Topic: UTRUST - page 170. (Read 314264 times)

I'm afraid you would be mistaken.

There are different levels of KYC and we have to comply with the highest which include Nationality.

Driver's Licenses can be obtained by anybody. For example, somebody from Iran (on the financial blacklist) could potentially (and easily) obtain a German driver's license. For this reason IDNow can no longer accept it and now only relies on ID cards and passports. We understand that for some people this may be frustrating, but we will do everything necessary to comply with active regulation to build a sound framework for years to come.

What's next? A statement that we only get our tokens if we resend the investment because Marc from Switzerland took everything and disappeared? 

It makes you wonder how highly qualified all those team members that are mentioned on utrust.io actually are...

Dear Community,

First of all, we would like to apologize for the long wait — in the future, we will be enhancing our efforts to keep you updated, in a faster and more efficient manner. 💪

Last week, we have started the account verification process by sending out invitations to our investors. This is an automated process and invitations are being sent out in batches. If you haven’t yet, you will receive your invitation within the next  2-3 weeks.

Once you receive the email, you will need both, an identification documentas well as a proof of address. For the former, please check out the approved documents here. 👈

Unfortunately, and due to circumstances beyond our control, our KYC provider has informed us that they are no longer able to accept driver’s licenses as proof of ID. We are very sorry for any inconvenience caused and have updated the list above to reflect this.

For the proof of address, any official invoice/bill/letter from your utility provider (gas, water, electricity, internet, phone, …) as well as credit card bills, bank statement and similar will work as long as they are not older than 3 months.

Our objective is to release the tokens in December. We intend to give all of our Contributors the opportunity to perform the KYC procedure before this time, but it is also your responsibility to ensure that you have all the necessary documentation readily available.

All the best,
Your UTRUST Team

Just received an email:
Unfortunately, and due to circumstances beyond our control, our KYC provider has informed us that they are no longer able to accept driver’s licenses as proof of ID. We are very sorry for any inconvenience caused and have updated the list above to reflect this.

And it goes on, and on, and on...
Yesterday it was accepted, now it is no longer accepted. Why?
And what about the people that passed with their driver's license, they need to go through it again?
Such an amateurs...

I think it is really an insult to investors that there is no communication at all. No updates on progress, no statement how they will handle the problems (people that invested when there was nothing mentioned about KYC), etc. I have send an email to [email protected] stating I want my ETH back: no response at all. Not even a mail stating they received my email and they are working on a solution. It's arrogant and insulting.

Seems that many people have been able to start their KYC process while i have still got nothing, was expect this to be much quicker!

Define: "some sort of signature"

Sign it with adobe:  2 options:

-handwritten signature scanned (exactly what I don't want to share and if I fake it, they can sue me (oh the irony).  They even mention it is a fraud.)
- typed signature: My name (which is legally bullshit)

If they need 'some sort of signature' , they'll get the latter.  NOWHERE in the whitepaper was ANYTHING about KYC in the first place (given that I'm a pre-ico investor).  NOWHERE was to be found that they would need my signature.  They can have my name under the document, no prob.  But that's it.

Several times in this thread I brought up the elephant in the room: are they able to scale up their staff to deal with the dispute mechanism? I hope what we see here with the KYC process is not a sign of things to come

Then again the tighter crypto regulations was not something they had enough time to prepare for. You have to remember the KYC/AML requirements happened somewhere around the time of the Chinese ICO ban.

Just found out there is a Telegram channel for announcements at https://t.me/utrustannouncements and as of 2017-11-29 they are searching for partners:
"Do you have an online shop and want to help UTRUST revolutionize online payments? Join our survey here and we will reach out to you very soon: [...]"

I'm far from being a marketing expert, but why do they keep silent about the KYC process and instead are posting something like this in a channel no one has even heard of? Linkedin, Twitter, Facebook, Reddit would have been better alternatives, no one has to actively join a channel there.

Seriously, what the hell?

@topswattashawn: Since you probably will comment on this... I tried really hard to find some positive development on this. But I just can't and it gets worse almost daily.

when did they add the video part of the KYC? this is the first i read avout it (for the X-tilllionth time), and I don't want to go buy a cam to access my UTK.

this whole ICO's just been a complete farce. they keep delaying the date the UTK will be made available, and they keep adding extra KYC things.

My Trust for UTrust is rapidly declining to zero.

does anyone want to buy an extra 13K? all you have to do is complete the KYC

More competition in the online payments arena is always a good thing, especially for the end-user.

Good luck on this project!

Couldn't resist posting this to accompany the KYC discussion, I'm sorry
https://twitter.com/UTRUST_Official/status/898573460401561600

Exactly, and as far as I am concerned they lost it. They kept changing the rules. That's not acceptable and makes someone very unreliable. Keep changing the rules and telling people it's allowed and fair is how a child plays a game. An adult sticks to the rules, admits his mistakes and takes his loss.

Potential customers and users of Utrust can read all this as well. And they will probably choose some other company, a company that's trust-worthy. So in the end all this hassle will turn out to be a huge loss for Utrust...

I agree. And this is where my problem lies and possibly also the problem of some other investors.

Initially I trusted them and participated in the pre-ICO in September 2017. I kept all their documents from that time (with no KYC mentioned anywhere).

Then things became... less predictable. The change of the ICO start date. The change of the ICO end date a day before the ICO should have ended. Misleading information on their website ("regulated by FINMA"). And most importantly, the changes of the terms and conditions prior and also during the ICO.

I became more suspicious, less trusting, and started to ask questions. Most of the questions were left unanswered, or they were swamped over by hired chills from the bounties. Once they asked me to contact them directly by email as they were obviously not very keen to provide the answers in public.

I stumbled over other issues like their questionable choice of director running utrust switzerland (someone with a shady past involving stock selling scams), the fact that the company was founded just a few days before the ICO (in other words, there was no company during the pre-ICO, at least that's what I assume since they didn't answer this either), the fact that no one of the actual team is registered as a director of the company, and the fact that they chose a highly questionable debt collecting agency to do the KYC for them.

And now, after the passing of the ICO, there is their passivity, their lack of responses, all that after they got what they wanted (before I got tons of emails on a daily basis, now I get zero).

Trust is a tricky thing. Once you lose it, it's very difficult to regain.

Here is a list with all whitepaper versions I could find, as it might be useful for people to refer to earlier versions.
2017-08-08, v1.0, https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/utrust/UTRUST-whitepaper-v1.0.pdf
2017-10-15, v1.0.1, https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/utrust/UTRUST-whitepaper-v1.0.1.pdf
2017-11-01, v1.0.2, https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/utrust/whitepaper/en/UTRUST-whitepaper-en-2017-11-01.pdf
2017-11-02, v1.0.2 (edited), https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/utrust/whitepaper/en/UTRUST-whitepaper-en-2017-11-02.pdf

I don't see anything legally binding in regards to the escrow of the funds in the WP.  But as you said, ICOs are unregulated at the moment.  There is a certain level of trust required when investing in an ICO -- you have to trust that the company is going to do what they say they're going to do.

Personally, whether their funds are in a locked escrow, or the funds are unlocked but I have their word they won't touch the funds until after KYC, is not a big deal to me.  But I have personally spoken to the team members and I believe in their vision and the team behind that vision.  For those with less trust, I would recommend staying away from ICOs and buying later on an Exchange.  But I want to see UTRUST succeed, so I'd prefer they get my money directly instead of some guy on the Exchange getting it.

I do partially agree with you, KYC before accepting funds is the most secure and compliant way to do it.  But since their KYC is so manually intensive (i.e. a video chat required for over 14,000 participants with a human operator), I guess they decided it was more important to focus on KYC security (making the KYC process itself more secure than any other KYC process in the industry), instead of paying potentially up to a million dollars (I got that figure from the team) to do the same manual process on 50,000+ participants.  So ideally, they would do the intensive KYC AND do it before the ICO, but they chose a middle of the road option with a focus on a strict KYC process.  It's still better than 99% of other ICOs, and the KYC process itself, while a hassle, is VERY difficult to fake (which you can do with other KYC processes pretty easily).  Sure, I could go grab my brother's passport or friend's passport for the video chat and just use their address/name/information, but you have to agree that it's more secure overall.

Technically, who is there to tell them what to do with the funds, to touch them or not? Do you read anything specific and binding in this regard in the whitepaper?
 Remember - ICOs are unregulated.

Either way, there is a big difference between doing KYC before or after accepting someone's money. If you broker a financial transaction, which you do when you set up an address for receiving BTC or ETH, and if you want to be on the same level of compliance as a financial intermediary, then you better know who you are dealing with beforehand.

    I am not surprised. For the KYC, utrust chose a company with the worst reputation: debt collection agency Instrum Justitia AG. I can easily imagine how they don't care and turned off the connection on you... just google for

intrum justitia watchdog

and you'll find plenty of "interesting" articles and reports. To me handing out my personal information to them would be a risk I couldn't justify.

Okay, I checked the WP and I see it indeed says 2 weeks.  I reached out to UTRUST and they stated that it should have said 3 weeks.  They will fix it right away.  I do understand being upset when the WP says 2 weeks, but I can assure you they are working as fast as they can given the fact that their KYC process is intensive and manual.  Additionally, the WP does cover them with this statement: "This timeline may be subject to further delays in the event of any unforeseen legal, certification, or regulatory compliance roadblocks"

UTRUST is just as eager as you and I am to get this KYC over with, but it is a necessary evil, and it'll take as long as it takes.  They're not going to take any shortcuts when it comes to compliance.


I spoke to UTRUST and you do NOT have to print out and sign the document by hand.  They do require some form of signature so they know you agreed to the form, but it can be a digital signature (you don't need to sign it by hand; you can sign it with Adobe).


The ICO is already over.


You don't have anything to worry about.  You will have at least 60 days to complete the KYC.  And assuming you can't complete it in time, there will be a way to do manual KYC at any time in the future.  I don't have further details on that process though.  It'll be quickest to do it during the 60 days though.


They do have a third party (IDnow) providing KYC services.


It is not a rubbish myth (in my opinion).  But let me make one thing clear.  UTRUST is NOT partnered with FINMA.  Their goal regarding doing KYC is to be compliant IN THE FUTURE if/whenFINMA starts regulating ICOs.  They want to be a case study for future ICOs looking to maximize compliance if/when it requires compliance in the future.  Regarding doing KYC before letting people invest, there are pros/cons to either option but I don't think they are breaking any current or future laws here, but I am not a legal expert so I'm only voicing an opinion.  Remember that all funds invested are in limbo until KYC is complete.  UTRUST is not allowed to touch it.  The reason they are doing KYC after ICO instead of before is because it's the difference between doing KYC on 14,000 investors, versus over 50,000 investors.  That extra ~40,000 investors adds close to a million dollars in KYC fees, when it's not needed.  The 14,000 people who did invest still must pass KYC or UTRUST cannot touch the funds legally.  But I'm not an expert so I won't speak to this as if I were.