Topic: SCAM EXCHANGE: Openchange (Openchange.cash) (PARTIALLY SOLVED) - page 5. (Read 1458 times)

I think we have to fight for every bit of privacy we have left!

It now sounds like OpenChange uses deposit addresses owned by another exchange, and not their own funds. If that's the case, the Reserve: $175 804 859 probably isn't correct.

Exactly. Cash isn't considered a "good" option of merchants for most countries nowadays, because there are regulations that make them believe so. In my country, Greece, it is not legal to make a purchase worth of beyond 1,500 EUR with cash, as they say, to avoid tax evasion. You must only make it with bank accounts, credit/debit cards and cheques.

But, cash is used to protect your privacy, and therefore this regulation can be translated to "forbidding privacy protection to avoid tax evasion". If you want to get goosebumps, check other countries' cash payment limitations: https://www.europe-consommateurs.eu/en/shopping-internet/cash-payment-limitations.html. If your country doesn't have a limit yet, be sure that it'll someday do.

I'm stop trusting BestChange, and this incident was just the icing on the cake. They've been advertising other services that treated bitcoin as non-fungible in the past, with no problem. They even added a rule in which they recommend against talking about Ukrainian war, just because one of them had a political belief a stranger didn't approve of.

They put profit above business integrity.

Laws in general, I mentioned the EU because a wannabe lawyer here thought he has a clue how things work, but AML rules are basically the same everywhere and in every country, Russia in a member of the FATF same regulation when it comes to this should apply. The main thing here is that exchange X, considers those funds to be illegal, coming from a theft, anything else, both those courses of actions are illegal:
- seizing the funds and releasing them on a simple ID check, personally I don't believe they have a license to even deal with personal checks
- seizing the funds without informing the cybercrime or equivalent police branch and not giving custody of those assets under the mentioned law enforcement

The thing those exchanges are doing is simply random scamming people and getting those funds for themselves, since as you mentioned, it's quite hard to think that most of them would file complaints about smaller sums, and if they do all the exchange has to do is send him his funds and grab another victim.

 
Financial transactions in which the ownership of funds in question is changed through the transfer of funds that do not include any other services are excluded from VAT. Chipmixer would simply act like those coin machines in which you dump all coins and you get a banknote or the other way round.

I'm quoting 1miau again

Not saying Janyiah201 should procure fake identity information, just saying it could be a way to try getting those funds back. Assuming they do return the funds by just seeing some ID document, which of course makes no sense since it doesn't make 'criminal origin funds' suddenly 'non-criminal', but what do I know.

Indeed; I got a positive impression of BestChange since browsing Bitcointalk, since respected community members wore the BestChange signature. But this case makes me hesitant to continue trusting BestChange in general. If BestChange ratings can so easily be manipulated, it begs the question of what use that site even is.

The whole tax subject is valid, but it's wrong that it requires giving up your privacy. For example, LoyceV has to pay wealth tax, but it doesn't require giving up privacy, since just has to tell the amount he owns, without providing addresses or public keys; thus the total of his holdings is known, but not when, if, and for what purchase, he moves funds in and out of his wallets.

Well, the laws that exist at least in Europe illegitimize privacy in the use of funds at least from medium amounts.  Let's make an analysis.

If you get paid for a job that either shows up directly on a tax return or you are legally obligated to declare it. In other words, the income from your work is not private at all. If you get money for selling a house, for example, neither.

In the European Union, all transactions between member countries that exceed 10,000 euros ($10,400) are automatically reported to the authorities, and those within countries have lower limits, such as 2,500 euros. Those of lesser amounts are obviously registered and available to the authorities if they request the data.

If you go to a country of the European Union, being a legal resident in the country, to open a bank account with "private" money that exceeds 10,000 euros, they will not open it if you cannot prove the origin of the funds.

There are countries like Italy, Spain or Portugal with a cash payment limit of 1,000 euros, which means that if you want to buy a fucking TV worth 1,000 euros you can not pay in banknotes and your name is registered in the transaction.

I would put the question the other way around. Do you think there is much time left legally speaking for services that are dedicated to obscuring the origin of funds? No upper limit at the top? In other words, an Italian buys a 1,000 euro TV in Italy and the transaction is obligatorily KYC. He makes a deposit in his bank of 5,000 euros and gets automatically reported to the authorities who are probably going to ask him to justify the origin of that money, and meanwhile that same Italian can mix 50 Bitcoins "for privacy?"

That leaving aside that I am not very clear on the basis of what legal vacuum mixers operate, because in normal conditions a company that provides services to Italian citizens, should charge VAT and pay it to the government of Italy, which I doubt very much that the mixers do.

You seem to fundamentally misunderstand the whole point of a mixer or why someone would want to keep their privacy. And for the record, I've never completely KYC with any crypto service ever, and I have no intention of starting now.

I wouldn't trust them to refund your money even if you did send the things the are asking, and the risk of your documents ending up on some darknet market or being used by someone else for some shady activity is extremely high.

---

I've never used BestChange, but I find it very questionable that they allow exchanges to simply close claims like this. OP has obviously not been refunded, but OpenChange have now closed his claim 24 times without resolving it. Looking back through their previous ratings, there seem to be a number of other issues which have been closed without being resolved. BestChange therefore show OpenChange as having an unblemished 100% positive feedback, which is obviously not the case. Such a system allows any exchange to keep a perfect record so long as they are more determined than their victims, who will eventually give up renewing their claims.

@stompix I am very sorry for you! I give up on it. But I wish you the best in your ventures, you sound like an ancien collègue who knew everything but irl he was left in the sun. On sunday you can text me on discord to continue the conversation and I'll show you where you are wrong on at least 18 states in EU.

Thank you for showing me you know how to use google...
The first paragraph is no law, in case you didn't know that.

The first link:
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1596452256370&uri=CELEX:52020DC0605
Is a briefing, you can see large in bold letters "communication"

The second link:
https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/aml-ctf-lawyers-training-manuals_en
Is a training manual for lawyers, probably it will come to a surprise for you but all that is for criminal cases, aka things that are being solved in a court

The third link:
https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/210720-anti-money-laundering-countering-financing-terrorism_en#transfer (this is revision of a treaty)
Yup, it's revision:

So openchange uses laws from the future just like you, nicely done

The fourth link:
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX%3A32014L0042&qid=1541682532524&from=EN

Finally, let's see some laws oh wait...but let's leave it like that:


Neither you nor openchange are competent authorities


Neither you nor openchange are a court so your final decision means nothing


Has openchange offered support to the competent authority to preserve the funds, do they have a court order mandating a confiscation order?

And the final sexy paragraph:


What order? Has openchage filled a case with a prosecutor in order for this order to exist?

Next time when I ask you to quote the law, please do QUOTE the law, don't be a smartass tossing google links you haven't ever read. I've done this kind of stuff in the EU for enough time to know when somebody is bullshiting about being a lawyer or knowing what laws are broken in a case

?

sexy?

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1596452256370&uri=CELEX:52020DC0605
https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/aml-ctf-lawyers-training-manuals_en
https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/210720-anti-money-laundering-countering-financing-terrorism_en#transfer (this is revision of a treaty)
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX%3A32014L0042&qid=1541682532524&from=EN

Exactly that's why I'm asking you about the laws, show me the laws where an exchange a bank, a money transmitter, a marketplace,a merchant can confiscate user funds or merchandise on suspicion of money laundering. AML rules don't give you rights on any property of a customer nor does a picture of an ID validate the source and legitimacy of those funds. /end.

If a cop stops me in the middle of the night because my plate seems stolen he won't let me get away if I just show him a legit ID. If he realizes the car is stolen he won't drive it to his house and wait there for the real owner to come and pick it up if he has matching keys while all the time using that car for UBER deliveries.

If an exchange determines by his own means the funds are stolen it can only freeze the assets and wait for his filling with a money-laundering task force to be accepted or solved, if a prosecutor denies the case then it must return the funds no matter what his beliefs are or face criminal charge themselves. /end


You can do whatever you want in your spare time, you are no prosecutor, you are no judge and neither is openchange so your tagging just as theirs has zero value in real life outside your make-believe fantasy.

Yes, I use Chipmixer and Monero, just like I use VPN and TOR, because I have something to hide, it's my privacy.

Why I tried to exchange ChipMixer's chip to Monero, I could explain, but does that matter?


WHAT DOES MATTER:

• They have TOS, but if I wanted to settle this in court, which court have jurisdiction? They don't have company, they hide their names.
• I have found that Openchange lie and hide their identities and use fake names and fake verified accounts to make payments.
• They are Russians, based in Russia, speak very poor English, but they use, for example, multiple Paypal accounts with American names and addresses. And there is probably more, I'm still investigating.
• They are in business for a long time, but the current domain is relatively new, because their previous was seized. I still don't know all the details.

Who would send their documents and selfie and many more things they asked to site like this one?

At this point, it looks like Openchange is no different than Freewallet.

You are right here. No exchange can hold your funds permanently, if there is a problem authorities get involved.


In every country that has decent money laundering laws you have to. Any input of your money need to be declared and knowledge how/where you got the money. You can't be paid by cartel to develope candy websites and have no troubles..

I understand that most of you focus on the privacy and fuck the government policies, but laws are laws and laws are accepted by us; you can't just fuck them, this is why we live in a society with rules.


This is what I do 14 hours a day. I have a big database which works like a spider and identifies several inputs which are already tagged as used in illegal transactions.

To your knowledge, out of 40k addresses and 3.1 mil inputs (all used for illegal activities) i got, only 4% have been through a mixer (those mixers I can identify, such as chipmixer).

Very well explained. This is what makes "Openchange" look like a scam!

That's what qualifies their behavior for a scam accusation. It's odd that this exchange isn't open about who they are, where they are, and all of that, but at the same time demands information from their customers.

It's probably on a 'trust me, bro' basis.
Real-life picure of saxydev:


That's good to keep in mind! On the other hand, I doubt anyone is interested in going to court against an exchange unless it's BTC1+ ...

Let's clear some things up.
First, this is one of my old posts:


So, I did send (by mistake) funds from a freshly mixed address directly to Bitstamp, coins that were just claimed, I didn't have a single problem to date with them, I'm full KYC (a thing I regret doing it also) but Bitstamp, probably the worse exchange when it comes to controlling everything has had no problem with it.

Second:
No exchange can confiscate your funds legally without a court order, they can freeze your account for a period but doing so because you have failed KYC would require them to inform the authorities where they operate about this transaction immediately. There is no such thing as these funds look stolen then we freeze it and we unfreeze it the moment you send us a pic of an id, this is illegal on so many levels it doesn't even need to be discussed.


Please do quote any law from any country, territory, or fantasy world on this planetthat says something like this , since FATF says something different


ToS terms don't grant you power beyond the law, nor can they shield you from complaints or lawsuits.
Of course, this is a no-name exchange with no location and no physical address but normally such ToS wound't stand a chance in any civil or criminal case.

You two are clearly very new to the whole subject of cryptocurrency and its roots in cypherpunk, anarchistic and liberalist ideology.
I'd like to use this opportunity to suggest reading Bitcoin: The dream of Cypherpunks, libertarians and crypto-anarchists.

If you really understand the importance of privacy for security and freedom, you would immediately see that the words you're spouting now are the propaganda someone made you believe; perfectly in line with the whole 'you have nothing to hide, have you?' narrative.
I'm not surprised seeing your line of thought when speaking to people who have no idea or no interest in Bitcoin, but I am surprised when I come across it on a Bitcoin forum. My most plausible theory so far is that 'crypto enthusiasts' who buy into 'I have nothing to hide; so here have all my data, KYC, and whatever else you want'-nonsense are people who see Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies merely as investment assets, nothing more, nothing less. They see them as a way to maximize their fiat holdings (hence the term 'fiat maxi'). But I'm interested to know about other theories.

Where is it illegal to ensure the privacy your funds?  I'm in a country where law enforcement has to prove a crime was committed before they can seize funds, and there's nothing illegal about using methods to remain private.

This isn't about ChipMixer, or any other method of obfuscating your coins.  I earn a bit of bitcoin here, and I don't want people from this site following my money around.  I use obfuscation tools to break the link between me and the money for privacy and security, and that's all.  I have no illegal funds, I have no criminal intent, but I do value my privacy.



WTF are you talking about?  You're the one saying that privacy is only for the criminals.  If you're so confident you have nothing to hide, why don't you post your KYC?

---

Wasabi is a joke, they are blacklisting UTXO's that don't meet their chain analysis requirements, so they only mix funds that don't need mixing.  What's the point of that?

---

Consider how many US dollars are in circulation right now, and consider how many of those US dollars have been used to pay for criminal activity.  When you spend those dollars at a grocery store, are they going to check the serial number of each dollar you spend to make sure they've not been stolen from a bank, or suspected of being used to pay for drugs?  

Give me a break, this is nothing but governments trying to hold on to the power they gain by controlling the method of trade.  They don't care to stop crime, they care to preserve their power and control.

Take a look at the United States Constitution and tell me where you see that the Federal Government has the right to control currency, I dare you to find it.  The advent of bitcoin makes the US dollar and the Federal Reserve unconstitutional, and power brokers everywhere are panicking!

It's funny how they accused you for money laundering like you tried to exchange much larger amount of coins, instead of just 0.25 btc.  
Openchange needs to return your coins if you don't want to pass kyc verfication, but Janyiah201 I think you should always read terms and conditions before using any centralized exchanges like this.
There are always risks when you are using obscure exchanges like this, and I think BestChange should change some things and add warning for exchanges that have strict KYC rules like this.

So much legal hypocrisy it makes me puke...

Tell me is it LEGAL to buy japanese decurret account verified, google play developer account, and is it legal to sell Japanese PayPal account?!  

It's non of your business, but I have been using it before I wore the signature, and I'm sure others have been using it too.

Show me a regulation that says that I'm forbidden to mix bitcoin.

This is one of the million reasons people (should) avoid using centralized exchanges. There's a high chance I have my funds frozen because they don't like my inputs. I don't deal with services that require my personal data to make a purchase.

I'll have to argue we're talking objectively.