Bitcoin in the Courtroom - Yeah, Crypto Going Mainstream!

[freedomgo]

I know the government has recognized crypto for a while now, but this news shows that sooner or later, cases like these will become more common. For a lawyer or judge to make the right decision, they should first educate themselves about crypto. The fact that they're already studying it is a good step, as it will help regulators and other professionals better understand Bitcoin.

CANADIAN COURT ORDERS $1.2M REPAYMENT IN BITCOIN LOAN CASE

A court in British Columbia has ruled that Daniel Tambosso must repay Hung Nguyen $1.2 million for a loan of 22 bitcoins provided in 2021.

Nguyen, a real estate agent, argued that the loan represented his life savings, and Daniel's failure to repay has caused severe financial and mental distress.

Daniel claimed he was a victim of a Ponzi scheme and had borrowed the bitcoins to recover misappropriated funds linked to Satoshi Nakamoto.

The judge rejected this defense, citing basic contract law, and ordered Daniel to repay the loan.

[ImThour]

Haha, this is not how I want Bitcoin to go mainstream but yea, it counts. The whole situation here is pretty messy and I am sure, the judge is asking Daniel to repay the amount in dollars and not Bitcoin? Let me know If I am wrong. Also, I don't have any idea how Satoshi is being dragged into this conversation. It's just another scam case and this time, it was Bitcoin. Nothing extraordinary though.

[Wiwo]

Haha, this is not how I want Bitcoin to go mainstream but yea, it counts. The whole situation here is pretty messy and I am sure, the judge is asking Daniel to repay the amount in dollars and not Bitcoin? Let me know If I am wrong. Also, I don't have any idea how Satoshi is being dragged into this conversation. It's just another scam case and this time, it was Bitcoin. Nothing extraordinary though.

Yeah this is not pretty exciting news for me, at least not to mentioned mainstream recognition, bitcoin have been in athe court room for a while now and each time, it all for the bad news, that is bitcoin being caught up as a tool by bad actors, just like in this case that bitcoin is being used for ponzi.

This is not how I want bitcoin to be recognised, because with this, there is nothing different from what the government have being claiming that bitcoin is a dark Web money movement tool.

[TheUltraElite]

Well bitcoin's notoriety started with Ponzi schemes and MLM, bitcoin itself being called a ponzi scheme in a recurring thread when I first visited the forum - no surprise that bitcoin is getting popular with being the mode of payment in ponzi schemes.

Few noteworthy things:

1. Its a court in Canada, a developed country. I cant begin to imagine when this will be coming to developing countries where politicians speak bad in the name of crypto without understanding even a thing about it. Judges are better though, they are quick learners, but politicians run the country.

2. This case is about resolution of a loan default. This is a good step for the future of bitcoin based lending.

3. Once again the reason for taking the loan was to invest in something risky. This type of mentality needs to change - because I care too much about my own money, I invest using a loan - heck, when you take a loan, you a signing a contract law, you are responsible for that money's loss.

[Cryptohygenic]

CANADIAN COURT ORDERS $1.2M REPAYMENT IN BITCOIN LOAN CASE

A court in British Columbia has ruled that Daniel Tambosso must repay Hung Nguyen $1.2 million for a loan of 22 bitcoins provided in 2021.

Nguyen, a real estate agent, argued that the loan represented his life savings, and Daniel's failure to repay has caused severe financial and mental distress.

Daniel claimed he was a victim of a Ponzi scheme and had borrowed the bitcoins to recover misappropriated funds linked to Satoshi Nakamoto.

The judge rejected this defense, citing basic contract law, and ordered Daniel to repay the loan.

The judge was in a justification order and he must be learned enough not to give Daniel's unnecessary excuses of fallen victim to ponzi scheme.
The judge was not biased and not that he was actually mainstreaming on bitcoin but understood that since the fund was borrowed on bitcoin it still has to be repaid by bitcoin for Nguyen to keep up with his assets since he already claimed to have been devastated over Daniels inability to pay him back since then.
Tha was a a fair judgement though.

[Yaunfitda]

Haha, this is not how I want Bitcoin to go mainstream but yea, it counts. The whole situation here is pretty messy and I am sure, the judge is asking Daniel to repay the amount in dollars and not Bitcoin? Let me know If I am wrong. Also, I don't have any idea how Satoshi is being dragged into this conversation. It's just another scam case and this time, it was Bitcoin. Nothing extraordinary though.

Yes, it was in dollars, the way I understand it, it was the price of 22 Bitcoin that time, give or take a few thousand dollars depending on the exchange rate + interest. He borrowed 18 BTC then the next day he borrowed 4 more to make it 22 BTC.

Daniel Tambosso invested it and he fall for a scam that's why he wasn't able to pay Mr. Nguyen in the next 48 hours (that was the agreement). I don't think this kind of news though will bring Bitcoin into mainstream, on the contrary, this is a very negative news in my opinion.

[hugeblack]

In these cases, if there is no agreement on how to pay, then the payment will most likely be in the local currency, in this case Canadian Dollar ($), although I do not know how Satoshi's name was included in such a case. Lending Bitcoin is the last thing you should do, especially since in the event of default, payment may be made in the local currency, which may be worth less, and even in the event of repayment of the loan in Bitcoin, its value may have decreased by more than the value of the loan.

[MusaMohamed]

In these cases, if there is no agreement on how to pay, then the payment will most likely be in the local currency, in this case Canadian Dollar ($), although I do not know how Satoshi's name was included in such a case.

It's same with bankruptcy, compensation to users will be paid in fiat currency and the pain is its value is at the time of bankruptcy or a hack, like Mt.Gox, FTX exchanges while after several years, Bitcoin price rose a lot and $1000 in bitcoin in 2013 can be very diferent than $1000 in bitcoin in 2024. Even the fiasco of FTX is already painful experience for their customers, it's really hard to explain how victims of Mt.Gox exchange feel.

Lending Bitcoin is the last thing you should do, especially since in the event of default, payment may be made in the local currency, which may be worth less, and even in the event of repayment of the loan in Bitcoin, its value may have decreased by more than the value of the loan.

If thing goes well, loan interest will be paid in fiat currency and collateral of the loan will be paid / returned in bitcoin. But as said, it's for good case, and in reality bad case like the deal between Tambosso and Mr. Hung Nguyen, is bad and it's like nightmare for the lender.

Honestly if I was him, I would not give that loan. 22 BTC is huge fortune and the lender in this case took very big risk.

There are about 153,000 addresses that hold 10+ BTC.
https://www.bitcoinmagazinepro.com/charts/addresses-greater-than-10-btc/

[ABCbits]

Bitcoin or cryptocurrency have mentioned in courts since many years ago, so i believe some lawyer and judge already learns about Bitcoin. And about this particular case, it seems the judge ask to repay using early 2021's Bitcoin price, since currently 1 BTC is about 86000 CAD[1]. So the victim missed still suffer some loss, assuming he planned to HODL Bitcoin for long time.

[1] https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/bitcoin/cad

[Majestic-milf]

Haha, this is not how I want Bitcoin to go mainstream but yea, it counts. The whole situation here is pretty messy and I am sure, the judge is asking Daniel to repay the amount in dollars and not Bitcoin? Let me know If I am wrong. Also, I don't have any idea how Satoshi is being dragged into this conversation. It's just another scam case and this time, it was Bitcoin. Nothing extraordinary though.

Any win is a win no matter how small and I'm glad that the court ruled in Mr Nguyen's favor because it seemed Daniel was punishing him for an offense he knew nothing about just because he loaned him the funds in Bitcoin.

Maybe the $1.2m will be paid back in Bitcoin although it wasn't stated there but it will be logical for it to be done that way since their initial transaction was done via Bitcoin.

[MusaMohamed]

Maybe the $1.2m will be paid back in Bitcoin although it wasn't stated there but it will be logical for it to be done that way since their initial transaction was done via Bitcoin.

Repayment required by the court, is in cash equivalent of 22 BTC in 2021, and not in bitcoins.

The interior of a B.C. Supreme courtroom. A judge has ordered a B.C. man to repay $1.2 million as the cash equivalent of a 22 bitcoin loan. (Ben Nelms/CBC)

An article with more details
Bitcoin scheme leads to financial ruin, legal battle for B.C. men
First let's see appealing words from Daniel, that are funny and unacceptable.

Meanwhile, Tambosso — who told the CBC he plans to appeal — claims he has also been left penniless, the victim of an "elaborate scam" that saw him borrow funds from Nguyen as he threw good money after bad in the hopes of unlocking a blockchain wallet worth billions.

"My intentions were genuine, with no desire to misappropriate his bitcoins," Tambosso wrote in an affidavit.

After reading through it, I saw reason why Mr. Hung Nguyen fell to this scam deal.

"Mr. Tambosso told Mr. Nguyen that the payoff could be huge: if the ... procedure was successful, Mr. Nguyen would receive 1,750 bitcoins as compensation for the loan," Fitzpatrick said.

Lending 22 BTC and when the deal completes, he will receive 1,750 BTC. This is too good to be true and as a cryptocurrency investor since 2017, how did Mr. Hung Nguyen fall to this scam deal?

A more interesting step but in Mr. Hung Nguyen's side, it's stupid. He believed in a screenshot that should never be a proof in cryptocurrency. If he needs proof, he will ask Daniel to sign a Bitcoin message with private key.

So did a "screenshot of a blockchain wallet (presumably that of Mr. Tambosso) showing a balance in excess of $5.2 billion in bitcoin."

Nguyen agreed to provide a short-term loan, and the two men signed a first contract for 18 bitcoins.

[freedomgo]

2. This case is about resolution of a loan default. This is a good step for the future of bitcoin based lending.

I was about to use lending in the forum as an example based on your statement about them having security to collect from defaulted loans, but then I realized it’s impossible since these borrowers are anonymous. So, a better example would be for legitimate lending businesses where borrowers have to go through KYC and character investigation before getting approved for a loan.

[Z-tight]

BTC is a currency, if you take a loan in BTC or in any other currency or asset, you have to pay back, isn't it as simple as that, the defendants defense that he was scammed in a ponzi scheme does not protect them from repaying their loan to the creditor.

Tambosso, claiming to be a victim of a Ponzi scheme, argued that he borrowed bitcoins to recover his misappropriated cryptocurrency through a supposed software linked to Satoshi Nakamoto, the purported creator of bitcoin.

So i see that it was indeed a crypto recovery scam, the defendant borrowed BTC from the plaintiff, because he thought he had found a service that could help him recover coins that were stolen from him in the past, how stupid can one be. So he kept on sending funds he borrowed to the scammers, until he sent everything and even borrowed some more from a different person, the story sound very funny and unbelievable and it is good that the judge ordered him to repay the creditor.

[Ambatman]

This isn't the first time and definitely won't be the last that a Bitcoin or crypto related is entering the court.
But here contract law was implemented in respect to the Loan.
I guess it's been integrated now and maybe could or already an option for a lawyer to pursue as an option.
Judicial precedence (case law) could be made from all this cases.
Loaning a Bitcoin? that was a risky and bold move and the case of defending that he was scammed by a name Satoshi Nakamoto doesn't concern the court much.
Is contract with Nguyen, is different from that of the scammer.
The legal system around Bitcoin is still growing, and would soon have proper laws to regulate offences and pleas.

[kryptqnick]

It's an unfortunate story with one person loaning BTC to another, but then that person losing BTC due to a scam (although I don't think Satoshi Nakamoto has anything to do with it). If you owe money, you do need to repay it, and it doesn't matter that you lost it yourself, I guess. But if Daniel simply has no means of repaying it (and it's a ton of money), then I'm not sure how it can move forward. In any case, courts working on such cases demonstrate that Bitcoin as something of value is recognised, so obligations similar to those with other financial loans apply here.

[Z-tight]

It's an unfortunate story with one person loaning BTC to another, but then that person losing BTC due to a scam (although I don't think Satoshi Nakamoto has anything to do with it).

You don't think? Lol, obviously it had nothing to do with Satoshi Nakamoto, the scammers found a way to use the name of the creator of BTC to build their scam, and as we can see someone fell for it, and i am sure there would be more victims. I don't know how the defendant is going to be able to make the repayment now that the court has given their verdict, since the defendant claims that they have lost all of their funds.

[AmoreJaz]

It's an unfortunate story with one person loaning BTC to another, but then that person losing BTC due to a scam (although I don't think Satoshi Nakamoto has anything to do with it).

You don't think? Lol, obviously it had nothing to do with Satoshi Nakamoto, the scammers found a way to use the name of the creator of BTC to build their scam, and as we can see someone fell for it, and i am sure there would be more victims. I don't know how the defendant is going to be able to make the repayment now that the court has given their verdict, since the defendant claims that they have lost all of their funds.

Of course, scammers are using the name of Nakamoto to extract money from naive people. It was already in 2021 when this case happened, so more than likely Daniel encountered a scammer or one of those failed ponzi schemes in crypto. We had a lot of those scam projects and up until now, there are still some of them.

[syedakhlaque]

In different countries of the world, the discussion of whether Bitcoin is legal or illegal has been going on for a long time. I think awareness like Jess will increase with time. And people will become aware of the power and utility of Bitcoin and this problem will die down automatically. What is needed today is that special attention should be paid to the education and training of Bitcoin. As the awareness of lawyers, judges and chief justices increased in this matter. The nations of the world will agree to give it legal status

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

The judge doesn't seem like who doesn't know the judgment he is making. Even if he doesn't have any idea of Bitcoin but he is prompting the borrower to repay the loan and of actually there was a contract of repayment between the two parties, then the borrower needs to repay the loan without giving any excuse of how he was scammed by any Ponzi scheme. With my calculation, I think they are calculating the 22 Bitcoin with the current rate.

[icalical]

Not the best scenario for Bitcoin to go mainstream, but it still nice to see that some Judges appear to learn about crypto a little more, as evidenced by this judgment regarding the return of $1.2 million worth of Bitcoin. The judgment from the court in British Columbia shows basic contract law still applies, even with Bitcoin loans and could be one solid precedent for the future.

It is encouraging that courts are finally catching up with the crypto space, but then again, it exposes the other side of the coin which is how complex the crypto space is and can therefore confuse some people into signing a deal like this. That's a good reminder for those using Bitcoin in any kind of transaction or legal agreement to ensure solid contracts in order not to face legal misfiring at some point.