Scam Report Against CryptoXchange $100k USD

[Phinnaeus Gage]

I dont see where they are claiming they will keep the coins. If I had that much money invested I would be doing everything possible to comply with the document request.

Personally I think its crazy to put that much money through one exchange

I have to agree with this.  If I put 100 grand in an exchange and they requested AML/KYC docs, I would hand it all over.  The only reason not to hand over those docs is if you have something to hide.  At the end of the day, if you have nothing to hide, hand over the identification documents.  Who cares whether it's crypto doing their own policing or the bank that is asking them for it, were talking about 100 grand.

Look at the dates..  (Use this http://masterrussian.com/vocabulary/russian_months.htm )    This guy had a ton of cash in the exchange and then for 2 months got the run around about his withdrawl wires, Mtgox is f'n us, we sent the wires, you didn't get them??.. Then after 2 months of excuses he gets, we need your apostille docs and we have suspended your account..  Because the last 2k of coins he put in were tainted..

Seriously..  Something fishy is going on here on both sides.  I like how Ken cusses out the mtgox exchange owner multiple times, and blames not sending wires on them (basically admiting they didn't have the money to pay), real professionalism there  

+1

This echos my sentiments completely. It's akin to somebody loaning me $100,000 in twenty dollar bills, and when during the time they start asking for their money back, I somehow get another $2K from them in twenties. After giving the runaround for a couple months on how I have not yet been able to refund their money, I come up with another angle. It seems like that last $2K given me has a funny looking dye on it, as if they came from a bank robbery. It now looks like I won't be repaying back a single bill, for I now have concerns as to where the rest of the funds came from. But if you supply me all the information I've asked of you, thus proving you are who you say you are, I will gladly give back to you every single twenty dollar bill I have right here on this funky coffee table. As you can see, I'm a reasonable guy, and trustworthy, whereas you, my friend, are a scumbag. (forgive me for going from 2nd person to 1st, or whatever it is, but you get the gist of what I'm trying to relay).

~Bruno~

Edit: (spelling of dye)

[1713894388]

1713894388

[1713894388]

1713894388

[1713894388]

1713894388

[Liberty Payout]

I dont see where they are claiming they will keep the coins. If I had that much money invested I would be doing everything possible to comply with the document request.

Personally I think its crazy to put that much money through one exchange

I have to agree with this.  If I put 100 grand in an exchange and they requested AML/KYC docs, I would hand it all over.  The only reason not to hand over those docs is if you have something to hide.  At the end of the day, if you have nothing to hide, hand over the identification documents.  Who cares whether it's crypto doing their own policing or the bank that is asking them for it, were talking about 100 grand.

Look at the dates..  (Use this http://masterrussian.com/vocabulary/russian_months.htm )    This guy had a ton of cash in the exchange and then for 2 months got the run around about his withdrawl wires, Mtgox is f'n us, we sent the wires, you didn't get them??.. Then after 2 months of excuses he gets, we need your apostille docs and we have suspended your account..  Because the last 2k of coins he put in were tainted..

Seriously..  Something fishy is going on here on both sides.  I like how Ken cusses out the mtgox exchange owner multiple times, and blames not sending wires on them (basically admiting they didn't have the money to pay), real professionalism there  

+1

This echos my sentiments completely. It's akin to somebody loaning me $100,000 in twenty dollar bills, and when during the time they start asking for their money back, I somehow get another $2K from them in twenties. After giving the runaround for a couple months on how I have not yet been able to refund their money, I come up with another angle. It seems like that last $2K given me has a funny looking die on it, as if they came from a bank robbery. It now looks like I won't be repaying back a single bill, for I now have concerns as to where the rest of the funds came from. But if you supply me all the information I've asked of you, thus proving you are who you say you are, I will gladly give back to you every single twenty dollar bill I have right here on this funky coffee table. As you can see, I'm a reasonable guy, and trustworthy, whereas you, my friend, are a scumbag. (forgive me for going from 2nd person to 1st, or whatever it is, but you get the gist of what I'm trying to relay).

~Bruno~

+1, dye*

[Coinoisseur]

When this amount of money/bitcoin is involved his best course of action is a lawsuit. It's even possible he would have to provide less identification than CX is asking for, or at the very least provide that information to a separate entity unlikely to divulge full ID details to CX, especially if he is just asking for the return of his BTC instead of currency.

[Clipse]

Lets assume OP is legit, if it all comes down to it he will provide all the details now magically requested by cryptoexchange since its really a decent size chunk of money.

Im curious what cryptoexchange will request next once they receive those docs, my best guess is they will claim they never received it over and over.

OP if you are legit and still have money left then book a ticket to Australia with a decent international criminal lawyer and take cryptoexchange on directly. If your claim is honest and legit you have alot more to win out of this case than what they actually owe to you.

[repentance]

From wme.cc's own ToS regarding AML compliance.

WME.cc views Money Laundering as a serious criminal offence, and as such, complies with regulatory requirements intended to forestall and prevent money laundering. These include:
• Identifying customers.
• Retaining transaction and identification records for a minimum period of five years.
• Training staff continuously in terms of anti-money laundering regulations.
• Monitoring and reporting any and all suspicious activities.
• Supervise and oversee that all transactions and information in the system is correct and complies with applicable laws.
Please note that WME.cc has the right to refuse a transaction at any time should suspicion arise that it may be connected to money laundering or any other criminal activity. In addition, WME.cc will report this suspicious activity in order to comply with said regulations, and internationally accepted laws and customs which also prohibits WME.cc from disclosing this information.

I therefore presume that WME knows the identity of the person who sold him the allegedly stolen Bitcoins and has reported the suspicious activity.

From their own ToS regarding refunding of unverified accounts.

Our service is available to verified customers only. Any deposit made to our bank account without following due process as contain in the users member area will not be treated. Such customer will be forced to register and verify an WME.cc account before funding. We may not refund, Please be informed!

Well what do you know.  If you don't complete the registration and verification process to their satisfaction, they mightn't refund your deposits.

Customers who could not complete the verification due to inability to provide the requested documents can make cash payments in our office. All other transactions are made through our bank accounts listed on the customer invoice which is only available to the verified customers.

So you can pay money into your account in cash without verification, but transfers and withdrawals must be made through their bank accounts, which requires you to be a verified customer.

OP if you are legit and still have money left then book a ticket to Australia with a decent international criminal lawyer and take cryptoexchange on directly. If your claim is honest and legit you have alot more to win out of this case than what they actually owe to you.

Criminal lawyers defend people accused by the state of having broken the law.  If the OP believes that a crime has been committed, then he needs to report it to Australian law enforcement.  You can't bring your own criminal lawyer to prosecute a criminal case.  Whether charges are laid and prosecuted is up to the Director of Public Prosecutions.   He could certainly try to recover his funds by civil action in the NSW courts system, though.  Hell, if the case ever got as far as even being listed for mention I'd show up for a front row seat each day.

[hoo]

What does it feel like, when you know you can't do anything.

...knowing no one here can do anything, and wouldn't if they could without getting a large percentage.
Welcome to Bitcoin.

[DILLIGAF]

If the OP believes that a crime has been committed, then he needs to report it to Australian law enforcement.  You can't bring your own criminal lawyer to prosecute a criminal case. 

You can indeed do that in a common law country which Australia is.


http://www.legallawyers.com.au/legal-topics/criminal-law/private-prosecution-in-new-south-wales/

[repentance]

If the OP believes that a crime has been committed, then he needs to report it to Australian law enforcement.  You can't bring your own criminal lawyer to prosecute a criminal case.  

You can indeed do that in a common law country which Australia is.

http://www.legallawyers.com.au/legal-topics/criminal-law/private-prosecution-in-new-south-wales/

The court attendance notice must first be signed by a registrar and the registrar cannot sign the notice if a) the notice does not disclose the grounds for the proceedings; b) it is not in the form required; or c) the rules provide that it should not be issued.

The Local Court Rules provide that a registrar must not sign a court attendance notice for a private prosecution if they believe the proceedings are “frivolous, vexatious, without substance or have no reasonable prospects of success”.

Do you really think that a complaint which is essentially "they won't release my money because I refuse to identify myself as requested under AML/KYC requirements" is going to be found to 1) have substance or 2) have a reasonable prospect of success?

Even assuming that a court didn't outright dismiss the proceedings, they can be terminated by the Attorney-General or taken over by the DPP.

I would honestly like very much to see one of these cases go to court, just as I'd like to see alleged Bitcoin thefts investigated by traditional law enforcement agencies.  The reality seems to be that those who complain the loudest avoid these options because they don't want to be subjected to independent scrutiny which they can't control.

[DILLIGAF]

If the OP believes that a crime has been committed, then he needs to report it to Australian law enforcement.  You can't bring your own criminal lawyer to prosecute a criminal case.  

You can indeed do that in a common law country which Australia is.

http://www.legallawyers.com.au/legal-topics/criminal-law/private-prosecution-in-new-south-wales/

The court attendance notice must first be signed by a registrar and the registrar cannot sign the notice if a) the notice does not disclose the grounds for the proceedings; b) it is not in the form required; or c) the rules provide that it should not be issued.

The Local Court Rules provide that a registrar must not sign a court attendance notice for a private prosecution if they believe the proceedings are “frivolous, vexatious, without substance or have no reasonable prospects of success”.

Do you really think that a complaint which is essentially "they won't release my money because I refuse to identify myself as requested under AML/KYC requirements" is going to be found to 1) have substance or 2) have a reasonable prospect of success?

Even assuming that a court didn't outright dismiss the proceedings, they can be terminated by the Attorney-General or taken over by the DPP.

I would honestly like very much to see one of these cases go to court, just as I'd like to see alleged Bitcoin thefts investigated by traditional law enforcement agencies.  The reality seems to be that those who complain the loudest avoid these options because they don't want to be subjected to independent scrutiny which they can't control.

No I don't think this clown has any chance that is not what I replied to it was your assertion that you could not bring a criminal case on your own when you can do it.

[repentance]

Let us keep in mind he sent in AML documents, CX is claiming they are fake. If the documents are not fake it is a different story.

There could still be a problem even if he sends documents which are accepted as authentic.  There's more than one AML/KYC issue with this story but, yes, if the OP can satisfactorily identify himself then the possibility that CryptoXchange can simply make a complex Suspicious Matter Report to AUSTRAC and return his funds is there. 

[DILLIGAF]

Let us keep in mind he sent in AML documents, CX is claiming they are fake. If the documents are not fake it is a different story.

Believe he also claims to have lawyer as well which if the case the lawyer would be taking care of this matter and he would not be posting on a forum trying to get "his" cash back. As well just about every time the crypto people post they ask for said documents yet he fails to provide any updated ones, you would think his lawyer would be doing that and the crypto people would not have to be asking repeatedly for them. In short I think this is a thinly veiled attempt to pressure the crypto people by putting out false information about them so they will just give him the money to shut him up, well I don't think that will turn out to be a winning strategy for him.

[repentance]

We do not know why CX is doing what they are doing. We do not know the full story. Still 100K is a lot to walk away from, I bet this ends up in court.

If it's to do with "suspicious matters" as defined by the AML/CTF Act, Cryptoxchange literally cannot tell the OP any specifics, let alone a bunch of people on the internet - disclosing that information would be a criminal offence under the "tipping-off" provisions of the Act (most FATF countries have similar provisions).  They can ask him to verify his identity and control of the funding account and they can ask him to prove the source and destination of funds, but they can't tell him that they suspect him of tax evasion/money laundering/financing terrorism or whatever other financial activity is illegal under the Act (the people/organisations to whom they can disclose that information is extremely limited).

I'd like to see just one of the people who claims that an exchange has robbed them of a large amount of money take the matter to court - they all seem curiously reluctant to do so though.

[Bigpiggy01]

Let us keep in mind he sent in AML documents, CX is claiming they are fake. If the documents are not fake it is a different story.

Believe he also claims to have lawyer as well which if the case the lawyer would be taking care of this matter and he would not be posting on a forum trying to get "his" cash back. As well just about every time the crypto people post they ask for said documents yet he fails to provide any updated ones, you would think his lawyer would be doing that and the crypto people would not have to be asking repeatedly for them. In short I think this is a thinly veiled attempt to pressure the crypto people by putting out false information about them so they will just give him the money to shut him up, well I don't think that will turn out to be a winning strategy for him.

This exactly.

I've done non btc business with Ken and his crew, as well as using their exchange and I find the entire concept of them holding onto funds without being forced into doing so ridiculous.

Let us keep in mind he sent in AML documents, CX is claiming they are fake. If the documents are not fake it is a different story.

Believe he also claims to have lawyer as well which if the case the lawyer would be taking care of this matter and he would not be posting on a forum trying to get "his" cash back. As well just about every time the crypto people post they ask for said documents yet he fails to provide any updated ones, you would think his lawyer would be doing that and the crypto people would not have to be asking repeatedly for them. In short I think this is a thinly veiled attempt to pressure the crypto people by putting out false information about them so they will just give him the money to shut him up, well I don't think that will turn out to be a winning strategy for him.

I understand the situation is not clear, I just do not like it when the exchange starts to be the police. We do not know why CX is doing what they are doing. We do not know the full story. Still 100K is a lot to walk away from, I bet this ends up in court.

Yup that would be the right place to settle something like this. Splashing childish nonsense all over a public forum is just idiotic. Furthermore taking a developers attempts at support and reading anything authoritative into them is just as ridiculous.

[DILLIGAF]

Let us keep in mind he sent in AML documents, CX is claiming they are fake. If the documents are not fake it is a different story.

Believe he also claims to have lawyer as well which if the case the lawyer would be taking care of this matter and he would not be posting on a forum trying to get "his" cash back. As well just about every time the crypto people post they ask for said documents yet he fails to provide any updated ones, you would think his lawyer would be doing that and the crypto people would not have to be asking repeatedly for them. In short I think this is a thinly veiled attempt to pressure the crypto people by putting out false information about them so they will just give him the money to shut him up, well I don't think that will turn out to be a winning strategy for him.

I understand the situation is not clear, I just do not like it when the exchange starts to be the police. We do not know why CX is doing what they are doing. We do not know the full story. Still 100K is a lot to walk away from, I bet this ends up in court.

Nor do I like the idea of exchanges acting like the police if anything is going to kill off BTC it will be that idea, once people don't trust that the coins they receive can be sold/traded anywhere it is dead and buried. This would already be in court if he had leg to stand on it has been as I said over a month I think since I first saw this pop up now supposedly he has lawyer but I have seen no mention of papers being served or even the attempt to get proceedings underway. Just the same tired old BS they got my money and won't give it too me and BTW I am not going out of my way to make sure they have everything needed to get the money too me thrown in for good measure. Now I don't know about you but for a $100k I would have been on plane to the land down under long time ago with my passport in hand in person at their offices to get my damn cash if this was the case and I would not be leaving until I had it in hand or the police removed me from said offices in fact I would bring the police with me in the first place which I would think would be a prudent thing to do.

[PatrickHarnett]

I have a few prongs of interest in this case.
1: I used to run a business in Australia governed by their financial services act (and am aware of the non-disclosure rules that exist in some of the Australian legislation).
2: I have legal proceedings against someone running though the legal system in Sydney for an unpaid debt.
3: I use CryptoExchange as my exchange of choice and haven't encountered problems like those mentioned above.
4: I have recently completed a review of how people resolve legal issues (it was a meta study looking at five different countries).

On #4, of the thousands of people surveyed, there was no mention of a successful resolution from trying to pressure someone via an internet forum.  Seeking help from police, citizens advice, Government departments, lawyers, friends/family, employers, self-help and others were covered.  But the approach adopted here - no mention.

And on #2 above, in retaining legal counsel I needed to provide ID, and there are sworn documents filed, but it is an expensive and drawn out process.

[Matthew N. Wright]

I have a few prongs of interest in this case.
1: I used to run a business in Australia governed by their financial services act (and am aware of the non-disclosure rules that exist in some of the Australian legislation).
2: I have legal proceedings against someone running though the legal system in Sydney for an unpaid debt.
3: I use CryptoExchange as my exchange of choice and haven't encountered problems like those mentioned above.
4: I have recently completed a review of how people resolve legal issues (it was a meta study looking at five different countries).

On #4, of the thousands of people surveyed, there was no mention of a successful resolution from trying to pressure someone via an internet forum.  Seeking help from police, citizens advice, Government departments, lawyers, friends/family, employers, self-help and others were covered.  But the approach adopted here - no mention.

And on #2 above, in retaining legal counsel I needed to provide ID, and there are sworn documents filed, but it is an expensive and drawn out process.

Thanks Patrick.

It appears to me that the OP is just trying to get attention and with the help of sock puppet #239402 Liberty Payout, basically trying to smear the exchange to put pressure on it to cave. The problem with that is that we all know Ken is honest and that CryptoXChange has a flawless reputation.

OP is a scammer who got burned by working with an exchange legally required to ask questions and like most scammers, underestimated the consistency of law abiding businesses. If he could provide the proper documents, he'd get his money, but I happen to know exactly why he won't and it's a doozy.

@OP: Why don't you bother showing the people here some proof of this supposed $100k you're missing, because that too is a lie.

[caveden]

What I want to know is the Govt forcing CX to act like this, or are they doing it because they want to be the new bitcoin police/hold onto the cash cuz they do not have funds?

That's what I'd like to know too.

[Matthew N. Wright]

What I want to know is the Govt forcing CX to act like this, or are they doing it because they want to be the new bitcoin police/hold onto the cash cuz they do not have funds?

That's what I'd like to know too.

Once AML flags go off, they can't legally send money to these scammer clowns even if they wanted to.

[caveden]

Once AML flags go off, they can't legally send money to these scammer clowns even if they wanted to.

If that was the case, they shouldn't have sworn the money was on its way for weeks/months.
And "stolen bitcoins" alone wouldn't trigger an AML investigation on the bank side. Something more would be necessary.

Anyways, it's pointless to discuss this here.
The best option is trying to stay away from centralized exchanges, if possible.

[Matthew N. Wright]

Once AML flags go off, they can't legally send money to these scammer clowns even if they wanted to.

If that was the case, they shouldn't have sworn the money was on its way for weeks/months.
And "stolen bitcoins" alone wouldn't trigger an AML investigation on the bank side. Something more would be necessary.

Anyways, it's pointless to discuss this here.
The best option is trying to stay away from centralized exchanges, if possible.

I believe CXE has already sent them funds before and were unable to continue to do so because they were cockblocked by their own solicitors who demanded more information due to reported stolen accounts etc. Not to mention these scummyfucks are more than likely associated with the Linode hack. Who knows. These clowns are trying to pass off CXE's lack of response to the issue as some kind of denial, but they are legally bound to deal with the customer only and the customer continues to bring their slop to the forums instead of go through normal legal channels.

Kind of a no brainer who's lying here.