Consumer complaint received 2026-05-24 00:00:00
Product: Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service — Virtual currency
Issue: Other service problem — 
Company: CoinZoom, Inc.
State: CO

Complaint narrative:
I am reporting a concern regarding the practices of the CoinZoom, Inc. cryptocurrency trading platform that have had a detrimental effect on myself. After a successful transfer into the account on the morning of XX/XX/year>, I attempted to purchase XXXX tokens, only to be given a message that my account was blocked ( for reasons unknown, and nothing specified in the message ) and to reach out to customer support. I initiated a support ticket, only to be informed the following day of XX/XX/year>, that my account was closed under the pretense that it was " due to deposits received from a third-party account. Per our Terms & Conditions, deposits must originate from a financial account in the same name as the CoinZoom account holder. '' After reviewing the Terms & Conditions of CoinZoom, I found no concrete clause that this was the case, and the funds did originate from my same FI. I have reason to believe this may constitute a breach of contract and/or a violation of UDAAP practices, as it is based on an alleged condition that is not grounded in any specific contractual term, based on a misidentification of a routine ACH intermediary account ( which is not a third-party account, and is standard procedure at certain FIs ), and resulting in actual financial harm ( inability to access ~ {$1000.00} in assets ). I have legal possession of USD in my CoinZoom account with XXXX XXXX XXXX, as well as XXXX and other cryptocurrency tokens, both of which CoinZoom has failed to provide a clear and convenient method of retrieving. In the email chain with customer support, they stated they can not return the funds on their own, but I may initiate a request with my FI. I did so, only for the funds to be returned due to the reason stated that the account is unable to be withdrawn from. I then requested, in an escalation email to the support address on a new email chain ( initiated XX/XX/year> ), for them to cite the specific clause that I allegedly violated in the Terms & Conditions, yet the subsequent response I received ( on XX/XX/year> ) was from the original email chain rather than the new one. The response thanked me for the additional information, but reiterated that my account could not be reopened and repeated the supposed sole process that I may use to retrieve my funds, and even acknowledged there is no formalized timeline for the return of funds from closed accounts on their end. On top of this, the representative failed to address my inquiry for a specific TOS clause. This lack of transparency regarding the operations of CoinZoom has me deeply concerned. As the response came on the original email chain from my escalation thread, and there has not been a subsequent reply since then, I have reason to believe the final message received on XX/XX/XXXX was indeed the one that was intended to respond to my request for clarification. The main point I wish to emphasize is that adverse action had been taken against me by CoinZoom without any prior notification of an alleged violation. I received no warning communique of any kind in my email, and I have reason to believe their communication records will also show no such notification ever being sent to my contact information in their system ( which I have verified is accurate and up-to-date ).

Company response to consumer: Untimely response