Solved

[mikel_012]

So what happens to the escrowed funds at Orangefren now that they can't help the victims of a service that falsely advertised itself as a no-KYC exchange?
They have delisted the service from the platform. Do they return the funds to the service and don't help the victim?
I see a loophole being exploited by other scammers right there.

From what I understood, they only refund with the escrow money if you use the swap with the link from the Orangefren. In the case when you go directly to the ghostswap website, there is money to save him

Yes, they continue to respond to us, albeit with a delay

But with any new information? Because to answer only "we are working on this" and "we can not give more information at this moment" it's the same as nothing.

[Benedesuuuk]

@OrangeFren , Could you please let me know—are you currently in contact with GS? GS hasn't responded for almost three weeks now—what's the status of their deposit with you?

Or maybe someone else is in touch with GS?

Yes, they continue to respond to us, albeit with a delay

Could you please ask them to reply to me for the first time in three weeks? I suspect they've just blocked me—they don't even read my messages on Telegram.

[Benedesuuuk]

So what happens to the escrowed funds at Orangefren now that they can't help the victims of a service that falsely advertised itself as a no-KYC exchange?
They have delisted the service from the platform. Do they return the funds to the service and don't help the victim?
I see a loophole being exploited by other scammers right there.

Yes, I've already written about this—that this could be a sweet spot for scammers. For example, we create a website and state that it's “No KYC,” then advertise on orangeFren and other services where victims are paid out only if they made the exchange via their link, and wait for people who will exchange large sums of money. If we see that they didn’t exchange via the link, we can block the exchange and say that the funds will be under review for, say, 10 years. Profit.

[Benedesuuuk]

@OrangeFren,  I strongly urge you not to return the deposit to GS until they have returned my funds. As they said, my funds are under suspicion for some reason; if that is the case, I am waiting for a document confirming that these funds have been seized by law enforcement, along with the contact information for the relevant law enforcement agencies so I can reach out to them for clarification and to potentially assist with the investigation. For now, this looks like fraud on GS’s part.

[OrangeFren]

@OrangeFren,  I strongly urge you not to return the deposit to GS until they have returned my funds. As they said, my funds are under suspicion for some reason; if that is the case, I am waiting for a document confirming that these funds have been seized by law enforcement, along with the contact information for the relevant law enforcement agencies so I can reach out to them for clarification and to potentially assist with the investigation. For now, this looks like fraud on GS’s part.

We're in no rush to return them their deposit. For what it's worth they haven't requested it back either.

[Benedesuuuk]

@OrangeFren,  I strongly urge you not to return the deposit to GS until they have returned my funds. As they said, my funds are under suspicion for some reason; if that is the case, I am waiting for a document confirming that these funds have been seized by law enforcement, along with the contact information for the relevant law enforcement agencies so I can reach out to them for clarification and to potentially assist with the investigation. For now, this looks like fraud on GS’s part.

We're in no rush to return them their deposit. For what it's worth they haven't requested it back either.

Thank you very much. So I'll just keep waiting for a response from GS. I don't know when they'll get in touch with me, but I hope it happens sooner or later, because they haven't even read my messages for three weeks.

[Benedesuuuk]

@OrangeFren,  I strongly urge you not to return the deposit to GS until they have returned my funds. As they said, my funds are under suspicion for some reason; if that is the case, I am waiting for a document confirming that these funds have been seized by law enforcement, along with the contact information for the relevant law enforcement agencies so I can reach out to them for clarification and to potentially assist with the investigation. For now, this looks like fraud on GS’s part.

We're in no rush to return them their deposit. For what it's worth they haven't requested it back either.

Good afternoon! Could you please message the exchange (GhostSwap) and ask them to unblock me on Telegram? (As I mentioned earlier, they haven't read my messages on Telegram for over three weeks.)

[examplens]

I’m also small amount of security deposit holder for GhostSwap. Why didn’t even reach me before doing that swap? I would’ve helped you swap those amounts easily. I wish you’d contacted me first.

Sorry about that.

Also, I’m reaching out to GhostSwap to see how it works, going to check it out now.

Trêvoid, have you ever received a concrete answer from Ghostswap regarding this case? Can you check what their current position is on this, if you still have a partner relationship and maintain communication?
Given that they don't seem worried about being removed from Orangefren, I see no room for optimism in this case.

[Trêvoid]

I’m also small amount of security deposit holder for GhostSwap. Why didn’t even reach me before doing that swap? I would’ve helped you swap those amounts easily. I wish you’d contacted me first.

Sorry about that.

Also, I’m reaching out to GhostSwap to see how it works, going to check it out now.

Trêvoid, have you ever received a concrete answer from Ghostswap regarding this case? Can you check what their current position is on this, if you still have a partner relationship and maintain communication?
Given that they don't seem worried about being removed from Orangefren, I see no room for optimism in this case.

Hi, examples.

On Jul 29, 2026, GS replied in my directory and also mentioned that

We are in direct contact with the user and still working on it, and a resolution will be posted when there is one.

https://kycnone.com/threads/ghostswap-swap-pending-after-kyc.35/post-98

I’m writing again to GS to share an update regarding this case.

[examplens]

Hi, examples.

On Jul 29, 2026, GS replied in my directory and also mentioned that

We are in direct contact with the user and still working on it, and a resolution will be posted when there is one.

https://kycnone.com/threads/ghostswap-swap-pending-after-kyc.35/post-98

I’m writing again to GS to share an update regarding this case.

Obviously, they are not even in contact anymore, since Benedesuuuk complains that he is blocked on Telegram from their side.

[Trêvoid]

Hi, examples.

On Jul 29, 2026, GS replied in my directory and also mentioned that

We are in direct contact with the user and still working on it, and a resolution will be posted when there is one.

https://kycnone.com/threads/ghostswap-swap-pending-after-kyc.35/post-98

I’m writing again to GS to share an update regarding this case.

Obviously, they are not even in contact anymore, since Benedesuuuk complains that he is blocked on Telegram from their side.

Noted. I’ll also mention this and get back here.

[JeromeTash]

@Trêvoid and @OrangeFren I think you need to review this issue much more closely. Yes, I know you are in a similar sort of business scope, but when you act as an escrow for a certain service. You hold some sort of responsibility, and it should be a bit neutral and realistic.

How long should a user wait till an issue is resolved? 1 month? 1 year? 2 years? The communication is not even there anymore, and the worst bit is the service falsely advertised themselves as a no-KYC and non-custodial service. This shouldn't take ages to resolve.

The main purpose of an escrow service you offer is to make the users who are using the service have a bit of confidence and trust in it and also make you hold the service in question accountable, lest they lose the funds held in an escrow. It doesn't matter if the customer used your service or not; otherwise, you should put up a big warning or disclaimer in red letters stating that only folks who used links from your platform are the only ones eligible for rembursement.

[Trêvoid]

@Trêvoid and @OrangeFren I think you need to review this issue much more closely. Yes, I know you are in a similar sort of business scope, but when you act as an escrow for a certain service. You hold some sort of responsibility, and it should be a bit neutral and realistic.

How long should a user wait till an issue is resolved? 1 month? 1 year? 2 years? The communication is not even there anymore, and the worst bit is the service falsely advertised themselves as a no-KYC and non-custodial service. This shouldn't take ages to resolve.

The main purpose of an escrow service you offer is to make the users who are using the service have a bit of confidence and trust in it and also make you hold the service in question accountable, lest they lose the funds held in an escrow. It doesn't matter if the customer used your service or not; otherwise, you should put up a big warning or disclaimer in red letters stating that only folks who used links from your platform are the only ones eligible for rembursement.

Hi, I understand the situation, but as clearly stated in my terms,

Non-Eligibility Clause: Any users who interact with the GhostSwap directly bypassing our intermediary service do so at their own risk and are not eligible for coverage from the security deposit.

Source: https://kycnone.com/threads/ghostswap-non-custodial-privacy-first-crypto-exchange.19/post-23

I have already pushed them and spoken to them many times, but there isn’t much else I can do. This issue isn’t limited to GhostSwap; there are several other swap services here that use third-party liquidity, and this can happen to anyone. Even when I personally contact some services here to discuss my active intermediary system and the protection of user funds, most of them don’t even respond. Can you guess why?

We have used GhostSwap before with some of my clients through me as the designated middleman and never experienced any issues.

His previous reply to me was:

We don’t have any updates on the case yet, as we’re still waiting for the compliance team to review the documents you submitted and get back to us.

Since I can’t do much, I won’t allow some of my clients to use his site until this scam case is resolved. And I did it already.

We’ve noticed that you haven’t been using our platform recently. Is everything okay on your side?

I also shared this case in my directory.

Source: https://kycnone.com/threads/ghostswap-swap-pending-after-kyc.35/

[examplens]

@Trêvoid and @OrangeFren I think you need to review this issue much more closely. Yes, I know you are in a similar sort of business scope, but when you act as an escrow for a certain service. You hold some sort of responsibility, and it should be a bit neutral and realistic.

How long should a user wait till an issue is resolved? 1 month? 1 year? 2 years? The communication is not even there anymore, and the worst bit is the service falsely advertised themselves as a no-KYC and non-custodial service. This shouldn't take ages to resolve.

The main purpose of an escrow service you offer is to make the users who are using the service have a bit of confidence and trust in it and also make you hold the service in question accountable, lest they lose the funds held in an escrow. It doesn't matter if the customer used your service or not; otherwise, you should put up a big warning or disclaimer in red letters stating that only folks who used links from your platform are the only ones eligible for rembursement.

Hi, I understand the situation, but as clearly stated in my terms,

I totally agree with JeromeTash.
No one here has expressed doubt that neither you nor Orangefren have clearly stated the conditions in your TOS.
However, both of you are holding the scammer's funds, while at the same time someone is suffering a serious loss. It is obvious that they do not have the capacity to solve this matter, and most of us do not care about them, we will just ignore them. Still, the OP lost 12+ ETH because they misrepresented themselves as no-KYC.
Murat has already been seriously criticised here because he did marketing for them, conveying false information. According to this logic, we could conclude that Trêvoid and OF also helped them, because their reputation encouraged others to consider Ghostswap as a reliable no KYC service.
I don't like this escrow model at all.
Here's a question for both you, Trêvoid, and Orangefren. Why are Benedesuuk's coins dirty when they go directly through the platform, and are at risk of freezing and KYC requirements, but they are fine if they go through you as an intermediary?

[Trêvoid]

@Trêvoid and @OrangeFren I think you need to review this issue much more closely. Yes, I know you are in a similar sort of business scope, but when you act as an escrow for a certain service. You hold some sort of responsibility, and it should be a bit neutral and realistic.

How long should a user wait till an issue is resolved? 1 month? 1 year? 2 years? The communication is not even there anymore, and the worst bit is the service falsely advertised themselves as a no-KYC and non-custodial service. This shouldn't take ages to resolve.

The main purpose of an escrow service you offer is to make the users who are using the service have a bit of confidence and trust in it and also make you hold the service in question accountable, lest they lose the funds held in an escrow. It doesn't matter if the customer used your service or not; otherwise, you should put up a big warning or disclaimer in red letters stating that only folks who used links from your platform are the only ones eligible for rembursement.

Hi, I understand the situation, but as clearly stated in my terms,

I totally agree with JeromeTash.
No one here has expressed doubt that neither you nor Orangefren have clearly stated the conditions in your TOS.
However, both of you are holding the scammer's funds, while at the same time someone is suffering a serious loss. It is obvious that they do not have the capacity to solve this matter, and most of us do not care about them, we will just ignore them. Still, the OP lost 12+ ETH because they misrepresented themselves as no-KYC.
Murat has already been seriously criticised here because he did marketing for them, conveying false information. According to this logic, we could conclude that Trêvoid and OF also helped them, because their reputation encouraged others to consider Ghostswap as a reliable no KYC service.
I don't like this escrow model at all.
Here's a question for both you, Trêvoid, and Orangefren. Why are Benedesuuk's coins dirty when they go directly through the platform, and are at risk of freezing and KYC requirements, but they are fine if they go through you as an intermediary?

I just got a reply from GhostSwap:

Hello, we have not blocked anyone on Telegram. At the moment, we do not have any new updates. As we have already informed them, we will contact them as soon as there is any new information regarding the case.
We also cannot keep posting comments every day repeating the same information when there is no new development. Once we have something meaningful to update, we will share it.

Another point is that I did not do any marketing for the service; I only listed it in my directory along with my terms. How can you conclude that I helped GhostSwap? I’m not a community manager. I only told my users to use the service through my intermediary service. I’m glad to say that no users have been scammed through my intermediary system. I have even conducted swaps on GhostSwap myself for clients. If Benedesuuk had come to me and told me about the swap, he would never have had an issue like this.

I don’t understand why you are criticizing me. I’m always here to help and do my best for the community safety. I have helped many users and facilitated large swaps without a single issue.

[Benedesuuuk]

@Trêvoid and @OrangeFren I think you need to review this issue much more closely. Yes, I know you are in a similar sort of business scope, but when you act as an escrow for a certain service. You hold some sort of responsibility, and it should be a bit neutral and realistic.

How long should a user wait till an issue is resolved? 1 month? 1 year? 2 years? The communication is not even there anymore, and the worst bit is the service falsely advertised themselves as a no-KYC and non-custodial service. This shouldn't take ages to resolve.

The main purpose of an escrow service you offer is to make the users who are using the service have a bit of confidence and trust in it and also make you hold the service in question accountable, lest they lose the funds held in an escrow. It doesn't matter if the customer used your service or not; otherwise, you should put up a big warning or disclaimer in red letters stating that only folks who used links from your platform are the only ones eligible for rembursement.

Hi, I understand the situation, but as clearly stated in my terms,

I totally agree with JeromeTash.
No one here has expressed doubt that neither you nor Orangefren have clearly stated the conditions in your TOS.
However, both of you are holding the scammer's funds, while at the same time someone is suffering a serious loss. It is obvious that they do not have the capacity to solve this matter, and most of us do not care about them, we will just ignore them. Still, the OP lost 12+ ETH because they misrepresented themselves as no-KYC.
Murat has already been seriously criticised here because he did marketing for them, conveying false information. According to this logic, we could conclude that Trêvoid and OF also helped them, because their reputation encouraged others to consider Ghostswap as a reliable no KYC service.
I don't like this escrow model at all.
Here's a question for both you, Trêvoid, and Orangefren. Why are Benedesuuk's coins dirty when they go directly through the platform, and are at risk of freezing and KYC requirements, but they are fine if they go through you as an intermediary?

I just got a reply from GhostSwap:

Hello, we have not blocked anyone on Telegram. At the moment, we do not have any new updates. As we have already informed them, we will contact them as soon as there is any new information regarding the case.
We also cannot keep posting comments every day repeating the same information when there is no new development. Once we have something meaningful to update, we will share it.

Another point is that I did not do any marketing for the service; I only listed it in my directory along with my terms. How can you conclude that I helped GhostSwap? I’m not a community manager. I only told my users to use the service through my intermediary service. I’m glad to say that no users have been scammed through my intermediary system. I have even conducted swaps on GhostSwap myself for clients. If Benedesuuk had come to me and told me about the swap, he would never have had an issue like this.

I don’t understand why you are criticizing me. I’m always here to help and do my best for the community safety. I have helped my users and facilitated large swaps without a single issue.

If GS hasn't responded to me (or even read my messages) for almost a month now and keeps telling you that they'll let you know when there's an update—maybe they have some kind of timeline? They certainly don't forget to post their ads on X.com, though. I wouldn't be surprised if there are already more people in the same situation as me right now, who don't know where to turn. (There may already be victims we don't know about, and their numbers may be increasing every day.)

[Trêvoid]

@Trêvoid and @OrangeFren I think you need to review this issue much more closely. Yes, I know you are in a similar sort of business scope, but when you act as an escrow for a certain service. You hold some sort of responsibility, and it should be a bit neutral and realistic.

How long should a user wait till an issue is resolved? 1 month? 1 year? 2 years? The communication is not even there anymore, and the worst bit is the service falsely advertised themselves as a no-KYC and non-custodial service. This shouldn't take ages to resolve.

The main purpose of an escrow service you offer is to make the users who are using the service have a bit of confidence and trust in it and also make you hold the service in question accountable, lest they lose the funds held in an escrow. It doesn't matter if the customer used your service or not; otherwise, you should put up a big warning or disclaimer in red letters stating that only folks who used links from your platform are the only ones eligible for rembursement.

Hi, I understand the situation, but as clearly stated in my terms,

I totally agree with JeromeTash.
No one here has expressed doubt that neither you nor Orangefren have clearly stated the conditions in your TOS.
However, both of you are holding the scammer's funds, while at the same time someone is suffering a serious loss. It is obvious that they do not have the capacity to solve this matter, and most of us do not care about them, we will just ignore them. Still, the OP lost 12+ ETH because they misrepresented themselves as no-KYC.
Murat has already been seriously criticised here because he did marketing for them, conveying false information. According to this logic, we could conclude that Trêvoid and OF also helped them, because their reputation encouraged others to consider Ghostswap as a reliable no KYC service.
I don't like this escrow model at all.
Here's a question for both you, Trêvoid, and Orangefren. Why are Benedesuuk's coins dirty when they go directly through the platform, and are at risk of freezing and KYC requirements, but they are fine if they go through you as an intermediary?

I just got a reply from GhostSwap:

Hello, we have not blocked anyone on Telegram. At the moment, we do not have any new updates. As we have already informed them, we will contact them as soon as there is any new information regarding the case.
We also cannot keep posting comments every day repeating the same information when there is no new development. Once we have something meaningful to update, we will share it.

Another point is that I did not do any marketing for the service; I only listed it in my directory along with my terms. How can you conclude that I helped GhostSwap? I’m not a community manager. I only told my users to use the service through my intermediary service. I’m glad to say that no users have been scammed through my intermediary system. I have even conducted swaps on GhostSwap myself for clients. If Benedesuuk had come to me and told me about the swap, he would never have had an issue like this.

I don’t understand why you are criticizing me. I’m always here to help and do my best for the community safety. I have helped my users and facilitated large swaps without a single issue.

If GS hasn't responded to me (or even read my messages) for almost a month now and keeps telling you that they'll let you know when there's an update—maybe they have some kind of timeline? They certainly don't forget to post their ads on X.com, though. I wouldn't be surprised if there are already more people in the same situation as me right now, who don't know where to turn. (There may already be victims we don't know about, and their numbers may be increasing every day.)

I understand you, but there isn’t much I can do. I can’t change the timeline for the compliance team to review the documents you submitted. All I can do is create a scam warning thread in my directory and prevent my clients and other users not using GhostSwap. That’s all I can do, and I’ve already done it.

There is no additional help or marketing I provided. If more users scammed they will eventually post scam threads here, and we’ll be able to see them.

[Benedesuuuk]

Solved

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Solved

I was browsing Monerica and saw the link to this thread with the conclusion of 'solved' which you also posted above.   Perhaps I missed something in this thread; perhaps I'm missing a bunch of brain cells, but I'm puzzled as to how this issue got solved.  Some elaboration after all of this back-and-forth would be really nice you know.

Money shot, man.  Money shot.

[criptounlocker]

Solved

I was browsing Monerica and saw the link to this thread with the conclusion of 'solved' which you also posted above.   Perhaps I missed something in this thread; perhaps I'm missing a bunch of brain cells, but I'm puzzled as to how this issue got solved.  Some elaboration after all of this back-and-forth would be really nice you know.

Money shot, man.  Money shot.

I apologize on behalf of the author of this thread for the brief response; that brief response was one of the reasons for the peaceful resolution of the conflict with GhostSwap.
The author and GhostSwap agreed on certain terms for a refund, and everyone was satisfied.
I witnessed this process. Please don’t judge me too harshly, and thank you all very much!