Consumer complaint received 2025-11-24 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Virtual currency
Issue: Other transaction problem — 
Company: Coinbase, Inc.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
# CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU ( CFPB ) FORMAL COMPLAINT * * Complainant : * * XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX * * Date of Complaint : * * XX/XX/XXXX * * Company : * * Coinbase Global , Inc. 
* * Complaint Category : * * Deceptive and Unfair Billing Practices, Account Mismanagement, Obstruction of Customer Service * * * # # EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I am filing a comprehensive complaint against Coinbase for a systematic pattern of deceptive billing practices, unauthorized account closure, forced liquidation of customer cryptocurrency, use of fabricated policies to deny legitimate refunds, and deliberate obstruction of customer support channels. These practices appear designed to extract subscription fees from closed accounts while preventing customers from obtaining remedies or escalating complaints. 

* * * # # I. ACCOUNT CLOSURE AND FORCED BITCOIN LIQUIDATION # # # A. Timeline of Account Closure - My Coinbase account was restricted and then closed by Coinbase approximately one week before my latest subscription billing date ( around early XX/XX/XXXX ). 
- Support representatives explicitly confirmed multiple times that * * my account was closed/restricted. * * [ 1 ] [ 2 ] [ 3 ] - Multiple support agents acknowledged this account status while simultaneously denying my refund requests.

# # # B. Coinbase 's Instruction to Withdraw, Followed by Prevention of Withdrawal - * * Before closing my account, Coinbase support instructed me to withdraw my Bitcoin * * to access my funds. [ 2 ] - Following Coinbase 's own instructions, I initiated a withdrawal of my cryptocurrency. 
- * * After I complied with their instruction, Coinbase then prevented me from completing that withdrawal. * * My account was frozen mid-transaction, leaving my cryptocurrency stranded and inaccessible.

# # # C. Forced Liquidation as the Only Remaining Option - Unable to withdraw my XXXX as Coinbase had instructed, I was forced to * * sell ( liquidate ) my Bitcoin * * while my account remained in a restricted/closed state. 
- This forced liquidation resulted in a XXXX sale of approximately {$80.00} ( documented in my transaction history ). [ XXXX ] - I did not initiate this liquidation willingly ; it was the only mechanism available to attempt to recover my funds after Coinbase prevented the withdrawal they had instructed me to make. 

* * * # # XXXX. SUBSCRIPTION BILLING ON A CLOSED ACCOUNT XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Billing Timeline - My Coinbase XXXX subscription shows a free trial start of XX/XX/XXXX in which I chose not to renew. Then there is, with multiple failed billing attempts in XX/XX/XXXX. Which I told Coinbase I dont want their subscription - The first successful paid billing appears on XX/XX/XXXX ( annual " Basic '' plan at promotional {$29.00}, regular $ XXXX ). 
- A second charge of {$29.00} was assessed on XX/XX/XXXX. [ XXXX ] [ XXXX ] XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  These charges were applied after my account was closed * * ( approximately one week prior ). And I didnt initiate this nor could I have with a closed account XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Why This Billing is Improper - A closed or restricted account can not provide subscription services or benefits to the customer. 
- I could not access the platform, trade, use fee waivers, or utilize any Coinbase XXXX features due to the account closure.

- Coinbase 's own later communications state : " Your Coinbase One subscription is canceled but will continue to be available until it expires on XX/XX/XXXX. Going forward, you will no longer be billed for Coinbase XXXX. " [ XXXX ] - This confirmation that I " will no longer be billed '' contradicts the charges that had already been applied while my account was closed. 
- Billing a closed account for services the customer can not access violates basic consumer protection principles and potentially violates the Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( EFTA ). 

* * * # # III. FABRICATED TRADING LIMIT USED TO DENY REFUND XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX The {$25.00} " Trading Limit '' That Doesn't Exist in Published Policy - In support chat, an agent named XXXX claimed that my subscription type has a * * fixed trading volume limit of {$25.00} * * for refund eligibility. 
- The agent explicitly wrote : " there is a specific, fixed amount of trading volume which is {$25.00} for your subscription type that needs to be met to be eligible for the refund. Now, as I can see you have unfortunately already gone over that limit because of that XXXX trade, then, regrettably, you are not eligible for the refund. " [ XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  This {$25.00} limit does not appear anywhere in Coinbase 's published Coinbase XXXX terms for XXXX. customers. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Published Policy Shows Much Higher Trading Volume Thresholds- Coinbase 's official Coinbase XXXX materials describe monthly trading volume caps in the thousands of dollars ( estimates range from {$10000.00} to XXXX XXXXXXXX depending on tier ), not {$25.00}. [ 11 ] [ 6 ] - A single {$80.00} XXXX trade is far below any reasonable monthly trading volume cap for a paid trading subscription. 
- Industry standard for subscription-based trading platforms is hundreds to tens of thousands of dollars in monthly volume, not {$25.00}. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  The Logical Impossibility : Forced Liquidation Leading to Refund Denial - * * Coinbase instructed me to withdraw my funds. * * - * * I complied with their instruction. * * - * * Coinbase then prevented the withdrawal. * * - * * I was forced to liquidate my Bitcoin as the only remaining option. * * - * * Coinbase then used this forced liquidation as grounds to deny my subscription refund. * * This is circular and deceptive : Coinbase created the trading activity ( by forcing liquidation ), then used that forced activity to justify denying a refund for billing on a closed account. 

# # # XXXX XXXX 's Contradictory Statements About the Policy Itself- When I cited Coinbase 's own published Coinbase XXXX information showing a much higher trading volume threshold, XXXX responded : * * '' Please do not share the wrong policy information. " * * [ XXXX ] - Yet XXXX provided no written policy reference for the {$25.00} limit and could not explain why it contradicts Coinbase 's public materials. 
- In the same conversation, XXXX also stated : " XXXX, I must reiterate that there isn't a policy that covers this specific situation. " [ XXXX ] - * * This is contradictory : * * XXXX simultaneously claimed there IS a {$25.00} trading limit policy that applies to my case, and then claimed there IS NO policy that covers my situationboth can not be true. 

* * * # # IV. CONTRADICTORY REFUND REPRESENTATIONS XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Initial Refund Denial ( Based on Fabricated {$25.00} Limit ) - XXXX told me I was permanently ineligible for a refund because I had " exceeded '' the {$25.00} trading limit through my {$80.00} XXXX liquidation. 
- This explanation relied on a non-existent policy and on trading activity that Coinbase itself forced. 

# # # B. Later Promise of Refund ( After 7-Day Cooling Period ) - Later in the same chat, XXXX stated XXXX " I also wanted to let you know that your Coinbase XXXX subscription payment is still processing ; it typically takes seven business days to clear. If the funds are withdrawn from your bank account before then, please contact us again, and we'll help you with a refund. " [ 2 ] - A different agent ( XXXX ) later explicitly promised : " Please do not worry as we will help you with the refund of the subscription charge '' and explained a " cooling period of 7 days, '' instructing me to contact Coinbase after 7 days with case number " XXXX '' to obtain the refund. [ XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Why These Contradictions Are Deceptive - * * First, XXXX denied any refund * * based on a policy that doesn't exist and on forced trading activity. 
- * * Then, XXXX and XXXX promised refunds * * after a 7-day period, contradicting the permanent ineligibility claim. 
- This pattern made it impossible for me to know : - Whether I was actually eligible for a refund - What the real policy was - Whether the {$25.00} limit was legitimate - What steps I needed to take to obtain relief XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX DECEPTIVE MISREPRESENTATION OF ACCOUNT STATUS XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Simultaneous Claims of Account Closure and Active Trading Activity - Support agents told me * * my account was closed/restricted * *, making it impossible for me to : - Log in - Transfer funds- Execute trades ( other than forced liquidation ) - Modify account settings- Access subscription features- * * Yet those same agents claimed * * I had : - Exceeded trading volume limits- Engaged in trading activity that violated terms - Made voluntary trading decisions that forfeited refund eligibility XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX The Logical Contradiction - A closed account can not simultaneously : - Be completely inaccessible ( account closure ), AND - Contain voluntary trading activity that violates terms ( trading limit ) - Either the account was open and I could trade ( contradicting their closure claim ), or it was closed and I couldn't trade ( contradicting their trading limit claim ). 
- Coinbase 's simultaneous assertions of both conditions appear designed to justify both the lack of refund and the subscription charge on a non-functional account. 

* * * # # VI. SYSTEMATIC OBSTRUCTION OF CUSTOMER SUPPORT XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX AI Chat Blockade Preventing Human Contact - After the account closure and forced liquidation, I attempted to open support chats to resolve the billing dispute. 
- * * Every single time I attempted to initiate a chat, the XXXX assistant immediately shut down the conversation before I could reach a human representative. * * - I was completely blocked from accessing live agent support through the chat channel. 
- This prevented me from : - Disputing the subscription charges- Challenging the {$25.00} limit explanation - Requesting documentation of actual Coinbase XXXX policy - Obtaining clarification on my account status - Escalating my complaint XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Circular Referrals Between Support Channels - When I called phone support, representatives told me I had to use chat instead. 
- When I tried chat ( struggling past the AI blockade ), agents told me to call. 
- When I sent emails, support responded directing me to use chat. 
- Other email responses told me to call. 
- This created an endless loop : * * callemail, emailchat, chatcall, callemail, emailchat * *, with no channel providing resolution. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Purpose and Effect of This Pattern - The circular referral system, combined with the AI chat blockade, * * functionally prevented me from obtaining meaningful customer support. * * - This obstruction made it impossible to resolve : - Billing on my closed account - The forced Bitcoin liquidation - Contradictory policy representations - Refund eligibility disputes- * * This pattern appears designed to exhaust customers into abandoning legitimate complaints * * while appearing to offer multiple support channels. 

* * * # # XXXX. REINTRODUCTION OF PREVIOUSLY-RESOLVED NON-ISSUE XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Duplicate Account Issue Already Resolved - Months ago, when I filed my initial CFPB complaint, the agency and I discussed a duplicate account issue on my Coinbase profile. 
- I was previously unaware of this duplicate account 's existence, but I took steps to resolve it. 
- * * The duplicate account has been deleted and no longer exists. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Suspicious Reintroduction During Current Dispute - During recent support interactions regarding my current subscription billing and forced liquidation disputes, a Coinbase representative ( XXXX ) suddenly brought up the duplicate account issue again. 
XXXX XXXX claimed : " Upon checking in your account I can see there is a duplicate account associated with this account you need to delete your duplicate account first. " [ 6 ] - * * The duplicate account does not exist. * * It was already resolved and removed months ago. 

# # # XXXX Apparent Use as Obstruction Tactic - Reintroducing a non-existent, previously-resolved issue appears designed to : - Deflect from current billing and forced liquidation disputes- Create confusion about what issues are actually pending - Suggest account problems originate from my end rather than Coinbase 's mishandling - Delay resolution by requiring addressing of a ghost problem - * * This appears to be another form of obstruction : * * creating false account problems to distract from legitimate billing and forced liquidation complaints. 

* * * # # VIII. LEGAL VIOLATIONS AND DECEPTIVE PRACTICES XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX False and Misleading Statements ( FTC Act Violation ) * * Deceptive Claim # XXXX : * * " You exceeded a {$25.00} trading limit. '' - * * Reality : * * No such {$25.00} limit exists in Coinbase 's published policy ; my {$80.00} trade is far below industry-standard trading volume caps. 
- * * Deception : * * Using a fabricated policy to deny a legitimate refund. 

* * Deceptive Claim # 2 : * * " This {$25.00} limit applies to your subscription type. '' - * * Reality : * * Coinbase 's published Coinbase XXXX materials describe much higher trading volume thresholds. 
- * * Deception : * * Asserting a made-up limit contradicts Coinbase 's own public representations. 

* * Deceptive Claim # 3 : * * " There is no policy that covers this situation '' ( while simultaneously citing the {$25.00} policy ). 
- * * Reality : * * These statements are mutually contradictory. 
- * * Deception : * * Making logically impossible claims to confuse the customer. 

* * Deceptive Claim # 4 : * * " Your account is closed, but you exceeded trading limits through your trading decisions. '' - * * Reality : * * A closed account can not support voluntary trading decisions ; any trading was forced. 
- * * Deception : * * Using mutually exclusive claims to justify both non-service and refund denial. 

# # # B. Unfair Billing Practices ( EFTA and Consumer Protection Violations ) - * * Billing a closed account : * * Charging subscription fees on an account Coinbase itself confirms is closed violates EFTA 's requirement that payments be authorized and for services actually provided.

- * * Forced liquidation used against customer : * * Coinbase forced a liquidation by preventing withdrawal, then used that forced liquidation to deny refund eligibilitya practice that punishes the customer for Coinbase 's actions.

- * * Billing after service termination : * * Coinbase 's own email confirms subscription is " canceled '' and customer " will no longer be billed, '' yet billing occurred. 

# # # XXXX Obstruction of Dispute Resolution XXXX XXXX XXXX  Violation ) - * * XXXX chat blockade : * * Automatically shutting down all customer service chats prevents consumers from disputing charges or accessing remedies. 
- * * Circular referrals : * * Creating a support system where each channel directs customers to another channel that redirects back prevents meaningful access to dispute resolution. 
- * * Reintroduction of resolved non-issues : * * Creating false account problems distracts from legitimate complaints and delays resolution. 

These practices appear designed to make it functionally impossible for customers to dispute billing errors or challenge misleading policy representationsitself an unfair practice. 

# # # D. Pattern Suggesting Intentional Scheme The sequence of events suggests a deliberate scheme : 1. * * Close the account * * ( confirmed by support ) 2. * * Instruct customer to withdraw funds * * ( to appear helpful ) 3. * * Prevent the withdrawal * * ( trap the customer ) 4. * * Force liquidation * * ( only remaining option ) 5. * * Charge subscription fees * * ( on now-closed account ) 6. * * Deny refund * * ( by citing forced liquidation as policy violation ) 7. * * Block support access * * ( prevent dispute escalation ) 8. * * Introduce false account issues * * ( distract from billing problem ) 9. * * Promise eventual refund * * ( after many days to reduce complaints ) This appears designed to extract fees while preventing meaningful customer remedies. 

* * * # # IX. DAMAGES AND RELIEF REQUESTED # # # A. Monetary Relief 1. * * Full refund of subscription charges : * * {$29.00} ( XX/XX/XXXX ) + {$29.00} ( XX/XX/XXXX ) = * * {$59.00} * * in subscription fees billed on a closed account for services I could not access. [ XXXX ] [ XXXX ] [ XXXX ] XXXX. * * Reimbursement for forced liquidation losses : * * The difference between the forced liquidation price ( {$80.00} for my XXXX ) and the fair market value of Bitcoin at the time forced sale occurred. Coinbase 's deliberate prevention of my legitimate withdrawal forced me to liquidate at a potentially suboptimal price. [ XXXX ] XXXX. * * Statutory damages under XXXX : * * Up to {$5000.00} for unauthorized charges on a closed account. 

XXXX. * * Treble damages under state consumer protection laws : * * If Coinbase 's conduct is found to be knowing or reckless. 

# # # B. Investigative and Enforcement Relief 1. * * CFPB investigation * * into whether Coinbase 's practices constitute systematic : - Deceptive misrepresentation of trading volume policies - Unfair billing on closed accounts - Obstruction of customer service and dispute resolution - Use of forced liquidations to deny customer remedies 2. * * Examination of whether these practices affect other customers * * through : - Review of closed-account billing patterns - Analysis of refund denial rates based on fabricated policy claims - Investigation of support channel obstruction complaints 3. * * Regulatory enforcement * * against Coinbase for : - Violations of the FTC Act ( deceptive practices ) - Violations of EFTA ( unauthorized billing, account closure ) - Violations of the XXXX XXXXt ( obstruction of dispute resolution ) # # # C. Corrective Actions 1. * * Cease billing closed accounts * * immediately and permanently. 

XXXX. * * Revise refund policies * * to exclude forced liquidations from trading volume calculations, or to provide refunds when liquidations are forced by Coinbase 's actions. 

XXXX. * * Eliminate the instruction-to-withdraw-then-prevent-withdrawal scheme * * that forces customers into liquidations. 

XXXX. * * Provide immediate human support access * * by : - Removing XXXX blockades on customer service chats- Ensuring customers can reach live agents through at least one channel - Training support staff to provide consistent, accurate policy information 5. * * Implement consistent policy training * * so support representatives can not cite fabricated policies like a {$25.00} trading limit that contradicts Coinbase 's published materials. 

XXXX. * * Review and correct previous refund denials * * that relied on the fabricated {$25.00} trading limit to identify other affected customers and provide relief. 

* * * # # X. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION * * Screenshots and Evidence Attached : * * - - Support chat : XXXX claims {$25.00} trading limit and denies refund [ XXXX ] - - Coinbase cancellation email confirming subscription is canceled and customer will no longer be billed ; also shows XXXX 's false claim about duplicate account [ XXXX ] - - Billing history showing charges on XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX after account closure [ XXXX ] - - Membership management screen and XXXX 's promise to provide refund after 7-day period [ 5 ] - - Support chat : XXXX repeating {$25.00} limit claim [ XXXX ] - - Support chat : XXXX claiming " you have unfortunately already gone over that limit '' [ XXXX ] - - Support chat : XXXX claiming " there isn't a policy that covers this specific situation '' ( contradicting the {$25.00} limit claim ) [ XXXX ] - - Support chat : XXXX confirming account closure and promising refund assistance after 7 days [ XXXX ] - - Support chat : Full context of {$25.00} limit denial [ XXXX ] - - Support chat : Additional confirmation of account restriction/closure [ XXXX ] - [ XXXX ] - Transaction report showing {$80.00} XXXX liquidation and minimal trading activity relative to any XXXX XXXX monthly cap * * External Policy References : * * - - Coinbase XXXX official page showing actual trading volume and refund eligibility terms [ XXXX ] - - Independent review of Coinbase XXXX confirming published trading volume thresholds far exceed {$25.00} [ XXXX ] XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX Coinbase 's conduct in my case appears to violate multiple federal consumer protection statutes and demonstrates a systematic pattern designed to extract subscription fees from closed accounts while making it functionally impossible for customers to obtain refunds or dispute misleading policy claims. 

The evidence shows : 1. * * Deliberate account closure * * confirmed by multiple support representatives 2. * * Forced Bitcoin liquidation * * through instruction-to-withdraw followed by withdrawal-prevention 3. * * Subscription billing on a closed account * * for services I could not access 4. * * Fabricated trading limit policy * * ( {$25.00} ) contradicting Coinbase 's own published terms 5. * * Contradictory policy representations * * creating confusion and preventing informed consumer choice 6. * * Systematic obstruction of support access * * through AI blockades and circular referrals 7. * * Reintroduction of false account issues * * to distract from billing disputes 8. * * Pattern suggesting intentional scheme * * to extract fees while preventing remedies I request that the CFPB investigate whether Coinbase 's practices constitute systematic deceptive and unfair conduct, and provide the relief and corrective actions outlined above to restore funds and prevent similar harm to other consumers. 

Respectfully submitted, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX * * Attachments : * * - Screenshots ( images 1-10 ) - Transaction Report ( XXXX  ) - Case

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation