[Guide] How I Unfroze My Exchanger BTC Deposit After AML Review.

[robelneo]

I know it's the regulatory policy, but I don't really understand why they can't just reject and return the flagged funds rather than accept them, freeze them, and hold them hostage while squeezing all kinds of sensitive information out of you. After all, it's not even in the thousands or even hundreds.

You're being patient, submissive, and compliant, OP. Those are probably good qualities especially if you've got funds stuck with them. But you're being bullied.

And I thought our local exchange was very strict; I encountered the same issue with my local exchange. They don't ask me to undergo any process; they just returned the funds and reminded me to check their TOS before sending them.
That Kucoin process is harsh and it's too imposing you might as well avoid Kucoin there are better exchanges that will treat you fairly.

[ABCbits]

However, it is worth mentioning here that my exchange account was KYC verified in advance with my ID. And after contacting their help, they gave me 48 hours to provide my source of funds. If I could not provide them with the source of funds, they would have blocked my entire exchange account.

Would they block your account if you took more than 48 hours to provide source of funds? If yes, it's too harsh, since i expect exchange may make you wait more than 48 hours to perform verification/check from their side.

[Royal Cap]

I’m curious whether some of the campaign participants here do something similar (or, more specifically, perform a one-time verification for future transactions). I’ve noticed that many of them use exchange deposit addresses directly for their payments.

Actually it depends on the payment style of the manager. There are many managers who use different wallets for different campaigns. And there are also many managers who send payments from one wallet to all campaign participants on a specific day of the week. So in that case the risk increases.

The problem is when a manager sends funds from a mixed fund to your wallet. Then your AML score increases. Because I found that the reason my wallet became high risk was because my fund was connected to the mixer.

Also it is a good idea to first take it to a non-custodial wallet and then if you take it to a central exchange, at least have your own wallet to prove it.

And I thought our local exchange was very strict; I encountered the same issue with my local exchange. They don't ask me to undergo any process; they just returned the funds and reminded me to check their TOS before sending them.
That Kucoin process is harsh and it's too imposing you might as well avoid Kucoin there are better exchanges that will treat you fairly.

Yes, it is a good method that if a fund with a high AML score enters a central exchange, they can simply just refund it. This does not cause any trouble to the user. But the problem is that the big reputable exchanges keep the funds and harass the customers by asking them for various personal information.

And as far as I know, such funds are refund by non KYC exchanges, which we know as instant exchanges. If high AML score funds are deposited in them, they will directly refund the funds to the refund address.

Would they block your account if you took more than 48 hours to provide source of funds? If yes, it's too harsh, since i expect exchange may make you wait more than 48 hours to perform verification/check from their side.

Maybe they gave me 48 hours to submit the form. But their verification process time might have been on their hand. Anyway, I got my funds back within 48 hours of submitting the form they gave me and they emailed me that my problem was resolved.

[Renampun]

Just looking at that SOF template, it's such a hassle to prove a transaction worth only a few dozen dollars.. But that's the risk when you deposit money into an exchange that's so strict about AML, even though they should be able to just reject the funds and return them to the user.. Instead, they hold it like the user is “guilty,” and the user has no choice but to go through a whole process that could have been avoided..

So far, I've never run into this kind of problem with the exchanges I use.. not sure about the future.. But even if they hold the funds I deposited into my account and asked me to go through an AML check like that, I'd just ask them to refund the money and close my account because it's not worth spending so much energy and time just filling out all those forms for only a few dozen dollars.

[sergiorus]

However, it is worth mentioning here that my exchange account was KYC verified in advance with my ID. And after contacting their help, they gave me 48 hours to provide my source of funds. If I could not provide them with the source of funds, they would have blocked my entire exchange account.

Would they block your account if you took more than 48 hours to provide source of funds? If yes, it's too harsh, since i expect exchange may make you wait more than 48 hours to perform verification/check from their side.

I believe they send the funds back when to where they came from when that happens. After all, if they suspect the funds could be below their AML standards, they simply don't want it on their wallets in any way.

Unless there's some evidence the funds were involved in criminal activity (there wasn't), simply taking the funds would be nothing short of a theft, which would make the exchange itself a criminal.

[The Cryptovator]

However, I do not know what the process will be like for other exchangers. Maybe it will be the same process. Especially if you fill out the doc file link that I have given and put it in the source of funds, I hope your funds will be unfrozen.

So my advice here is that those of you who will receive signature payments, must first receive them in a non-custodial wallet first, so that you can provide proof of at least two step transaction records. So if you can keep it like this, I hope you will get your funds back very easily.

I have faced a similar issue with Binance; I simply provided evidence from where I have received the funds. So they simply unfreeze my funds after providing everything. However, now I haven’t been sending funds into Binance directly from the noncustodial wallet where I have been receiving my funds.

Same as you, I have been using Kucoin as well. Because Binance is my primary exchange, I don’t want to get into trouble with them. So first deposit into Kucoin, then transfer into Binance; definitely all the signature funds will be received into my noncustodial wallet (Trust Wallet).

Locally I have been using Trust Wallet, then from there to exchange and from exchange to my hardware wallet. This means I have been holding fresh funds in my hardware wallet, so later I won’t face this kind of unexpected situation when funds send back to the exchange for trading or cash out.

[salad daging]

That's quite a long process, OP. And it seems so unfair. You don't deserve to be treated that way.

Imagine if you did this every week? Every signature campaign payment is deposited into Kucoin and subjected to the same events, this is obviously unfair.

I know it's the regulatory policy, but I don't really understand why they can't just reject and return the flagged funds rather than accept them, freeze them, and hold them hostage while squeezing all kinds of sensitive information out of you. After all, it's not even in the thousands or even hundreds.

because it is a regulatory policy that they want to fund small amounts or a lot if it is from a high AML examination, they will do the same.

Do they use Chainanalys to monitor every high risk deposit?