscate your funds legally without a court order, they can freeze your account for a period but doing so because you have failed KYC would require them to inform the authorities where they operate about this transaction immediately. There is no such thing as these funds look stolen then we freeze it and we unfreeze it the moment you send us a pic of an id, this is illegal on so many levels it doesn't even need to be discussed.

Very well explained. This is what makes "Openchange" look like a scam!

[1714234663]

1714234663

[1714234663]

1714234663

[1714234663]

1714234663

[saxydev]

No exchange can confiscate your funds legally without a court order, they can freeze your account for a period but doing so because you have failed KYC would require them to inform the authorities where they operate about this transaction immediately. There is no such thing as these funds look stolen then we freeze it and we unfreeze it the moment you send us a pic of an id, this is illegal on so many levels it doesn't even need to be discussed.

Very well explained. This is what makes "Openchange" look like a scam!

You are right here. No exchange can hold your funds permanently, if there is a problem authorities get involved.

Please do quote any law from any country, territory, or fantasy world on this planetthat says something like this , since FATF says something different

In every country that has decent money laundering laws you have to. Any input of your money need to be declared and knowledge how/where you got the money. You can't be paid by cartel to develope candy websites and have no troubles..

I understand that most of you focus on the privacy and fuck the government policies, but laws are laws and laws are accepted by us; you can't just fuck them, this is why we live in a society with rules.

Could you explain why you said "It is clearly 100% money laundering"? While 94.89... is quite high, i wouldn't say that when doesn't meet 95% or 99% confidence interval.

This is what I do 14 hours a day. I have a big database which works like a spider and identifies several inputs which are already tagged as used in illegal transactions.

To your knowledge, out of 40k addresses and 3.1 mil inputs (all used for illegal activities) i got, only 4% have been through a mixer (those mixers I can identify, such as chipmixer).

[DireWolfM14]

No exchange can confiscate your funds legally without a court order, they can freeze your account for a period but doing so because you have failed KYC would require them to inform the authorities where they operate about this transaction immediately. There is no such thing as these funds look stolen then we freeze it and we unfreeze it the moment you send us a pic of an id, this is illegal on so many levels it doesn't even need to be discussed.

Very well explained. This is what makes "Openchange" look like a scam!

At this point, it looks like Openchange is no different than Freewallet.

[Janyiah201]

Yes, I use Chipmixer and Monero, just like I use VPN and TOR, because I have something to hide, it's my privacy.

Why I tried to exchange ChipMixer's chip to Monero, I could explain, but does that matter?


WHAT DOES MATTER:

• They have TOS, but if I wanted to settle this in court, which court have jurisdiction? They don't have company, they hide their names.
• I have found that Openchange lie and hide their identities and use fake names and fake verified accounts to make payments.
• They are Russians, based in Russia, speak very poor English, but they use, for example, multiple Paypal accounts with American names and addresses. And there is probably more, I'm still investigating.
• They are in business for a long time, but the current domain is relatively new, because their previous was seized. I still don't know all the details.

Who would send their documents and selfie and many more things they asked to site like this one?

[stompix]

I understand that most of you focus on the privacy and fuck the government policies, but laws are laws and laws are accepted by us; you can't just fuck them, this is why we live in a society with rules.

Exactly that's why I'm asking you about the laws, show me the laws where an exchange a bank, a money transmitter, a marketplace,a merchant can confiscate user funds or merchandise on suspicion of money laundering. AML rules don't give you rights on any property of a customer nor does a picture of an ID validate the source and legitimacy of those funds. /end.

If a cop stops me in the middle of the night because my plate seems stolen he won't let me get away if I just show him a legit ID. If he realizes the car is stolen he won't drive it to his house and wait there for the real owner to come and pick it up if he has matching keys while all the time using that car for UBER deliveries.

If an exchange determines by his own means the funds are stolen it can only freeze the assets and wait for his filling with a money-laundering task force to be accepted or solved, if a prosecutor denies the case then it must return the funds no matter what his beliefs are or face criminal charge themselves. /end

This is what I do 14 hours a day. I have a big database which works like a spider and identifies several inputs which are already tagged as used in illegal transactions.

You can do whatever you want in your spare time, you are no prosecutor, you are no judge and neither is openchange so your tagging just as theirs has zero value in real life outside your make-believe fantasy.

[saxydev]

I understand that most of you focus on the privacy and fuck the government policies, but laws are laws and laws are accepted by us; you can't just fuck them, this is why we live in a society with rules.

Exactly that's why I'm asking you about the laws, show me the laws where an exchange a bank, a money transmitter, a marketplace,a merchant can confiscate user funds or merchandise on suspicion of money laundering. AML rules don't give you rights on any property of a customer nor does a picture of an ID validate the source and legitimacy of those funds. /end.

If a cop stops me in the middle of the night because my plate seems stolen he won't let me get away if I just show him a legit ID. If he realizes the car is stolen he won't drive it to his house and wait there for the real owner to come and pick it up if he has matching keys while all the time using that car for UBER deliveries.

If an exchange determines by his own means the funds are stolen it can only freeze the assets and wait for his filling with a money-laundering task force to be accepted or solved, if a prosecutor denies the case then it must return the funds no matter what his beliefs are or face criminal charge themselves. /end

This is what I do 14 hours a day. I have a big database which works like a spider and identifies several inputs which are already tagged as used in illegal transactions.

You can do whatever you want in your spare time, you are no prosecutor, you are no judge and neither is openchange so your tagging just as theirs has zero value in real life outside your make-believe fantasy.

?

Full application of the EU AML/CFT rules to the crypto sector
At present, only certain categories of crypto-asset service providers are included in the scope of EU
AML/CFT rules. The proposed reform will extend these rules to the entire crypto sector, obliging all
service providers to conduct due diligence on their customers. Today's amendments will ensure full
traceability of crypto-asset transfers, such as Bitcoin, and will allow for prevention and detection of
their possible use for money laundering or terrorism financing. In addition, anonymous crypto asset
wallets will be prohibited, fully applying EU AML/CFT rules to the crypto sector.

sexy?

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1596452256370&uri=CELEX:52020DC0605
https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/aml-ctf-lawyers-training-manuals_en
https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/210720-anti-money-laundering-countering-financing-terrorism_en#transfer (this is revision of a treaty)
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX%3A32014L0042&qid=1541682532524&from=EN

[stompix]

?

Full application of the EU AML/CFT rules to the crypto sector
At present, only certain categories of crypto-asset service providers are included in the scope of EU
AML/CFT rules. The proposed reform will extend these rules to the entire crypto sector, obliging all
service providers to conduct due diligence on their customers. Today's amendments will ensure full
traceability of crypto-asset transfers, such as Bitcoin, and will allow for prevention and detection of
their possible use for money laundering or terrorism financing. In addition, anonymous crypto asset
wallets will be prohibited, fully applying EU AML/CFT rules to the crypto sector.

sexy?

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1596452256370&uri=CELEX:52020DC0605
https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/aml-ctf-lawyers-training-manuals_en
https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/210720-anti-money-laundering-countering-financing-terrorism_en#transfer (this is revision of a treaty)
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX%3A32014L0042&qid=1541682532524&from=EN

Thank you for showing me you know how to use google...
The first paragraph is no law, in case you didn't know that.

The first link:
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1596452256370&uri=CELEX:52020DC0605
Is a briefing, you can see large in bold letters "communication"

The second link:
https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/aml-ctf-lawyers-training-manuals_en
Is a training manual for lawyers, probably it will come to a surprise for you but all that is for criminal cases, aka things that are being solved in a court

The third link:
https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/210720-anti-money-laundering-countering-financing-terrorism_en#transfer (this is revision of a treaty)
Yup, it's revision:

The AML authority should be operational in 2024 and will start the work of direct supervision slightly later, once the directive has been transposed and the new rules start to apply.

So openchange uses laws from the future just like you, nicely done

The fourth link:
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX%3A32014L0042&qid=1541682532524&from=EN

Finally, let's see some laws oh wait...but let's leave it like that:

(1) The main motive for cross-border organised crime, including mafia-type criminal organisation, is financial gain. As
a consequence, competent authorities should be given the means to trace, freeze, manage and confiscate the
proceeds of crime.

Neither you nor openchange are competent authorities

) In the confiscation of instrumentalities and proceeds of crime following a final decision of a court and of property
of equivalent value to those instrumentalities and proceeds, the broad concept of criminal offences covered by this
Directive should apply. Framework Decision 2001/500/JHA requires Member States to enable the confiscation of
instrumentalities and proceeds of crime following a final conviction and to enable the confiscation of property the
value of which corresponds to such instrumentalities and proceeds.

Neither you nor openchange are a court so your final decision means nothing

Confiscation leads to the final deprivation of property. However, preservation of property can be a prerequisite to
confiscation and can be of importance for the enforcement of a confiscation order. Property is preserved by means
of freezing. In order to prevent the dissipation of property before a freezing order can be issued, the competent
authorities in the Member States should be empowered to take immediate action in order to secure such property.

Has openchange offered support to the competent authority to preserve the funds, do they have a court order mandating a confiscation order?

And the final sexy paragraph:

(34) The purpose of communicating the freezing order is, inter alia, to allow the affected person to challenge the order.
Therefore, such communication should indicate, at least briefly, the reason or reasons for the order concerned, it
being understood that such indication can be very succinct.

What order? Has openchage filled a case with a prosecutor in order for this order to exist?

Next time when I ask you to quote the law, please do QUOTE the law, don't be a smartass tossing google links you haven't ever read. I've done this kind of stuff in the EU for enough time to know when somebody is bullshiting about being a lawyer or knowing what laws are broken in a case

[saxydev]

@stompix I am very sorry for you! I give up on it. But I wish you the best in your ventures, you sound like an ancien collègue who knew everything but irl he was left in the sun. On sunday you can text me on discord to continue the conversation and I'll show you where you are wrong on at least 18 states in EU.

[o_e_l_e_o]

"Hey everybody I use Chipmixer " it's easy to say that why hiding behind a username and a keyboard.
If you are right go ahead show your KYC and tell the people like a centralized exchange you used a mixing service.

You seem to fundamentally misunderstand the whole point of a mixer or why someone would want to keep their privacy. And for the record, I've never completely KYC with any crypto service ever, and I have no intention of starting now.

Who would send their documents and selfie and many more things they asked to site like this one?

I wouldn't trust them to refund your money even if you did send the things the are asking, and the risk of your documents ending up on some darknet market or being used by someone else for some shady activity is extremely high.


I've never used BestChange, but I find it very questionable that they allow exchanges to simply close claims like this. OP has obviously not been refunded, but OpenChange have now closed his claim 24 times without resolving it. Looking back through their previous ratings, there seem to be a number of other issues which have been closed without being resolved. BestChange therefore show OpenChange as having an unblemished 100% positive feedback, which is obviously not the case. Such a system allows any exchange to keep a perfect record so long as they are more determined than their victims, who will eventually give up renewing their claims.

[Poker Player]

Where is it illegal to ensure the privacy your funds?  

Well, the laws that exist at least in Europe illegitimize privacy in the use of funds at least from medium amounts.  Let's make an analysis.

If you get paid for a job that either shows up directly on a tax return or you are legally obligated to declare it. In other words, the income from your work is not private at all. If you get money for selling a house, for example, neither.

In the European Union, all transactions between member countries that exceed 10,000 euros ($10,400) are automatically reported to the authorities, and those within countries have lower limits, such as 2,500 euros. Those of lesser amounts are obviously registered and available to the authorities if they request the data.

If you go to a country of the European Union, being a legal resident in the country, to open a bank account with "private" money that exceeds 10,000 euros, they will not open it if you cannot prove the origin of the funds.

There are countries like Italy, Spain or Portugal with a cash payment limit of 1,000 euros, which means that if you want to buy a fucking TV worth 1,000 euros you can not pay in banknotes and your name is registered in the transaction.

I would put the question the other way around. Do you think there is much time left legally speaking for services that are dedicated to obscuring the origin of funds? No upper limit at the top? In other words, an Italian buys a 1,000 euro TV in Italy and the transaction is obligatorily KYC. He makes a deposit in his bank of 5,000 euros and gets automatically reported to the authorities who are probably going to ask him to justify the origin of that money, and meanwhile that same Italian can mix 50 Bitcoins "for privacy?"

That leaving aside that I am not very clear on the basis of what legal vacuum mixers operate, because in normal conditions a company that provides services to Italian citizens, should charge VAT and pay it to the government of Italy, which I doubt very much that the mixers do.

[n0nce]

Who would send their documents and selfie and many more things they asked to site like this one?

I wouldn't trust them to refund your money even if you did send the things the are asking, and the risk of your documents ending up on some darknet market or being used by someone else for some shady activity is extremely high.

I'm quoting 1miau again

KYC is encouraging identity theft

Not saying Janyiah201 should procure fake identity information, just saying it could be a way to try getting those funds back. Assuming they do return the funds by just seeing some ID document, which of course makes no sense since it doesn't make 'criminal origin funds' suddenly 'non-criminal', but what do I know.

I've never used BestChange, but I find it very questionable that they allow exchanges to simply close claims like this. OP has obviously not been refunded, but OpenChange have now closed his claim 24 times without resolving it. Looking back through their previous ratings, there seem to be a number of other issues which have been closed without being resolved. BestChange therefore show OpenChange as having an unblemished 100% positive feedback, which is obviously not the case. Such a system allows any exchange to keep a perfect record so long as they are more determined than their victims, who will eventually give up renewing their claims.

Indeed; I got a positive impression of BestChange since browsing Bitcointalk, since respected community members wore the BestChange signature. But this case makes me hesitant to continue trusting BestChange in general. If BestChange ratings can so easily be manipulated, it begs the question of what use that site even is.

Where is it illegal to ensure the privacy your funds? 

Well, the laws that exist at least in Europe illegitimize privacy in the use of funds at least from medium amounts.  Let's make an analysis.
[...]

The whole tax subject is valid, but it's wrong that it requires giving up your privacy. For example, LoyceV has to pay wealth tax, but it doesn't require giving up privacy, since just has to tell the amount he owns, without providing addresses or public keys; thus the total of his holdings is known, but not when, if, and for what purchase, he moves funds in and out of his wallets.

[stompix]

Are you talking about law/legal in general or specific in Russia? Besides, there's another concern whether OP could be remain anonymous if OP decide to sue the exchange.

Laws in general, I mentioned the EU because a wannabe lawyer here thought he has a clue how things work, but AML rules are basically the same everywhere and in every country, Russia in a member of the FATF same regulation when it comes to this should apply. The main thing here is that exchange X, considers those funds to be illegal, coming from a theft, anything else, both those courses of actions are illegal:
- seizing the funds and releasing them on a simple ID check, personally I don't believe they have a license to even deal with personal checks
- seizing the funds without informing the cybercrime or equivalent police branch and not giving custody of those assets under the mentioned law enforcement

The thing those exchanges are doing is simply random scamming people and getting those funds for themselves, since as you mentioned, it's quite hard to think that most of them would file complaints about smaller sums, and if they do all the exchange has to do is send him his funds and grab another victim.

 

That leaving aside that I am not very clear on the basis of what legal vacuum mixers operate, because in normal conditions a company that provides services to Italian citizens, should charge VAT and pay it to the government of Italy, which I doubt very much that the mixers do.

Financial transactions in which the ownership of funds in question is changed through the transfer of funds that do not include any other services are excluded from VAT. Chipmixer would simply act like those coin machines in which you dump all coins and you get a banknote or the other way round.

[BlackHatCoiner]

Well, the laws that exist at least in Europe illegitimize privacy in the use of funds at least from medium amounts.

Exactly. Cash isn't considered a "good" option of merchants for most countries nowadays, because there are regulations that make them believe so. In my country, Greece, it is not legal to make a purchase worth of beyond 1,500 EUR with cash, as they say, to avoid tax evasion. You must only make it with bank accounts, credit/debit cards and cheques.

But, cash is used to protect your privacy, and therefore this regulation can be translated to "forbidding privacy protection to avoid tax evasion". If you want to get goosebumps, check other countries' cash payment limitations: https://www.europe-consommateurs.eu/en/shopping-internet/cash-payment-limitations.html. If your country doesn't have a limit yet, be sure that it'll someday do.

But this case makes me hesitant to continue trusting BestChange in general.

I'm stop trusting BestChange, and this incident was just the icing on the cake. They've been advertising other services that treated bitcoin as non-fungible in the past, with no problem. They even added a rule in which they recommend against talking about Ukrainian war, just because one of them had a political belief a stranger didn't approve of.

They put profit above business integrity.

[LoyceV]

I would put the question the other way around. Do you think there is much time left legally speaking for services that are dedicated to obscuring the origin of funds?

I think we have to fight for every bit of privacy we have left!

That leaving aside that I am not very clear on the basis of what legal vacuum mixers operate, because in normal conditions a company that provides services to Italian citizens, should charge VAT and pay it to the government of Italy, which I doubt very much that the mixers do.

There's no VAT on exchanging money, right? That would make buying dollars very expensive in Italy, and just as expensive to exchange them back after your vacation.

I'll take this post from another topic here:

From Janyiah's feedback:

Admin BestChange.com    June 30, 2022, 21:47
Hello!

There is no mark in monitoring about possible verification because verification is not carried out at the exchange service.
The situation with your order is another, the funds from you were not received by the exchange service and were frozen by the exchange, which requested verification, because the funds have the status Stolen 100%.

By creating and confirming your initial order, you have agreed to all the terms and conditions of the exchanger. The rule 7.7 of terms says about situations with frozen funds.
Verification is one of the most common and effective ways of following the AML and KYC policies.

In this case it is not possible to resolve this situation without providing the requested information to the exchange office.

Who is "the exchange" who didn't receive the funds but froze it anyway? You make it sound as if the exchanger doesn't own the deposit address they ask the user to send funds to (but again: they froze it anyway).

In this case “the exchange” is a custodial service which uses OpenChange to receive funds. That’s why although practically the funds were transferred within crypto wallets, but the accrual to the inner balance of OpenChange in this custodial service didn’t happened because of the highest AML-risk.

I still don't get it. Does this mean Janyiah sent his Bitcoin to a third party, and not to OpenChange? Who thought this is a good idea?

It now sounds like OpenChange uses deposit addresses owned by another exchange, and not their own funds. If that's the case, the Reserve: $175 804 859 probably isn't correct.

[DireWolfM14]

If you get paid for a job that either shows up directly on a tax return or you are legally obligated to declare it. In other words, the income from your work is not private at all. If you get money for selling a house, for example, neither.

In the European Union, all transactions between member countries that exceed 10,000 euros ($10,400) are automatically reported to the authorities, and those within countries have lower limits, such as 2,500 euros. Those of lesser amounts are obviously registered and available to the authorities if they request the data.

We have similar laws here in the US, cheating on taxes isn't a good idea no matter where you live.  But that's all it's about; i.e. they want to make sure to tax every penny they can.  Recently the Biden Administration announced they want the IRS to be informed every time an American deposits $600 of cash (or more) into their bank account.   Yes, $600!  Obviously that's not about crime or terrorism.  

Let's be real, if these same politicians cared about crime they wouldn't be enabling it.  They only care when they can use it as a bludgeon to gain more power, like "Gun Crime."  Just look at all the liberal DA's in major US cities who are decriminalizing drug crimes, thefts of up to $1000, or running over a mother pushing a stroller.  So, if you're a law abiding citizen you better report $600, but if you're a repeat offender you can get away stealing $1000, and possibly attempted murder.

These laws are intended to keep us under their control and afraid.  As for reporting the movement of your money, these laws are sold as an effort to prevent terrorism, or thwart drug cartels, and again I'll point to the politicians' actions rather than their words to decern their real agenda.

There are countries like Italy, Spain or Portugal with a cash payment limit of 1,000 euros, which means that if you want to buy a fucking TV worth 1,000 euros you can not pay in banknotes and your name is registered in the transaction.

This isn't an argument to stop using mixers, this is an argument for a revolution.  

[dkbit98]

Indeed; I got a positive impression of BestChange since browsing Bitcointalk, since respected community members wore the BestChange signature. But this case makes me hesitant to continue trusting BestChange in general. If BestChange ratings can so easily be manipulated, it begs the question of what use that site even is.

I didn't know how this ratings work but I certainly don't like it and I don't understand why would positive feedback be any different from negative feedback.
If they say how someone could abuse feedback for negative reviews, than I can say that anyone can do exactly the same thing for positive feedback to create fake reviews.

In my country, Greece, it is not legal to make a purchase worth of beyond 1,500 EUR with cash, as they say, to avoid tax evasion. You must only make it with bank accounts, credit/debit cards and cheques.

This is crazy, I don' understand how people accepted this rules
So that means you can't even buy a laptop, bike or cheap used car with cash if it's 1,501 euros?

It now sounds like OpenChange uses deposit addresses owned by another exchange, and not their own funds. If that's the case, the Reserve: $175 804 859 probably isn't correct.

I think they are probably using Binance and other similar centralized exchanges like that, and they use their own account for trading and taking percentage earnings.
Any exchange that uses third parties should notify users about that in their website.

[BlackHatCoiner]

This is crazy, I don' understand how people accepted this rules

Why? They don't have anything to hide. 

So that means you can't even buy a laptop, bike or cheap used car with cash if it's 1,501 euros?

Yes, because a minority uses cash to launder money, and we're really sensitive when it comes to minorities. We're willing to have our privacy invaded to discourage them do so. It's bad on behalf of them.

[Poker Player]

Financial transactions in which the ownership of funds in question is changed through the transfer of funds that do not include any other services are excluded from VAT. Chipmixer would simply act like those coin machines in which you dump all coins and you get a banknote or the other way round.

There's no VAT on exchanging money, right?

It is true, I had not thought of that, but I imagine that it does not operate as a regular company of which the Ministry of Finance of the respective countries have record, and less operating with Tor, I would not see much sense.

This isn't an argument to stop using mixers, this is an argument for a revolution. 

This is crazy, I don' understand how people accepted this rules

Why? They don't have anything to hide. 

Forget about revolutions in Europe to defend privacy. People accept it because in those countries it does not affect them and they see it as a measure against the rich. In those countries, the average monthly net salary is around €1,300. Add to that the fact that people have a mortgage, a car loan and some credit card or personal loan debt, and that they pay more and more frequently by credit card or cell phone, and you get that the vast majority of people have not seen €1,000 in banknotes in many years.  Add to this the mentality that the state is the best guarantor of citizen welfare, and you will see why no one protests.

Back to the central topic of the thread, I agree, especially with stompix who has explained it very well, that the exchange does not have the legal capacity to hold some funds that it suspects are laundered without informing the authorities, but I have been reading the comments on:

https://www.bestchange.com/openchange-exchanger.html

and something doesn't add up:

As we told you before, your funds has not been credited to our account, so we are unable to return them. We will be happy to do it when it possible.

Are they saying that it is an entity external to Openchange that has freezed the funds?

[o_e_l_e_o]

Are they saying that it is an entity external to Openchange that has freezed the funds?

That's exactly what it sounds like. See their other comments:

Funds from the client were not received by us, so the order cannot be completed.
We do not perform AML and KYC verification, we only request supporting documents upon the request of the exchange, about which we inform the client.

All you need is simple verification. What's the problem? Make photo and screenshots, that's all. After some time funds will be credited to our account and we will make refund.

Janyiah, we can pay the order only after coins deposited to wallet, as was mentioned before the coins are frozen due to AML checking at this moment

And this quote from their Terms of Service:

4.2 To receive Payins from Users, the Company uses the requisites of crypto exchanges. By sending a Payin, the User understands that he is not sending funds directly to the User's cold wallets, but to third-party accounts where the Company has accounts.

Sounds like OpenChange need to come clean here and tell OP which third party service is currently holding his coins ransom.

OP could also pursue this avenue:

7.6 The user has the right to receive the results of the audit and/or independently verify the correctness of the risk assessment.

I would be asking for the results of the audit so he can independently verify how they have decided that mixed coins are "100% stolen", since that is clearly and provably incorrect.

[LoyceV]

As we told you before, your funds has not been credited to our account, so we are unable to return them. We will be happy to do it when it possible.

Are they saying that it is an entity external to Openchange that has freezed the funds?

This is how I read it:
Anonymous scammer: Please pay me, on address X.
Customer: I've sent you 0.256 BTC.
Anonymous scammer: It's confirmed on the address, but the address isn't mine, so I didn't receive your payment. You're now going to have to send me all the documents I need to be able to commit identity fraud. Or you'll never see your money again.
Customer: WTF?