Is there any fintech company that shields crypto transactions completely?

[Decimetre]

This question because necessary now because of two events that has happened around me now within a space of few months now. First, it was a brother who ran a p2p transactions here in Nigeria selling a #400k worth of USDT using his Opay. When he got paid and released the coins, his Opay got flagged and claimed that the money was fraudulent and requested that he should go for clarification. Out of fear, he forfeited the said amount in order not to get into the hands of these security agencies.

Just few days ago now, a friend based outside Nigeria ran a P2P transaction through Kuda Bank, a transaction worth over 1m and his account got flagged as fraudulent. When he contacted the help desk he was told that the money was paid from a proceed of crime (fraud). This is the real problem now, he has been directed to court for affidavit and now to the police which he is running through a sister here in Nigeria. No real success seems to be coming forth as they seem to be tactically waiting for him to go in person and he will get arrested. He has provided the entire P2P details now and it doesn't seem to be enough.

Now my question is, can someone control the source of the money he will receive from a P2P transaction?

When payment is made from a fraudulent source, is the USDT vendor supposed to be held responsible?

Is there any fintech company that can shield someone's money from any form of security interference?

When such case occurs, how best can a person go about the case?

[PostQuantumBTC]

Now my question is, can someone control the source of the money he will receive from a P2P transaction?

If you are the person creating the P2P ads, you can ask for identity documents, but you will have to include it in your terms of service.

When payment is made from a fraudulent source, is the USDT vendor supposed to be held responsible?

No if the transaction was on KYC exchange, but he will have to clear himself in the police station. The police can contact the exchange.

Is there any fintech company that can shield someone's money from any form of security interference?

Some are doing it by flagging some people if you want to send money to them, not when they send you money. Also consider it not accurate at all. So the best answer is no.

When such case occurs, how best can a person go about the case?

Just follow the police instructions. Make sure you are paying your tax and it is good to have a lawyer. If the interrogation is getting beyond what you can handle, tell them you want to contact your lawyer.

[Curious T]

If not that Nigeria is a useless country where nothing is done right, these issues wouldn't be a problem. There is a paper trail of the transfer. All they need to do is trace the account that sent the money and find out the root source of the fraud, but things are never done right here.

I knew somebody who was in a similar situation. he even got a lawyer and went back and forth on the case, but in the end, he just lost his money and the money he wasted on the lawyer.

This thing doesn't happen too often. There is no way you can protect yourself against things like that because you can never know where the money is coming from. There is nothing the exchange can do about the money. When such cases occur, you just have to weigh the risk. If the money is huge enough to hire a lawyer and go back and forth to get the account unfrozen, then go ahead, but if it's not worth it, there is no need to waste your time.

[Emjay24]

There's a common error people make that might trigger these problems some more is receiving money from an account that bears a different name from the one registered by the merchant in the exchange. The exchange verifies merchants properly and those that deal with illicit funds might ask to send from another company account instead of the account that bears their already verified name which it's corresponding documents was submitted to the exchange. In that scenario, you don't have an explanation when it gets to the police because it's not who placed the sell order that made the transfer, although the police knows the truth, but it would take a lot of proccess to exonerate you.

[Charles-Tim]

If not that Nigeria is a useless country where nothing is done right, these issues wouldn't be a problem. There is a paper trail of the transfer. All they need to do is trace the account that sent the money and find out the root source of the fraud, but things are never done right here.

Nigeria police are not bad up to that, they can trace the account number that sent the fund. But it can get complicated in a way the bad people do it in a way they will not be traced. This is the reason we need to be careful and not be receiving money from people that we can not trace.

There's a common error people make that might trigger these problems some more is receiving money from an account that bears a different name from the one registered by the merchant in the exchange.

The most important thing and first thing that should be checked about who you want to trade with is that the bank name should correspond with the name the person is using on the exchange. But the scam that I have seen this linked to mostly is about stealing money from the person's bank account, use it for P2P directly from the person's bank account and receive coins in return. But it is very possible the exchange can have the person's information.

[Hypnotizer]

Now my question is, can someone control the source of the money he will receive from a P2P transaction?

Technically it is not possible, that’s why you need to be somewhat cautious when doing P2P and avoid receiving payments from third parties, only recieve payments directly from the account with the confirmed buyer’s name.

When payment is made from a fraudulent source, is the USDT vendor supposed to be held responsible?

He is held responsible but that doesn’t unfreeze your already frozen account, the recovery process is usually hard if it involves fintechs but it will be much better if you involve lawyers especially when the money is as much as 1 million Naira.

Is there any fintech company that can shield someone's money from any form of security interference?

No.

They need to comply to CBN regulations if they’re to operate in Nigeria, every bank or Fintech must follow the rules and they can’t shield your money from security interference.

When such case occurs, how best can a person go about the case?

The best way to go about this is to contact the Fintech’s Anti-fraud desk directly and immediately through email and don’t waste your time on other customers support. If your funds are frozen with the reason being fraud, you need to act very fast in the first three days to try and explain the source of your funds.

You should also try as much as possible to involve a learned lawyer especially if the money is up to a million, it will help you in the process a lot. You can avoid being directly arrested or detained by security forces if you’re with a learned lawyer.

[Curious T]

Nigeria police are not bad up to that, they can trace the account number that sent the fund. But it can get complicated in a way the bad people do it in a way they will not be traced. This is the reason we need to be careful and not be receiving money from people that we can not trace.

If you have never been in that situation, you won't understand. Some things that are ordinarily very simple to solve will turn into very difficult things. No matter the proof you give to them that you had nothing to do with it, they will still not let you go. No matter the amount that was in the account before the money was transferred in, you won't be able to access any of it. The system is too bad. They will tell you to go to court. So now you're battling police, court and the bank. They will just keep passing you around till you get tired. It's a very frustrating position to be in. You'll spend money hiring lawyers, you will spend money bribing police, because if you don't do that, there is nothing for you. You will be drained, and in the end, you might just give up after everything, except you have a lot of money in the account that you can't let go.

[Wiwo]

What I do not understand is the reason why an account number will get flagged just by receiving deposits. I think the bank can set a benchmark on the amount of deposit that falls into such categories to flag an account.

Most cases are to just resend the money to the sender's account in the exact amount, or report the deposits to your bank if the amount is huge.

What you should avoid on p2p is to avoid any situation where a buyer transfers money through a third-party account other than the name that appears in their exchange account.

[Gragebox]

What I do not understand is the reason why an account number will get flagged just by receiving deposits. I think the bank can set a benchmark on the amount of deposit that falls into such categories to flag an account.

Most cases are to just resend the money to the sender's account in the exact amount, or report the deposits to your bank if the amount is huge.

What you should avoid on p2p is to avoid any situation where a buyer transfers money through a third-party account other than the name that appears in their exchange account.

I believe the core problem isn't necessarily the amount of money someone gets, but the source of the money and if the transfer appears trustworthy. A maximum deposit limit can help banks catch irregular behaviour, but they're unlikely to be the solution to all fraud activity. A low payment could be linked to fraud, whilst a large deposit can be completely legitimate.

This is the other advantage of using third-party payment. When the buyer's exchange account name does not match the bank account for payment, the seller should not release USDT. Just think about it. Do you want to get involved in the fight between others?

On the other hand, sending back the suspicious funds to the thief might not be the most prudent option. If the recipient account was a victim's, that might not be the most prudent course of action. Leaving the money intact, not saving the transaction records, and asking the bank for instructions will be wiser.

The third thing to remember when you get that flagged deposit is that you might not be a fraudster. Your account can be placed on hold temporarily to verify the deposit.

Recognize that when someone pays you (like a P2P) it is not only about them paying you but it is about you ensuring that they are the person who paid you, keeping records and knowing what steps to take if things go wrong.

[Hyphen(-)]

Now my question is, can someone control the source of the money he will receive from a P2P transaction?

When payment is made from a fraudulent source, is the USDT vendor supposed to be held responsible?

Is there any fintech company that can shield someone's money from any form of security interference?

When such case occurs, how best can a person go about the case?

Let’s be realistic, even if you are the one joining P2P service today if your source money is through fraud, you will never tell them the truth, and they have limit to how they can do investigation in your accounts because it’s your privacy, their own policy will just be if you can pay the money and stay active to serve their customers; they can’t stop fraudulent money because they can’t identify them. It is left for the trader to only accept money from the account the user used to register p2p and avoid accepting money from external account.

Once payment is made and you released USDT, the transaction is already completed because you have received money feombuuur and, there is no reason to return the USDT to you anymore.

We just need to be very cautious while doing p2p, you should avoid external discussions and avoid recovering money from different accounts.

[Odohu]

What I do not understand is the reason why an account number will get flagged just by receiving deposits. I think the bank can set a benchmark on the amount of deposit that falls into such categories to flag an account.

Most cases are to just resend the money to the sender's account in the exact amount, or report the deposits to your bank if the amount is huge.

What you should avoid on p2p is to avoid any situation where a buyer transfers money through a third-party account other than the name that appears in their exchange account.

You are obviously missing the point, the accounts were not flagged because of the amount they received, they were flagged because of the source of the money they received. What I understand is that people might be using money from proceed of crime to perform p2p transaction which is why they receiver is being quizzed.  One solution to this is to ensure that the account sending the money must bear the same name the merchant register on the exchange. 

[Felicity_Tide]

Now my question is, can someone control the source of the money he will receive from a P2P transaction?

When payment is made from a fraudulent source, is the USDT vendor supposed to be held responsible?

It's impossible to do that. The least you can do is to make sure that the account you're receiving money from matches what the vendor registered with on any of the exchanges that you're using for P2P. Another problem is, even with all that, you can still find yourself battling with legal issues especially when you come across terrible law enforcement officers who might want to take advantage of the situation before you even make it to court.

And as for the second question, well, from a legal and logical pov, the vendor ought to be traced and arrested because he's 100% responsible

Is there any fintech company that can shield someone's money from any form of security interference?

When such case occurs, how best can a person go about the case?

No fintech company can protect you from things like this. They can only flag such transactions while they expect you to sort yourself out legally. And if you find yourself in such a situation, well, you have to battle your way out legally. And most importantly, have enough proof because that might just be your saving grace.

[Moreno233]

This is a very serious issue that should get anyone worried. Considering how our country is, it is better not to experience this challenge beaise you go explain tire no evidence. I'm just imagining a situation where someone send money from accounts used to collect ransom to, it will be easy to get off the case because the more you explain, the more problems you enter under Nigeria's settings. How do we solve this issue because I'm bereft of ideas?

[Ronsbit]

As long as fiat is concerned, there is no fintech company that can shield any p2p transaction expect in the situation were it is a live one on one deal with physical cash. This is when fintech can and government can not trace or act otherwise. But as far as it is online, there must definitely be a trace and all accounts involved with such transactions would be frozen with immediate effect.

I have a friend who sold usdt via bybit but the buyer paid with money gotten form fraudulent proceeds. After he received the payment, few hours his account was blocked and restricted from withdrawing or making transfer. When he called, the procedures was that much involving security agencies and looking at the amount involved and the stress, he had to let go.
Sometimes one just needs to handle such situations with wisdom and knowledge because it would not be making sense to out yourself in a big mess just because of an amount of money that is not worth the stress.