Lizex.io SCAM! $18K

[mabji1]

Hello everyone,

Based on our review, the funds involved in this transaction were identified as high-risk funds showing indicators of being connected to fraudulent activity. This is precisely why the relevant AML/KYC procedures were initiated.

Apparently, this may also explain why the user chose to hide the exchange ID and transaction details, preventing forum participants from objectively reviewing the situation.

We strongly oppose fraud and false accusations. Before accusing us of fraud, it is worth looking at the origin of your friend’s funds as well. Furthermore, your friend refused to complete the requested AML/KYC procedure, which was initiated specifically because of the risk identified in relation to the funds.

We are ready to provide supporting information and explain the reasons behind our actions.

Why did you initially lie to us by saying that the funds were in KuCoin and that KuCoin was holding them?



See what you said on Telegram. We contacted KuCoin, and they said they don’t have these funds.



You are a liar and a scammer. Since nothing happened in the previous cases, you won’t get away with this one.

My friend is waiting for his refund. Just return it to the sender’s wallet. We all know you’re the one holding the funds. Where is your company registered? You want to remain hidden, but you don’t want us to? And you’re asking why I hide the images when talking here? That’s hilarious.

[Coyster]

We strongly oppose fraud and false accusations. Before accusing us of fraud, it is worth looking at the origin of your friend’s funds as well. Furthermore, your friend refused to complete the requested AML/KYC procedure, which was initiated specifically because of the risk identified in relation to the funds.

What risk are you talking about, is the funds connected to any hack that has happened in the past and did you receive any request from law enforcement regarding these coins? There are many reasons why a customer's funds can have a high AML-score, and it could be no fault of theirs, the fair thing to do is not to process the transaction and then return the funds to the customer.

That said, does your platform have any valid license, and where exactly are you registered? If you are not cooperating with law enforcement, then confiscating peoples funds simply means you are stealing it and that is a dishonorable practice.

[mabji1]

We strongly oppose fraud and false accusations. Before accusing us of fraud, it is worth looking at the origin of your friend’s funds as well. Furthermore, your friend refused to complete the requested AML/KYC procedure, which was initiated specifically because of the risk identified in relation to the funds.

What risk are you talking about, is the funds connected to any hack that has happened in the past and did you receive any request from law enforcement regarding these coins? There are many reasons why a customer's funds can have a high AML-score, and it could be no fault of theirs, the fair thing to do is not to process the transaction and then return the funds to the customer.

That said, does your platform have any valid license, and where exactly are you registered? If you are not cooperating with law enforcement, then confiscating peoples funds simply means you are stealing it and that is a dishonorable practice.

Currently, they are not replying to my emails or Telegram messages.

According to them, my coins have a high AML risk. If that is the case, why did they not refund the funds to the sender’s address? Keeping my funds and falsely claiming that KuCoin is holding them be an attempt to scam me. This looks like a genuine scam.

They do not appear to have a valid license or any legitimate registration. They may simply be an unregulated scam service that is withholding my funds and misleading customers. Where are the law-enforcement reports to support their claims? I would also like to know how many times they have done this to other customers.

According to this, they use an intermediary wallet to receive the transaction before sending it to their partners.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5560783.msg65866664#msg65866664

[Coyster]

I would also like to know how many times they have done this to other customers.

I have left a negative feedback on Lizex, i strongly believe that anybody using their service is at a high risk of losing their deposit.
They claim to be an anonymous crypto platform that doesn't require KYC:

We provide anonymous cryptocurrency exchange services and do not require KYC for standard transactions, except in cases where it is required by our liquidity provider. The service team also remains anonymous to ensure a high level of user privacy. We value privacy as a fundamental principle of our project.

It is ironical that an anonymous exchange that claims that privacy is at the top of their priority is holding a customers deposit and asking for personal information. Even if we agree that the funds are held by their liquidity provider, which one of them is it, Whitebit? Kucoin already confirmed they are not in possession of the coins. All of these put together means this service is not to be trusted, until proven otherwise.

[logfiles]

Hello everyone,

Based on our review, the funds involved in this transaction were identified as high-risk funds showing indicators of being connected to fraudulent activity. This is precisely why the relevant AML/KYC procedures were initiated.

Apparently, this may also explain why the user chose to hide the exchange ID and transaction details, preventing forum participants from objectively reviewing the situation.

We strongly oppose fraud and false accusations. Before accusing us of fraud, it is worth looking at the origin of your friend’s funds as well. Furthermore, your friend refused to complete the requested AML/KYC procedure, which was initiated specifically because of the risk identified in relation to the funds.

We are ready to provide supporting information and explain the reasons behind our actions.

This is what you get for lack of transparency and when members raise these issues, you are reluctant to respond to them or simply ignore them. For example the issue of liquidity providers. Why not list them on your website so a customer knows where their funds are likely going to end up or the likelihood of them getting frozen?
It was not until this accusation popped up that we realised Kucoin is one of the liquidity providers

If you are serious about KYC/AML compliance then you will also provide us with your operating licence. Prove to us that you are regulated. You can't hold someone's funds hostage and expect them to send their sensitive data to an undocumented entity. We live in an era of identity theft.

[AB de Royse777]

I don't remember seeing this exchange name anywhere in this forum. Even if I have seen it, I don't remember that. I don't understand why people don't do their research before they do a transaction online.

They had a review campaign in November 2025, managed by Royse.

Thanks for mentioning this.

Could you share some links just to make sure you are talking about the Lizex we know on the forum.

It's the same lizex, I confirm because Lixex reached to me an hour ago and told me about this.
@mabji1 can you provide me the transaction ID via PM if you are not comfortable to share it in public?

[mabji1]

I don't remember seeing this exchange name anywhere in this forum. Even if I have seen it, I don't remember that. I don't understand why people don't do their research before they do a transaction online.

They had a review campaign in November 2025, managed by Royse.

Thanks for mentioning this.

Could you share some links just to make sure you are talking about the Lizex we know on the forum.

It's the same lizex, I confirm because Lixex reached to me an hour ago and told me about this.
@mabji1 can you provide me the transaction ID via PM if you are not comfortable to share it in public?

I have shared all the details with you, including the order ID and USDC wallet address, so you should be able to see everything. At first, they told me that the funds were being held by KuCoin, but KuCoin said they do not have them. My funds are now in their hands. Please help me resolve this situation.

This is what you get for lack of transparency and when members raise these issues, you are reluctant to respond to them or simply ignore them. For example the issue of liquidity providers. Why not list them on your website so a customer knows where their funds are likely going to end up or the likelihood of them getting frozen?
It was not until this accusation pop up that we realised Kucoin is one of the liquidity providers

If you are serious about KYC/AML compliance then you will also provide us with your operating licence. Prove to us that you are regulated. You can hold someone funds hostage and expect them to send their sensitive data to an undocumented entity. We live in an era of identity theft.

They do not have an operating license or a registered company. They are simply running a one-person scam operation. They are not regulated, yet they are asking for extensive KYC information.

Why would we provide our personal details to a scam service that does not even have an operating license?

The scam service Lizex, is still holding money and has not responded to any of our messages.

[AB de Royse777]

I have shared all the details with you, including the order ID and USDC wallet address, so you should be able to see everything. At first, they told me that the funds were being held by KuCoin, but KuCoin said they do not have them. My funds are now in their hands. Please help me resolve this situation.

Thanks for that and things for the quick co-operation on Telegram chat. Just to avoid misunderstanding for everyone I am sharing the screenshots of the chat then I will conclude the case with my views.






Lizex privacy policy: https://lizex.io/en/policy


- The transaction from mabji1 had 100% AML RISK score which lead Lizex to ask KYC and other information from mabji1. They acted according to their privacy-policy. I don't see them wrong here.
- When user mabji1 initiated the exchange and sent fund, he automatically agreed to Lizex policy but now he do not want to provide KYC. This clearly indicates mabji1 is driven by emotion but not the terms he agreed. mabji1 has his finished work to do.
- If the user cooperated and provided what Lizex asked and upon succeeding in the KYC check then we had a case to blame Lizex.

To my opinion, this case and scam accusation have no merit right now.

PS: I can not act on things that I can not verify for example: Whatever it was the Kucoin support said and it's irrelevant too until the KYC process is completed and successful to have a good ground for the case.

1- if funds is dirty they can refund it
2- they dont have registered company
3- only registered company can ask kyc

Not relevant at all with your issue.

Coyster and Trêvoid I kindly suggest you to read the post and make a decision that matters for the case instead of involving emption with your feedback. If you have a business and if your term ask KYC but if your customer deny after getting caught with 100% AML risk, wouldn't you respect your business terms. You would. I hope it make sense.

[Coyster]

...

Royse, i appreciate it that you're trying to resolve this dispute
Yes, a 100% AML sore is high and such coins would be flagged and confiscated in any custodial platform that run checks on their customers deposit. But Lizex also has this in their privacy policy you have just posted:

If a user refuses to provide requested information during an AML/KYC review, Lizex.io may suspend or cancel the transaction. In most cases, funds will be returned to the original sending address, except where prevented by legal, technical, or compliance restrictions. Network expenses incurred during this process may be withheld

They said that in most cases they would return the funds to the original sending address, which is the right thing to do for an unregistered exchange, so i don't really know why Lizex is unwilling to do that in this case. It would help everybody if their representative can tell us why they don't want to go down that route.

What legal, technical and compliance restrictions stops them from simply returning this customer's deposit? Of course they cannot tell us that they were requested by law enforcement, because they weren't, since they do not have any license and are not registered anywhere.

[AB de Royse777]

Point noted and I asked about it to the person I am in touch. Seems like he is offline. My time to go offline too. Let's check it tomorrow.

[PX-Z]

If a user refuses to provide requested information during an AML/KYC review, Lizex.io may suspend or cancel the transaction. In most cases, funds will be returned to the original sending address, except where prevented by legal, technical, or compliance restrictions. Network expenses incurred during this process may be withheld

They said that in most cases they would return the funds to the original sending address, which is the right thing to do for an unregistered exchange, so i don't really know why Lizex is unwilling to do that in this case. It would help everybody if their representative can tell us why they don't want to go down that route.

Right. Considering the reputation they have built here over the past few months or even years, I think the best thing they can do to resolve this issue is simply refund the user. This situation still seems to fall under the "most cases" phrase in their terms.

That said, since this particular case resulted in a 100% aml score, I am curious what the result would be if the same address or transaction were checked using other aml checkers as well. It would be interesting to see whether they produce a similar result or a completely different score.

[mabji1]

I have shared all the details with you, including the order ID and USDC wallet address, so you should be able to see everything. At first, they told me that the funds were being held by KuCoin, but KuCoin said they do not have them. My funds are now in their hands. Please help me resolve this situation.

Thanks for that and things for the quick co-operation on Telegram chat. Just to avoid misunderstanding for everyone I am sharing the screenshots of the chat then I will conclude the case with my views.






Lizex privacy policy: https://lizex.io/en/policy


- The transaction from mabji1 had 100% AML RISK score which lead Lizex to ask KYC and other information from mabji1. They acted according to their privacy-policy. I don't see them wrong here.
- When user mabji1 initiated the exchange and sent fund, he automatically agreed to Lizex policy but now he do not want to provide KYC. This clearly indicates mabji1 is driven by emotion but not the terms he agreed. mabji1 has his finished work to do.
- If the user cooperated and provided what Lizex asked and upon succeeding in the KYC check then we had a case to blame Lizex.

To my opinion, this case and scam accusation have no merit right now.

PS: I can not act on things that I can not verify for example: Whatever it was the Kucoin support said and it's irrelevant too until the KYC process is completed and successful to have a good ground for the case.

1- if funds is dirty they can refund it
2- they dont have registered company
3- only registered company can ask kyc

Not relevant at all with your issue.

Coyster and Trêvoid I kindly suggest you to read the post and make a decision that matters for the case instead of involving emption with your feedback. If you have a business and if your term ask KYC but if your customer deny after getting caught with 100% AML risk, wouldn't you respect your business terms. You would. I hope it make sense.

What? Do you even know who is legally authorized to request KYC? Are you really someone competent who is making comments here? You’re the only person supporting them with nonsensical information. We can all see that you don’t understand the details.

They don’t even have a registered company, so how can they require KYC? Do you really understand this? What part of this is irrelevant to our issue? Did they pay you to defend them?

Please, can someone who actually understands the situation comment? It seems like this person is just someone who doesn’t understand how the swap world and AML/KYC policies works.

They lied to us, saying that the funds were held on KuCoin, but we found out that the funds are not there. Where is their company registered, and what are its registration details?

Why is nobody answering this? The AB de Royse person who coming here making nonsensical comments and showing how little he actually knows.

Since Lizex doesn’t even have a registered company and operates anonymously, there’s no reason for it to try to be compliant. Not to mention, asking us and other customers for KYC information while not being a registered entity is unlawful.

And this guy AB de Royse becoming the escrow agent for the others services also is so funny how is that even possible? If anything happens like our case, we can see here how he responds. OMG.

[Trêvoid]

Coyster and Trêvoid I kindly suggest you to read the post and make a decision that matters for the case instead of involving emption with your feedback. If you have a business and if your term ask KYC but if your customer deny after getting caught with 100% AML risk, wouldn't you respect your business terms. You would. I hope it make sense.

I received your private message. Thank you for reaching out to me AB de Royse777. However, I cannot support the decision you have made, as it does not seem correct to me. The issue isn’t whether Lizex’s privacy policy mentions KYC or whether mabji1 refused to cooperate.

The issue is whether Lizex is legally authorized to collect and process KYC information in the first place. A 100% AML risk score is not proof that the funds are illicit, nor does it automatically give an anonymous, unregistered project the authority to demand sensitive personal documents. A privacy policy cannot override applicable laws or create legal powers that the entity does not have.

The screenshots also appear to show that Lizex claimed the funds were being held in KuCoin, but that statement was allegedly false. If the funds were not actually in KuCoin, then Lizex misrepresented the situation to justify its actions. That point needs to be addressed rather than dismissed as irrelevant. If Lizex genuinely believed the funds were suspicious, it could have paused the transaction and simply refund the user. Instead, it retained the money while demanding KYC from mabji1 despite apparently having no registered company or clearly identifiable legal entity behind the service. Agreeing to a website’s terms does not automatically make every term lawful or enforceable. Customers cannot contract away their legal rights, and “you agreed to our policy” does not answer whether Lizex had the legal basis and authorization (play police) to collect KYC information.

Not relevant at all with your issue.

KuCoin’s position is relevant as supporting context, but the central issues remain Lizex’s legal status, its authority to request KYC, its decision to withhold the funds, and its apparent misrepresentation regarding where the funds were held. Until those questions are addressed, dismissing the accusation solely because mabji1 did not submit personal documents is premature.

AML/KYC policies can only be properly implemented by a registered company something none of Lizex.io projects appear to have. Therefore, their attempt to act as a regulatory authority (play police) create more problems and make worse than it solves.

Lizex privacy policy at https://lizex.io/en/policy | Archived regulations not apply to anonymous exchangers because, without a properly registered company, they cannot meaningfully comply with these requirements.

Evidence can be found here:
https://www.bka.de/DE/Presse/Listenseite_Pressemitteilungen/2024/Presse2024/240919_PM_finalexchange.html

| Archived (https://talkimg.com/images/2026/09/23/U0HkXq.png)
| Archived (https://talkimg.com/images/2026/09/23/U0Hvzj.png)
| Archived (https://talkimg.com/images/2026/09/23/U0HYhG.png)

Best regards,
— Trêvoid

[NotATether]

OP, sorry for your friend's loss.

You guys should've checked the AML score of the coins before trusting any exchange with them.

Here, I run an anonymous checker with BTC, ETH and TRX support: https://amlcheck.bitmixlist.org

It used to support Arbitrum, but after I changed providers a couple weeks ago, I had to drop support for it - my new provider now supports this chain and a few others and I will be updating the supported coins accordingly.

[Coyster]

Did they pay you to defend them?

I understand your frustrations, but let's try and stay on-topic and not make unnecessary accusations.

I agree with you that your funds should be returned to the sending address, that is why i have left a negative feedback for Lizex, until all of this sorted. I also asked Royse an important question and they promised to get back to this thread with feedback from Lizex:

Point noted and I asked about it to the person I am in touch. Seems like he is offline. My time to go offline too. Let's check it tomorrow.

So it's better to chill out and wait for their response.

[AB de Royse777]

I also asked Royse an important question and they promised to get back to this thread with feedback from Lizex:

Point noted and I asked about it to the person I am in touch. Seems like he is offline. My time to go offline too. Let's check it tomorrow.

So it's better to chill out and wait for their response.

I may need a few hours or more but let's take 24 hours the maximum from me please before I post anything regarding this case.

Cheers,

Edit:

The issue is whether Lizex is legally authorized to collect and process KYC information in the first place.

I see it this way, if the provider ask for the privacy information then they can ask for it to hand it over to their provider - this is the case when the funds are being in hold by their provider. And if that contradicts with legal matter then don't simply agree with their terms.

[mabji1]

I also asked Royse an important question and they promised to get back to this thread with feedback from Lizex:

Point noted and I asked about it to the person I am in touch. Seems like he is offline. My time to go offline too. Let's check it tomorrow.

So it's better to chill out and wait for their response.

I may need a few hours or more but let's take 24 hours the maximum from me please before I post anything regarding this case.

Cheers,

Edit:

The issue is whether Lizex is legally authorized to collect and process KYC information in the first place.

I see it this way, if the provider ask for the privacy information then they can ask for it to hand it over to their provider - this is the case when the funds are being in hold by their provider. And if that contradicts with legal matter then don't simply agree with their terms.

Where is the proof that KuCoin is holding our funds? Why hasn’t the Lizex team replied to our Telegram messages or emails? What happened to them? Do they think we will remain silent and eventually forget about this scam?

[AB de Royse777]

Where is the proof that KuCoin is holding our funds? Why hasn’t the Lizex team replied to our Telegram messages or emails? What happened to them? Do they think we will remain silent and eventually forget about this scam?

Look bud, I am trying to help both you and Lizex. Some of these question are also my questions too. Let me work in it please. I am still in discussion with them, collecting information as much as I can, trying to understand the situation and all these things. Remote communication is not quicker besides I am a busy person, all of us live in different time zone. So please have more patience.


The conversation is even longer but I am attaching the part that is important for this case.









Here we come to understand the case:

Let's summarize:

Your sub account is restricted/block or whatever it is by Kucoin because that customer sent 100% AML risk coin in that account which triggered a blocking and the Singapore authority sent the blocking request to Kucoin.

Kucoin then gave you the EDD form and asked for information.
You passed this EDD to the customer.

Now since you are not providing the EDD information (because the customer is not willing to give it), kucoin asked you to contact the Law Enforcement Agencies.

It's in one of the screenshot.

@mabji1 the reason for you to deny the KYC is because Lizex are not licensed so I will PM you the direct contact address to contact the authority.
I will also give you the contact of Lizex but later once you sort out with the Singapore authority and write about it on this topic.

Let's hope it ends well.

[Coyster]

This is what Lizex posted earlier in this thread:

Based on our review, the funds involved in this transaction were identified as high-risk funds showing indicators of being connected to fraudulent activity. This is precisely why the relevant AML/KYC procedures were initiated.

They said the funds were blocked based on their review, but now they claim that their account, i believe on Kucoin was also blocked because this user's funds were deposited there. So according to Lizex, it is Kucoin that's holding the funds right, but the customer has reached out to Kucoin and they have denied that claim.
Is it just this customers funds that is in that account, or is Lizex also at risk of losing their own funds stored in that account? I am also not sure why Kucoin would deny that they are in possession of the funds as Lizex claims, and if i was to believe one party, i'd believe them over Lizex. Finally, i don't know how busy their rep is, but it would do everybody good if they also respond directly to certain questions in this thread.

[mabji1]

I don’t understand this reply. I have asked repeatedly, KuCoin keeps saying that this wallet does not belong to them.

Where is the proof that KuCoin is holding my funds?

Simply providing jjust a email address **@spf.gov.sg does not answer my questions. Everything is leading to a dead end. Please DT users respond directly to my topic and address my questions clearly. Why has none of my questions been answered?

What kind of scam is this? Where is the proof that my coins are being held?

Funds are being kept in a wallet controlled by Lizex, yet they continue to deny ownership. This situation seems completely false and fraudulent.

This is what Lizex posted earlier in this thread:

Based on our review, the funds involved in this transaction were identified as high-risk funds showing indicators of being connected to fraudulent activity. This is precisely why the relevant AML/KYC procedures were initiated.

They said the funds were blocked based on their review, but now they claim that their account, i believe on Kucoin was also blocked because this user's funds were deposited there. So according to Lizex, it is Kucoin that's holding the funds right, but the customer has reached out to Kucoin and they have denied that claim.
Is it just this customers funds that is in that account, or is Lizex also at risk of losing their own funds stored in that account? I am also not sure why Kucoin would deny that they are in possession of the funds as Lizex claims, and if i was to believe one party, i'd believe them over Lizex. Finally, i don't know how busy their rep is, but it would do everybody good if they also respond directly to certain questions in this thread.

AB de Royse777

1. provide the lizex company’s complete details. 
2. provide verifiable proof that KuCoin is holding the funds

not merely an email just in dm.

Of course, Lizex won’t come here because they know we’ve busted their scam.