Consumer complaint received 2024-07-23
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Virtual currency
Issue: Fraud or scam — 
Company: Foris DAX, Inc. (NC)

In XXXX, I was solicited by someone presenting themselves as representatives of the web-platform XXXX ( hereinafter referred to as the XXXX ). There are official warnings against XXXX that confirm that it operates illegal. 
Unofficial investigations about the illegal operation of XXXX can be also found in a number of sources that are considered more or less reliable. 
Notwithstanding the above, the persons pretended that the web platform and the XXXX were licensed as regulated financial brokers and that they had the required qualification and skills for trading regulated financial tools and providing financial advice to the public. They insisted that by following their advice I would be able to open and maintain a segregated financial account and to make trades on regulated markets. Being an average consumer and without special knowledge in the financial markets, I was made to believe that I was investing in regulated financial tools via a licensed and qualified platform. Making use of my lack of experience and knowledge, the persons acting through the aforementioned ISSUE Fraud or scam HAVE YOU ALREADY TRIED TO FIX THIS PROBLEM WITH THE COMPANY? 
Yes DID YOU REQUEST INFORMATION FROM THE COMPANY? 
Yes WHAT INFORMATION DID YOU REQUEST? 
About the wallet holders DID THE COMPANY PROVIDE THIS INFORMATION? 
No XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX Review Complaint https : //portal.consumerfinance.gov/consumer/s/review-complaint? XXXX XXXX platform and/or on behalf of the XXXX requested me to make payments leading me to believe they were funding a segregated financial account. As per explicit request of the aforementioned persons, all payments were to be made in crypto currency and I was advised and instructed to purchase crypto currency from Crypto.com. I was then advised by the unlicensed XXXX to transfer the purchase crypto to nominated e-wallets, which are assumingly located outside Crypto.com. Acting in good faith and following advice, I made an account with Crypto.com, and made series of payments in consideration of purchasing crypto. 
Total amount of the payments is XXXX  BTC, distributed in multiple transactions, all of them were sent through my e-wallet with Crypto.com to the following address : XXXX XXXX XXXX Each transaction was immediately indicated on the my profile with the unlicensed broker XXXX, which, in our opinion, clearly reveals the link between above indicated address ( es ) and the operation of the illegal website of the XXXX. Therefore, I consider any of the above wallets potentially being an integral part of the illegal activity of XXXX and/or potentially used for committing fraud and/or money- laundering. However, due to the specifics of the crypto-transactions, as of today, I am not in a position to determine which person ( individual and/or legal entity ) has made use of the above indicated e-wallet in order to facilitate the operation of the activity of the unlicensed broker XXXX. According to the FINTRAC Guidance on Record keeping requirements for money services businesses and foreign money services businesses, money service businesses ( MSBs ) and foreign money services businesses ( FMSBs ) have record keeping requirements under the Proceeds of Crime ( Money Laundering ) and Terrorist Financing Act ( PCMLTFA ) and associated Regulations. Among others, a record for all transactions exceeding {$1.00}, -- and for all suspicious transaction shall be made full record. With slight deviations in the thresholds and the required information to be recorded, similar regulations are adopted by FINCEN and by FATF ( Recommendation 16 ). It shall be noted with this regard, that according to Section 179 of the FATF Guidance for a Risk Based Approach, the requirements of Recommendation 16 apply to VASPs whenever their transactions, whether in fiat currency or VA, involve : ( a ) a traditional wire transfer, ( b ) a VA transfer between a VASP and another obliged entity ( e.g., between two VASPs or between a VASP and another obliged entity, such as a bank or other FI ), or ( c ) a VA transfer between a VASP and a non-obliged entity ( i.e., an unhosted wallet ). On the grounds of the travel rule crypto- exchanges in their capacity as an originator of institutions are put under the obligation to keep record about : ( a ) name and address of the originator and transmitter ; ( b ) the amount of the payment or transmittal order ; ( c ) the execution date of the payment or transmittal order ; ( d ) any payment instructions received from the originator or transmitter with the payment or transmittal order ; and ( e ) the identity of the beneficiarys bank or recipients bank financial institution. Where the counterparty is a non-obliged entity ( i.e. unhosted wallet ), VASPs are still under certain AML/CFT and fraud prevention monitoring and control measures ( Sections 203 and 204 of the FATF Guidance for a Risk Based Approach, which also include feasible efforts to collect the information in the above described scope. According XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX  Review Complaint https : //portal.consumerfinance.gov/consumer/s/review-complaint? XXXX XXXX to 31 CFR 1010.410 - Records to be made and retained by financial institutions, each agent, agency, branch, or office located within the United States of a financial institution other than a bank is subject to the requirements with respect to a transmittal of funds in the amount of {$3000.00} or more. In particular, for each transmittal order that it accepts as a transmittor 's financial institution, a financial institution shall obtain and retain either the original or a microfilm, other copy, or electronic record of the following information relating to the transmittal order : ( A ) The name and address of the transmittor ; ( B ) The amount of the transmittal order ; ( C ) The execution date of the transmittal order ; ( D ) Any payment instructions received from the transmittor with the transmittal order ; ( XXXX ) The identity of the recipient 's financial institution. With this letter and based upon the above-cited guidelines, I believe that Crypto.com should have collected and stored information about ( A ) the name of the beneficiary wallet holder and ( B ) about the location of the beneficiary wallet ( if it is hosted by an obliged entity ) or confirmation that it is unhosted or hosted by a not obliged entity. Insofar as this information should have been collected from the originator of the payments/ transactions, it is not deemed confidential in the relations between the exchange and me.