Freewallet.org Flag - Please Support - page 4.

marlboroza

legendary

Activity: 1932

Merit: 2270

Quote from: actmyname on July 15, 2019, 11:15:22 AM

What are the exact requirements for you to request a KYC procedure?

If you cannot outline these details (and subsequently record them in your terms of service if they are not already) then how do we know you are not selectively enforcing it in order to fill your pockets?

Some useful information and links https://www.hkma.gov.hk/eng/key-functions/banking-stability/aml-cft.shtml

If I understand this https://www.hkma.gov.hk/media/eng/doc/key-functions/finanical-infrastructure/infrastructure/svf/Guideline_on_AMLCFT_for_SVF_eng_final.pdf correctly, they have to conduct KYC procedure if amount is equal or above HK$8,000, which is cca $1,000 at the moment. I couldn't find information for cryptocurrency but I believe it should be the same procedure.

Quote from: suchmoon on July 15, 2019, 02:47:39 PM

Look at the flailing excuses (emphasis mine):

Quote from: fuckpay on July 12, 2019, 12:08:08 AM

I got the following email from them,

Quote

We’d like to inform you that our security system has detected suspicious activity on your account. In case it was a hacking attempt, we had to temporarily suspend withdrawals from your account – this way your funds will be absolutely safe, and the access will be restored once the verification procedure will be finished.

Quote from: Freewallet on July 12, 2019, 03:18:29 AM

In your case, the risk-scoring algorithm has detected suspicious activity.

Quote from: Freewallet on July 12, 2019, 09:35:03 AM

Our guidelines are compliant with international AML regulations and standards.
That's the main reason why this procedure is in place.

marlboroza pointed that out and some other stuff here:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.51801073

Sleazy AF. Not to mention that the 15 BTC case did not involve fiat (Tether is not fiat) and their AML/KYC shit is supposed to apply to direct fiat-crypto purchases.

They replied this:

Quote from: Freewallet on July 14, 2019, 02:37:24 AM

Reveal of suspicions activity implies we'd act within the frames of the AML regulations.

If they locked funds because of suspicious activity (which they claim they did) they have to report it to authorities, they can't just say - "hey, we suspect that these funds came from criminal activity, send us your selfie and you can have your funds".

Normal answer would be "we need your personal information because under the AML regulation and law we have to enforce KYC if amount is equal or above (insert currency)x,xxx which in your case was."

Everything should be correctly stated in ToS.

suchmoon

legendary

Activity: 3654

Merit: 8909

https://bpip.org

Look at the flailing excuses (emphasis mine):

Quote from: fuckpay on July 12, 2019, 12:08:08 AM

I got the following email from them,

Quote

We’d like to inform you that our security system has detected suspicious activity on your account. In case it was a hacking attempt, we had to temporarily suspend withdrawals from your account – this way your funds will be absolutely safe, and the access will be restored once the verification procedure will be finished.

Quote from: Freewallet on July 12, 2019, 03:18:29 AM

In your case, the risk-scoring algorithm has detected suspicious activity.

Quote from: Freewallet on July 12, 2019, 09:35:03 AM

Our guidelines are compliant with international AML regulations and standards.
That's the main reason why this procedure is in place.

marlboroza pointed that out and some other stuff here:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.51801073

Sleazy AF. Not to mention that the 15 BTC case did not involve fiat (Tether is not fiat) and their AML/KYC shit is supposed to apply to direct fiat-crypto purchases.

actmyname

copper member

Activity: 2562

Merit: 2504

Spear the bees

Quote from: AdolfinWolf on July 15, 2019, 01:11:21 PM

See, this is interesting.

My take is that they ask almost every customer for KYC, and only resolve the ones where the customer makes a fuss about it, or uploads documents, regardless of whether or not the customer had "fraudulent activity" going on with their account.

Which we won't know about since these people either don't care that they lost 50-500$, or don't know how to resolve it properly.

Here's an alternative proposal:

Not every customer is asked for KYC.

A small percentage of the pool is "culled" and a participant thereof is asked of KYC. This percentage might comprise of some additional calculations (i.e. blockchain analysis or location-based targeting). The majority of the customers have no problem and may dismiss these complaints as angry/ignorant clients. And since the wallet's name isn't obscure, it can certainly withstand a few "minor" complaints.

Think of it this way: an outright scam with KYC will disincentivize new users from registering. A long con with a trickling increase of victims, however...

What they could do is target polarized users in terms of balance.

If a user has to KYC just to withdraw $10, they might just forgo the money. At worst, they seem like they're complaining about some minute amount.
If a user has to KYC to withdraw $50,000... well, you have a chance of just outright stealing the money, if they're privacy-conscious. At worst, they complain and you allow them to withdraw. No harm done.

AdolfinWolf

legendary

Activity: 1946

Merit: 1427

Quote from: sheenshane on July 15, 2019, 12:12:46 PM

Few days? How many days does it take? (I think you are one of them, am I right?)
In my case, it takes more than a year and you know what makes me annoyed at that shady service wallet? Their support on Gmail is just like a bot it response once to confirm your ticket issue submitted but after that, they will no longer reply. In short, lack of staff and also showing shady behavior. And now, I am not interested in my sleeping coin on their shady wallet(never trust them anymore), that is a small amount but it was so disappointing.

Supporting the raising flag as well.

See, this is interesting.

My take is that they ask almost every customer for KYC, and only resolve the ones where the customer makes a fuss about it, or uploads documents, regardless of whether or not the customer had "fraudulent activity" going on with their account.

Which we won't know about since these people either don't care that they lost 50-500$, or don't know how to resolve it properly.

sheenshane

legendary

Activity: 2366

Merit: 1206

Quote from: dr.hopkins on July 15, 2019, 11:22:32 AM

I had the same problem recently but the sum of the stuck transaction was smaller. It took support a few days to solve my case. So you’d better do not worry and just give the devs some time to figure it all out.

Few days? How many days does it take? (I think you are one of them, am I right?)
In my case, it takes more than a year and you know what makes me annoyed at that shady service wallet? Their support on Gmail is just like a bot it response once to confirm your ticket issue submitted but after that, they will no longer reply. In short, lack of staff and also showing shady behavior. And now, I am not interested in my sleeping coin on their shady wallet(never trust them anymore), that is a small amount but it was so disappointing.

Supporting the raising flag as well.

actmyname

copper member

Activity: 2562

Merit: 2504

Spear the bees

Quote from: bitmover on July 15, 2019, 11:38:50 AM

Quote from: dr.hopkins on July 15, 2019, 11:22:32 AM

. It took support a few days to solve my case. So you’d better do not worry and just give the devs some time to figure it all out.

Devs? Figure out?
You don't understand what is going on here lol

Freewallet deliberately is locking funds until the customer goes through kyc procedure. There is no issue to be solved, just a shady behavior

Not sure what's going on with the account, either. Seems like a farmed one (posting a few times every month) but there's these posts that mention Freewallet:

Quote from: ?? on ??

Losing control over the wallet is sometimes too scary. That's exactly the point I wanted to use the Freewallet EOS app because it is told in their knowledge base that they are using a Cold Storage. I think that means they store all the valuable information regarding me and my funds. Since the fork happened I am keeping all my EOS there, except those bits I'm trading.

And the following is in a locked thread... unquoteable without manual intervention.

Quote

It was a good time to buy alts at that moment. Just take a look at EOS and the way it is slowly making its way to the top. From the very beginning of 2019 it has been showing growing trend, don't you think it is still a good time to buy some EOS for a long term hold? Should bring some profit I think in a half a year probably. I've chosen to keep mine at Freewallet's app, seems legit: https://freewallet.org/eos-wallet

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

bitmover

legendary

Activity: 2212

Merit: 5622

Non-custodial BTC Wallet

Quote from: dr.hopkins on July 15, 2019, 11:22:32 AM

. It took support a few days to solve my case. So you’d better do not worry and just give the devs some time to figure it all out.

Devs? Figure out?
You don't understand what is going on here lol

Freewallet deliberately is locking funds until the customer goes through kyc procedure. There is no issue to be solved, just a shady behavior

dr.hopkins

newbie

Activity: 54

Merit: 0

I had the same problem recently but the sum of the stuck transaction was smaller. It took support a few days to solve my case. So you’d better do not worry and just give the devs some time to figure it all out.

actmyname

copper member

Activity: 2562

Merit: 2504

Spear the bees

What are the exact requirements for you to request a KYC procedure?

If you cannot outline these details (and subsequently record them in your terms of service if they are not already) then how do we know you are not selectively enforcing it in order to fill your pockets?

suchmoon

legendary

Activity: 3654

Merit: 8909

https://bpip.org

Quote from: Freewallet on July 15, 2019, 10:23:47 AM

He made a conversion transaction (from Tether to BTC), using our service.

What does that have to do with anything? Are you saying KYC wouldn't apply to someone who deposits and withdraws the same currency? What about the claims of suspected hacking?

Freewallet

member

Activity: 551

Merit: 11

Quote from: suchmoon on July 15, 2019, 10:10:42 AM

The customer whose "issue was closed on Friday". Did that person have to go through KYC just to get their own funds back?

He made a conversion transaction (from Tether to BTC), using our service.

suchmoon

legendary

Activity: 3654

Merit: 8909

https://bpip.org

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: suchmoon on July 15, 2019, 09:00:47 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

I'd like to draw the attention of everyone in this thread that the referenced issue was closed on Friday and the customer could withdraw his funds.

Did you still force them to go through KYC? And how many other accounts do you have locked up this way?

Force whom?

At this point, we have a few accounts going through this procedure

The customer whose "issue was closed on Friday". Did that person have to go through KYC just to get their own funds back?

bob123

legendary

Activity: 1624

Merit: 2481

Quote from: ?? on ??

At this point, we have a few accounts going through this procedure

And you don't believe that this is an extremely shady behavior that should not be used at all from a 'wallet' ?

Offering some kind of web wallet - Alright.
Having access to the private keys which the user don't have - Extremely risky and unnecessary, but ok. One could claim that it is the users choice.
Requiring KYC, as a 'wallet' - Absolute no-go.
Locking up funds - Absolute no-go.

Overall.. besides your service being delusional, you are showing extremely shady behavior, which every user should be aware of.

Freewallet

member

Activity: 551

Merit: 11

Quote from: AdolfinWolf on July 15, 2019, 08:19:07 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

I'd like to draw the attention of everyone in this thread that the referenced issue was closed on Friday and the customer could withdraw his funds.

And what do you do with the money of people that don't speak out against you after you subject them to a "random" KYC check?

Per your TOS you can just claim that, right?

We treat all matters equally no matter if they are spoken in public or not.

LoyceMobile

hero member

Activity: 1659

Merit: 687

LoyceV on the road. Or couch.

Quote from: suchmoon on July 15, 2019, 09:00:47 AM

Did you still force them to go through KYC? And how many other accounts do you have locked up this way?

From what I've seen, Freewallet conveniently ignore critical questions.

suchmoon

legendary

Activity: 3654

Merit: 8909

https://bpip.org

Quote from: ?? on ??

I'd like to draw the attention of everyone in this thread that the referenced issue was closed on Friday and the customer could withdraw his funds.

Did you still force them to go through KYC? And how many other accounts do you have locked up this way?

bitmover

legendary

Activity: 2212

Merit: 5622

Non-custodial BTC Wallet

I agree with LoyceV, it is not a wallet.

As I pointed out in the scam accusation thread, there is a lack of transparency.
They should ask for the KYC BEFORE receiving the funds, not when they ask to withdrawal.

I think the flag is appropriate (especially with that high amount of money), even if you return the funds back to users. I don't know the perfect word for that in English, but in POrtuguese we call this attitude "bad faith" (don't know if this expression exists in English). Freewallet is not acting like an honest business, because this situation could be easily avoided and it is very unpleasent for customers, and very confortable for freewallet.

They hold the funds and make whatever demand they wish to pay the money back.

Quote from: bitmover on July 15, 2019, 06:52:43 AM

Freewallet,
The problem for me is the lack of transparency.

When the user deposited 190.000 usdt, there was no warning. He wasn't warned that "you will need to do kyc to withdrawal that amount"
If you were a transparent service, you would refuse to receive such amount until he does kyc, not refuse to withdrawal.
It's easy, just make a pop up asking how much the user wants to transfer before showing the public address to receive.

It is very comfortable for you to comply with all regulations while you are holding someone else's money, isn't it? Why didn't you said that upfront?

And no, writing that in the guidelines or whatever is not being transparent

LFC_Bitcoin

legendary

Activity: 3556

Merit: 9709

#1 VIP Crypto Casino

Quote from: ?? on ??

I'd like to draw the attention of everyone in this thread that the referenced issue was closed on Friday and the customer could withdraw his funds.

Only because he created a Scam Accusation, right?
Besides I see no confirmation from fuckpay that he has access to his funds now. It isn’t good practice to hold users funds pending KYC. You are a wallet, not an exchange. The flag stands as a warning to noobs/guests. You’re lucky it’s a yellow flag & not a red flag.

AdolfinWolf

legendary

Activity: 1946

Merit: 1427

Quote from: ?? on ??

I'd like to draw the attention of everyone in this thread that the referenced issue was closed on Friday and the customer could withdraw his funds.

And what do you do with the money of people that don't speak out against you after you subject them to a "random" KYC check?

Per your TOS you can just claim that, right?

Joel_Jantsen

legendary

Activity: 1876

Merit: 1308

Get your game girl

Quote from: ?? on ??

I'd like to draw the attention of everyone in this thread that the referenced issue was closed on Friday and the customer could withdraw his funds.

Doesn't matter. You should shut down your scummy service as it's against Satoshi's will. Who the fuck in their right minds asks KYC for a wallet service? You don't give users access to their private keys. Do you even fuckin know the definition of a wallet? Services like yours are the true reason why bitcoin will never go mainstream because scums like you come up with creative ways to scam people. GTFO

Topic: Freewallet.org Flag - Please Support - page 4. (Read 1340 times)