Consumer complaint received 2023-08-11
Company: Coinbase, Inc.
State: CT
Product: Checking or savings account
Sub-product: Other banking product or service
Issue: Problem with a lender or other company charging your account
Sub-issue: Transaction was not authorized

Complaint:
XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/2023 To : The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) 1700 G Street NW., Washington , DC 20552 This is my response letter to the utter incompetence, irresponsibility, and unaccountability shown in handling complaints by absolutely choosing to ignore my earlier letter dated XX/XX/2023. 
You ought to have analyzed to distinguish thereafter between what may be normal activity and that which might suggest an illegal enterprise. This ethical standard of industry practice plays a substantial role in preventing criminals from liquidating and laundering the public 's funds. 
With todays technology and the vast intelligence network of the banking industry, I strongly believe that all banks would have a list of blacklisted companies or merchants involved in fraudulent businesses, and would thus have alerted their customers against fraud when such a transaction was made. 
Unfortunately, Coinbase has taken the easy route, by blinding itself to the obvious, highly alarming red flags mentioned herein. 

As previously advised, Coinbase should have known, suspected, or have reason to suspect that the transaction ( or pattern of transactions ) : involves funds the ultimate purpose of which was to fuel an illegal enterprise ; is intended to disguise funds the ultimate purpose of which was to fuel an illegal enterprise, in an attempt to avoid and thus violate regulations ; is intentionally designed to defraud the customer ; serves no legitimate or lawful purpose ; and involves the use of their services to facilitate criminal activity There are so many other ways in which fraud prevention and mitigation measures could have been useful. To the extent to which Coinbase was inconsistent therewith, they are liable to me for damages. 
Financial firms need to consider guidance published by international financial regulatory bodies, which is taken into account when deciding whether to take action again a financial firm for not carrying out due diligence. 
It is incumbent upon financial institutions to carefully assess all information available about their customer, including vulnerability, needs, and customer type. There is a wide range of transactions that, although legitimate, should raise a red flag simply because you are inconsistent with the customers typical and ordinary activity. What constitutes reasonable grounds to flag transactions varies according to the facts and circumstances of the particular matter being investigated and the effectiveness of the anti-fraud processes. Upon identification of such unusual or suspicious activity, it is crucial that the relevant staff member adequately describe the factors making an activity or transaction suspicious, thoroughly depict the extent and nature of this activity and properly communicate to the customer that such activity meets the relevant criteria of fraud. 
I would have hoped that Coinbase would have realized that my funds managed to slip through their fingers and into the hands of criminals. A very serious crime has been committed here, and we must work together to set things right. Especially since the wallet that the crypto was going into was probably receiving even more crypto at the time and they failed to question it. 
I maintain that Coinbase failed to adequately investigate the circumstances surrounding the transactions in question and willfully blinded itself to obvious red flags concerning what was happening to the account. It is of significant concern that compared to the usual activity-taking place in the account Coinbase should have noticed the very unusual activity-taking place in the account. 
Responsible financial institutions shall be working hard and committed to the markets future and the security of all customer funds. Coinbase must recognize that they play a critical role in the funds they hold as assets for their customers. 
Coinbase also had the duty to stop those crimes, yet they refused to do so because they were more interested in enriching thereof, even if it meant furthering those crimes and allowing them to cause massive financial losses to plenty of victims many of whom suffered as a result of your wrongful conduct. Therefore, it is clear that they did not have in place adequate security measures to properly safeguard the public assets hence, they have irreparably harmed me and, if not enjoined, will continue to irreparably harm other victims and your various associates and loved ones. They have irreparably harmed the general public and, if not enjoined, will continue to irreparably harm the general public, which has an interest in being free from confusion, mistake, and deception. 
Conclusion I believe there is no ill-intend on Coinbases part but simply hoping that they will assume their share of responsibilities and be there for the customers when needed most, especially in protecting them against injustice that should have been done sooner enough when Coinbase got my first dispute letter, rather than leaving me with a feeling of being abandoned. 
Desired outcome : Coinbase put things into the right perspective for me by reversing the total amount of XXXX USD paid to the Fraudster as my losses are substantial and I have suffered a great loss because of this scam, it had affected me personally, emotionally, and financially and I am struggling to make ends meet. 
I look forward to your response. 
Sincerely, XXXX XXXX

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation