Bitcoin Forum
December 10, 2016, 01:06:05 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Scam Report Against CryptoXchange $100k USD  (Read 20268 times)
Maged
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260


View Profile
June 07, 2012, 08:08:47 AM
 #41

AML / CFT / KYC is very important in Australia, there is a lot more to this than is shown, we are doing what we legally have to do

Care to show what's not shown?
Have you received a court order or a police order telling you to seize this money or freeze this account?
Here's the thing with AML law: CryptoXchange legally can't tell someone that they're being investigated.
And why telling him that the money's on the way if it isn't? The same way he's refusing to send you notarized documents, it seems by the pictures you've avoided sending him wire receipts.
Because the money was on the way. It was the bank that flagged the transaction, after the wire request was submitted.

Why can't he provide receipts then. Some evidence to feast our eyes upon.
Because the wire never left the bank - it was only ever a request, and the bank denied it.

Image 16. If Crypto thought he was laundering why would he ask the OP to help him get cheap coins, why try to engage in a joint venture with the OP's business?
Because stolen coins are cheap and Ken apparently knows how to properly launder the coins so that he can make some nice, hot, cash.

1481375165
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481375165

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481375165
Reply with quote  #2

1481375165
Report to moderator
1481375165
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481375165

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481375165
Reply with quote  #2

1481375165
Report to moderator
1481375165
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481375165

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481375165
Reply with quote  #2

1481375165
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
caveden
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
June 07, 2012, 08:13:42 AM
 #42

1) They can't directly say that the bank is who triggered the AML request. Showing the receipt would absolutely prove that.

You're assuming there's an official AML investigation on the way. Posting the receipts would just prove they send the money which is now stuck at the bank, for whatever reasons. In no way that states there's an AML investigation on the way.
I really doubt that's illegal.

2) They submit the wire requests in large batches. Giving us the receipt would reveal the transactions of others.

Please, just blur the other names.

Honestly, this is an issue that's well beyond the court of public opinion. I support the OP in wanting to do a lawsuit, as that is the only way that both sides could lay all their cards on the table.

You're probably right on that one.

The thing is, OP being a thief or not, I'm very uneasy with a btc exchange "playing police", tainting coins and all that. If CryptoXChange would show us the bank is at fault here for not sending the wires, we could at least rule that out.

18rZYyWcafwD86xvLrfuxWG5xEMMWUtVkL
repentance
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 840


View Profile
June 07, 2012, 08:23:52 AM
 #43

Honestly, this is an issue that's well beyond the court of public opinion. I support the OP in wanting to do a lawsuit, as that is the only way that both sides could lay all their cards on the table.

The OP could make a complaint to AUSTRAC if he genuinely believes that CryptoXchange is abusing AML/KYC requirements in order to keep his funds for themselves.  Of course he might have some explaining to do if he took that option.

All I can say is that this is Bitcoin. I don't believe it until I see six confirmations.
rjk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


1ngldh


View Profile
June 07, 2012, 01:36:36 PM
 #44

So why does OP post once or twice, and then some unknown members take over the discussion for him in his favor? Smacks of major sockpuppetry and fraud, to say the very least. I'm fairly sure there is a lot more at work here than many folks realize.

Those of you that want to perform actions in direct defiance of governmental or regulatory mandates, please go start your own exchange and see how far you get.

Mining Rig Extraordinaire - the Trenton BPX6806 18-slot PCIe backplane [PICS] Dead project is dead, all hail the coming of the mighty ASIC!
Bitcoin Oz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700


Wat


View Profile WWW
June 07, 2012, 01:57:13 PM
 #45

I guess you could always just send the coins to the police to sort out but they would need a bitcoin address first  Cheesy


LoupGaroux
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420



View Profile
June 07, 2012, 02:17:13 PM
 #46

Isn't it so very interesting that Liberty Payouts has such a passionate interest in this issue, when he has been "dealing" in similar amounts of similarly tainted and misappropriated funds? What's up Liberty, worried that one of your colleagues in crime might be getting slapped down while laundering stolen funds? Feel a little too close for comfort to see vigilante justice?

Funny how the scammers all stick up for each other.

54Gh/s bASIC Bitcoin Mining Devices
Pre-Order Yours Today!     
Only $1069.99 ! @ http://www.BitcoinASIC.com


Look^^ I'm selling my soul too!
Bigpiggy01
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 616



View Profile
June 07, 2012, 02:28:20 PM
 #47

1) They can't directly say that the bank is who triggered the AML request. Showing the receipt would absolutely prove that.

You're assuming there's an official AML investigation on the way. Posting the receipts would just prove they send the money which is now stuck at the bank, for whatever reasons. In no way that states there's an AML investigation on the way.
I really doubt that's illegal.

2) They submit the wire requests in large batches. Giving us the receipt would reveal the transactions of others.

Please, just blur the other names.

Honestly, this is an issue that's well beyond the court of public opinion. I support the OP in wanting to do a lawsuit, as that is the only way that both sides could lay all their cards on the table.

You're probably right on that one.

The thing is, OP being a thief or not, I'm very uneasy with a btc exchange "playing police", tainting coins and all that. If CryptoXChange would show us the bank is at fault here for not sending the wires, we could at least rule that out.

It's not just a question of AML law it's also a question of privacy laws etc here. A company that is required in case of AML/KYC laws etc to hold customer information, and bank accounts/recipts/statements are very much customer information, are in most civilized countries severely restricted in what they can and can't do with such information and suggesting that they post such on the internet is frankly kinda fail.

In Australia the rules are quite clear: http://www.privacy.gov.au/materials/types/infosheets/view/6541#k

What you're suggesting is in legal terms under AUS law the same as your bank suddenly deciding to post everything they have on you on the internet. Not really a smart move at all.

Bitcoin Oz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700


Wat


View Profile WWW
June 07, 2012, 02:35:37 PM
 #48

I guess you could always just send the coins to the police to sort out but they would need a bitcoin address first  Cheesy



I know you were making a joke but it is a reasonable idea on the face of it. However once they do this, no one will ever use the exchange again as everyone sooner or later will have tainted coins.

I wonder how many transactions happened between bitcoinica withdrawal and crypto deposit of the coins ?

bitfury
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266


View Profile
June 07, 2012, 03:09:16 PM
 #49

Well. I would like to add few cents here....

Actually if payment was done via SWIFT network, it is quite easily to track it. And sender who is doing his job correctly (i.e. sending wires at the same dates as they write in admin screens, etc.) could easily provide proof.

Sender of such payment can ask from bank copy of swift message. And still value date can be in the future,
basically SWIFT message transmitted from sender bank to receiver bank within few seconds to 15-20 minutes depending on
correspondent bank accounts. So if receiver has good relationship with his bank, he could see incoming payment
in minutes... Not in days... And look what "value date" will be.

That's SWIFT message today is standardized and called SWIFT MESSAGE MT-103 ... So copy of this SWIFT message by CryptoXChange would clarify everything. And studying more about SWIFT system would actually help to find international wires, as if some of corr. banks by some reason not transferred to recipient because OF SOME ERROR IN ORIGINATING SWIFT MESSAGE, like wrong account number or wrong company name, this can be easily and quickly resolved.

The swift message copy usually costs between $0 to $25 and contains all required information, with stamp and signature from bank. This swift message - is like GPG-signed email, which can be lawfully enforced if banker screw things. This also negates rumors about "batches"... As even if you sent to your bank "batch", it will be processed message by message using MT-103 transfers. That's why wire costs so much... And wire is irreversible.

More about SWIFT:
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_MT_103-23
http://www.globalgrainsvn.com/GGSVN/MT103.html

Please read also this (so you will see how it looks like.... Quite different from these shitty online forms, isn't it ? Actually bankers take responsibility for the transfers... And will be liable by laws if they screw transfer...):
http://www.wallstreetfunds.biz/bankers/MT-103format.htm

That is from google... Usually banks don't copy whole message, but only part with amounts, value date, corr. banks, etc.
They could also put signature and seal on it (useful in case if you have to deal against receiving bank, and have proof that money were actually transferred there - with small and bad banks this works very well, as when they know that you have signed swift message on hands)

Another moment - this not looks like police investigations, as usually you'll get your wire as expected with slight delay, but then you'll likely be arrested when getting these funds. If claims that false passport was used are true for example, then receiving bank would cooperate and receiver of funds would be likely under investigation. If fake ID happened on side of receiver bank, they would perform further tracking until transaction would get to recipient. This is called "paper trail"... Knowing the details helps a lot to locate crooks and then their assets as well... However that may be expensive to perform large-scale investigations.

On other side - WME is running exchange services for years, and it seems that he would not risk with CLIENTS' money by providing fake ID. Putting $100k on fake ID is like complete nonsense today, as if it would be truly dirty money, which "launderer" would know of - he would provide real person with paying him about $500-$1000 for laundering, or this transaction would be structured in smaller pieces. Although it is strange - is that WME is actually same WME ? Because being 10 years in exchanges, and not asking first for proof of transfer via asking for swift message or other similar form for systems like ACH for US accounts or SEPA for EURs is quite strange. However other side seems to have ad-hoc behavior with multiple lies. It looks more like both operate in "gray" biz zone not knowing well what they actually do.

It looks more like CryptoX stopped their money either by their own investigation, without authorities involved or they simply decided to rob WME. Maybe that is "rob the robber" action... I don't know - it's all fantasy without CORRECT investigation by authorized and trained persons (i.e. investigators, experts, etc). But in case if they're just robbing money - many would think that they are nice target for robbery as well, as they would have difficulties to deal with police then, and simply bigger and more powerful robber could take their "bank". And that fact makes additional risk to it's users.

About "stolen bitcoins" - that's the question - who is the judge - stolen they or not ? That cannot be determined from blockchain alone. If exchanger claims the right to be judge - then - what reason to use that exchange ? Somebody pays you, and then cry on forum - oh - they were stolen, I haven't sent that payment... Is it legit to trust such claims at all ?
Isn't purpose of bitcoins was to fix this issue ? If you want refund ability - then go with VISA or paypal - they have it!
Say these "hacks" in exchanges - are they hacks or security exploits by owners or insider personnel, who just decided to steal some coins knowing in advance that it is coins and unlikely there will be any legal consequences, as I written above, that would likely happen if you for example steal money from bank account and wire it even to account with fake ID.

This also raises question - is it possible to trust using bitcoin exchange 3-rd parties that aggregate clients money and operate without tight law framework, that actually protects customers (i.e. maintaining liquidity, etc.) or bitcoin exchanges should be done more in p2p manner, making p2p transactions between persons using real banking institutions that has strict regulations.

Thanks for your attention!

2 Bigpiggy01: If customer wants to disclose his private information - he could, and he could authorize doing that.
caveden
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
June 07, 2012, 04:39:48 PM
 #50

It's not just a question of AML law it's also a question of privacy laws etc here. A company that is required in case of AML/KYC laws etc to hold customer information, and bank accounts/recipts/statements are very much customer information, are in most civilized countries severely restricted in what they can and can't do with such information and suggesting that they post such on the internet is frankly kinda fail.

In Australia the rules are quite clear: http://www.privacy.gov.au/materials/types/infosheets/view/6541#k

What you're suggesting is in legal terms under AUS law the same as your bank suddenly deciding to post everything they have on you on the internet. Not really a smart move at all.

WME himself has already made the details public. So I guess he wouldn't mind giving authorization to make the receipt public as well.

18rZYyWcafwD86xvLrfuxWG5xEMMWUtVkL
Liberty Payout
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266



View Profile
June 07, 2012, 06:45:49 PM
 #51

Isn't it so very interesting that Liberty Payouts has such a passionate interest in this issue, when he has been "dealing" in similar amounts of similarly tainted and misappropriated funds? What's up Liberty, worried that one of your colleagues in crime might be getting slapped down while laundering stolen funds? Feel a little too close for comfort to see vigilante justice?

Funny how the scammers all stick up for each other.

Why are you so sure he is not the same guy?

Funny how the scammers stick up for each other? Funny how when there is actually a scam on this site you guys have nothing better to do then come after people like me for no reason at all. There is a mound of evidence against Crypto. Point of the matter is someone is out $100,000 which is a lot of money, and until someone starts explaining why this is, rather than making some baseless assumptions I'm going to assume Crypto is a scammer. Is that not what all you idiots were saying? That you have to "assume" until proven otherwise? Well that's what I'm doing. You guys also need to stop riding Crypto's dick so he can come in here like a man and explain himself.
Matthew N. Wright
Untrustworthy
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588


Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet


View Profile
June 07, 2012, 06:47:35 PM
 #52

Isn't it so very interesting that Liberty Payouts has such a passionate interest in this issue, when he has been "dealing" in similar amounts of similarly tainted and misappropriated funds? What's up Liberty, worried that one of your colleagues in crime might be getting slapped down while laundering stolen funds? Feel a little too close for comfort to see vigilante justice?

Funny how the scammers all stick up for each other.

Why are you so sure he is not the same guy?

Funny how the scammers stick up for each other? Funny how when there is actually a scam on this site you guys have nothing better to do then come after people like me for no reason at all. There is a mound of evidence against Crypto. Point of the matter is someone is out $100,000 which is a lot of money, and until someone starts explaining why this is, rather than making some baseless assumptions I'm going to assume Crypto is a scammer. Is that not what all you idiots were saying? That you have to "assume" until proven otherwise? Well that's what I'm doing. You guys also need to stop riding Crypto's dick so he can come in here like a man and explain himself.

Liberty Payout: One question--- how do you feel about anonymity and living in New York city?

Liberty Payout
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266



View Profile
June 07, 2012, 06:50:49 PM
 #53

Isn't it so very interesting that Liberty Payouts has such a passionate interest in this issue, when he has been "dealing" in similar amounts of similarly tainted and misappropriated funds? What's up Liberty, worried that one of your colleagues in crime might be getting slapped down while laundering stolen funds? Feel a little too close for comfort to see vigilante justice?

Funny how the scammers all stick up for each other.

Why are you so sure he is not the same guy?

Funny how the scammers stick up for each other? Funny how when there is actually a scam on this site you guys have nothing better to do then come after people like me for no reason at all. There is a mound of evidence against Crypto. Point of the matter is someone is out $100,000 which is a lot of money, and until someone starts explaining why this is, rather than making some baseless assumptions I'm going to assume Crypto is a scammer. Is that not what all you idiots were saying? That you have to "assume" until proven otherwise? Well that's what I'm doing. You guys also need to stop riding Crypto's dick so he can come in here like a man and explain himself.

Liberty Payout: One question--- how do you feel about anonymity and living in New York city?

I don't understand your question. If you have questions PM me. In the meanwhile I want this thread on topic. People have explaining to do. I want to see how an actual scam report plays out on this site. At this point I'm pissed the fuck off, because so many of you were so adamant about me when I didn't do anything, and now that there is an actual scammer you're all lollygagging which makes the fact that you tried to persecute me my first few days here on the basis of "protecting each other" bullshit.
Matthew N. Wright
Untrustworthy
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588


Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet


View Profile
June 07, 2012, 06:55:14 PM
 #54

I don't understand your question. If you have questions PM me. In the meanwhile I want this thread on topic. People have explaining to do. I want to see how an actual scam report plays out on this site. At this point I'm pissed the fuck off, because so many of you were so adamant about me when I didn't do anything, and now that there is an actual scammer you're all lollygagging which makes the fact that you tried to persecute me my first few days here on the basis of "protecting each other" bullshit.

haha you said I was on ignore.

Anyway, the reason no one is jumping up and down is because this is not the first thread WME has tried to make noise in. Go check the other thread. The solutions were all presented, the OP doesn't want to do what he has to do.

casascius
Mike Caldwell
VIP
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1344


The Casascius 1oz 10BTC Silver Round (w/ Gold B)


View Profile WWW
June 07, 2012, 07:18:11 PM
 #55

I wish the alleged scam report were a little more concise.  It's too difficult and long-winded to follow.

The first paragraph should state a precise dollar/btc amount and a date since which it's been owed and how it came to be owed (deposit? proceeds of btc sales? etc.).  Everything coming after that should support the original allegation.  All of the inline screenshots are noise - to the extent they have evidence value, they should be linked as offsite references.

Companies claiming they got hacked and lost your coins sounds like fraud so perfect it could be called fashionable.  I never believe them.  If I ever experience the misfortune of a real intrusion, I declare I have been honest about the way I have managed the keys in Casascius Coins.  I maintain no ability to recover or reproduce the keys, not even under limitless duress or total intrusion.  Remember that trusting strangers with your coins without any recourse is, as a matter of principle, not a best practice.  Don't keep coins online. Use paper wallets instead.
repentance
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 840


View Profile
June 07, 2012, 08:10:08 PM
 #56

2 Bigpiggy01: If customer wants to disclose his private information - he could, and he could authorize doing that.

It's really not that simple, which is why when people go to the media about their bank having allegedly done something terrible the bank only comments in general terms along the lines of "looking into the complaint".  There really isn't a blanket authorisation for public disclosure of financial information which a customer can give - the authorisation needs to be insanely specific and it needs to state the lawful purpose for which the information can be disclosed (providing information to a message board so they can form an opinion wouldn't count as the kind of "lawful purpose" required by the various privacy acts).

OP really needs to get his lawyer to file a complaint with AUSTRAC.  There'll be no problem getting his funds released if AUSTRAC determines that his identity verification documents meet the required standards for AML/KYC compliance standards and that his transactions are legitimate.

All I can say is that this is Bitcoin. I don't believe it until I see six confirmations.
Liberty Payout
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266



View Profile
June 07, 2012, 08:14:33 PM
 #57

2 Bigpiggy01: If customer wants to disclose his private information - he could, and he could authorize doing that.

It's really not that simple, which is why when people go to the media about their bank having allegedly done something terrible the bank only comments in general terms along the lines of "looking into the complaint".  There really isn't a blanket authorisation for public disclosure of financial information which a customer can give - the authorisation needs to be insanely specific and it needs to state the lawful purpose for which the information can be disclosed (providing information to a message board so they can form an opinion wouldn't count as the kind of "lawful purpose" required by the various privacy acts).

OP really needs to get his lawyer to file a complaint with AUSTRAC.  There'll be no problem getting his funds released if AUSTRAC determines that his identity verification documents meet the required standards for AML/KYC compliance standards and that his transactions are legitimate.

From what I know about these matters it would be extremely expensive for the OP to take this to court and may yield little benefit. If my assumptions about Crypto are correct they are a company that is heading into the gutter whether by lack of funding or some other source and they simply don't have the funding to pay. Yes the OP could take this to court but in the end Crypto may end up declaring bankruptcy to no avail of the OP or may end up paying but at a large monetary loss of the OP. Either way Crypto goes down and the OP loses a significant amount of money.
Matthew N. Wright
Untrustworthy
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588


Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet


View Profile
June 07, 2012, 08:16:57 PM
 #58

From what I know about these matters it would be extremely expensive for the OP to take this to court and may yield little benefit. If my assumptions about Crypto are correct they are a company that is heading into the gutter whether by lack of funding or some other source and they simply don't have the funding to pay. Yes the OP could take this to court but in the end Crypto may end up declaring bankruptcy to no avail of the OP or may end up paying but at a large monetary loss of the OP. Either way Crypto goes down and the OP loses a significant amount of money.

Crypto is not going down. OP needs to file his paperwork.

Liberty Payout
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266



View Profile
June 07, 2012, 08:20:29 PM
 #59

From what I know about these matters it would be extremely expensive for the OP to take this to court and may yield little benefit. If my assumptions about Crypto are correct they are a company that is heading into the gutter whether by lack of funding or some other source and they simply don't have the funding to pay. Yes the OP could take this to court but in the end Crypto may end up declaring bankruptcy to no avail of the OP or may end up paying but at a large monetary loss of the OP. Either way Crypto goes down and the OP loses a significant amount of money.

Crypto is not going down. OP needs to file his paperwork.

I think they are. You can't just pull off scams of this magnitude with sensitive currency such as BTC.
Liberty Payout
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266



View Profile
June 07, 2012, 08:21:17 PM
 #60

I also highly doubt this is the first or the last time Crypto has done something like this. Only a matter of time before others come out.
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!