Consumer complaint received 2026-03-26 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Mobile or digital wallet
Issue: Unauthorized transactions or other transaction problem — 
Company: Payward Ventures Inc. dba Kraken
State: AL

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/XXXX, I deposited {$150.00} via ACH ( Plaid ) to my account on XXXX, a cryptocurrency exchange operated by Payward Interactive , Inc . I used those funds to purchase XXXX ( XXXX ). On XX/XX/XXXX, I contacted XXXX support XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ) and was told by an agent that my deposit had been received and that my funds were on a XXXX hold, available for withdrawal on XX/XX/XXXX. Then on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX sent me an email ( XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ) claiming my bank had returned the ACH transaction with code R01 : Insufficient Funds. They restricted my account and demanded I deposit additional funds by XX/XX/XXXX or they would liquidate my crypto holdings. Over the following four months ( XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX ), I exchanged over 50 emails with at least seven different XXXX support agents. Every single one told me the same thing : my {$150.00} deposit " never settled, '' " funds were never received, '' and " no money was transferred from your bank account. '' Based on that position, XXXX liquidated my cryptocurrency holdings to " recover '' the {$150.00} they claimed they never received. They left my account with a negative balance of - {$1.00} and told me to deposit more money to resolve it. My bank ( Chime ) confirmed there was no record of a chargeback. XXXX also told me that when the money was returned, it had only a comma where the merchant name should have been, so they could not capture the return and it expired. XXXX 's own agent acknowledged this on XX/XX/XXXX, confirming the {$150.00} hold with a comma in the merchant field and providing trace ID XXXX. THE NEW EVIDENCE : In XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX issued me a XXXX Form XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX From Broker Transactions ) and filed the same with the IRS. This form reports, under penalty of accuracy, the following transaction : - Asset : Ethereum ( ETH ) - Units : XXXX - Date Acquired : XX/XX/XXXX - Date Sold : XX/XX/XXXX - Proceeds : {$130.00} - Cost Basis : {$150.00} - Loss : ( {$12.00} ) This means XXXX has officially reported to the Internal Revenue Service that I acquired {$150.00} worth of XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX the exact transaction they spent XXXX months telling me " never settled '' and for which " funds were never received. '' A XXXX with a {$150.00} cost basis represents a completed broker transaction. You can not report a completed purchase to the IRS and simultaneously tell the customer that same purchase never happened. THE CONTRADICTION : XXXX can not have it both ways. Either : ( A ) The XX/XX/XXXX transaction was completed and XXXX received my {$150.00} in which case they wrongfully liquidated my XXXX holdings to " recover '' money they already had, and they owe me restitution for the liquidated assets plus the original {$150.00} ; or ( B ) The transaction never settled and XXXX never received my {$150.00} in which case the XXXX they filed with the IRS is XXXX false information return, and they have created a tax liability for me on a transaction they claim never occurred. ADDITIONAL SUPPORTING EVIDENCE : XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, a XXXX support agent confirmed via live chat that my deposit was received and told me I could withdraw the funds after a XXXX hold ( XX/XX/XXXX ). XXXX agent " XXXX '' acknowledged this communication on XX/XX/XXXX, in writing. XXXX. My bank confirmed there is no record of any chargeback from XXXX. The bank stated that money left my account but the return was sent back with no merchant name ( only a comma ), preventing them from capturing it. The return expired. XXXX. XXXX provided trace ID XXXX for the transaction on XX/XX/XXXX, and acknowledged the {$150.00} hold with the comma in the merchant field. XXXX. The XXXX also shows a second ETH transaction on XX/XX/XXXX ( XXXX ETH, cost basis {$140.00}, proceeds {$130.00} ) which corresponds to the forced liquidation XXXX performed XXXX my holdings to " recover '' the {$150.00} they now report as a completed transaction. XXXX. I have preserved the complete email thread ( XXXX messages ) documenting every communication with XXXX support from XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX. REQUESTED RELIEF : I am requesting that the CFPB reopen or escalate this complaint based on this new evidence. Specifically : XXXX. XXXX should be required to explain how they reported a completed {$150.00} transaction to the IRS while telling me for XXXX months that the same transaction never settled. XXXX. XXXX should refund the {$150.00} deposit plus the value of all cryptocurrency assets they liquidated from my account to " recover '' funds they now acknowledge receiving. XXXX. If XXXX maintains the transaction never settled, they should be required to issue a corrected XXXX to both me and the IRS, XXXX the XX/XX/XXXX transaction, and compensate me for any tax consequences of the erroneous filing. XXXX. The CFPB should investigate whether this practice provisionally crediting accounts, claiming ACH returns, liquidating customer assets, and then reporting the original transactions as completed to the IRS is a systematic issue affecting other XXXX customers. I have attached a redacted copy of the XXXX Form XXXX showing the disputed transaction. I have also compiled a complete evidence package with the full email chronology that I am prepared to provide upon request.

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation