One of the most bizarre crypto lawsuits against Coinbase ends

And it ends with a positive outcome. Mind you, if this verdict was anything other than what we've got then all of the existing crypto exchanges, and inevitably all of the banking world would be in some serious trouble.

The story began when some man wanted to invest in cryptos back in 2021. And it is quite telling that right off the bat, the investigators, judge and the man (and his lawyers) all wrongfully presume that the Coinbase account he made, was his personal "wallet". But anyway, in 2021 the plaintiff was new to it all and needed help/guidance on how to get started. He found some site and left his contact details and soon enough got a call back with the instructions to install Anydesk. And as most of you will probably already know based on that old red flag, he lost it all to scammers.

The instructions were to create a Coinbase account and to then transfer the coins he had purchased to an external address where "his investment" would be located at. Pretty odd because he already made the investment and held it at Coinbase, but you must remember this is someone who's new to it all. Now here's where these scamming scum got real clever.

Upon creating the Coinbase account and transferring the sum to invest, the scammers were lurking along with not just his passwords from Coinbase, but could also see his banking details and saw the large sum of money just sitting there and thought "Hmmm, must get it all". Nowadays online banking has a gazillion extra steps to ensure the money being sent out, is being done by the actual account holder. So the scammers needed a way to win his trust and keep him on the line long enough to make him take out some more money. Preferably all of it which is pretty much what they went for.

They made up some 🐎💩 story about how the government had flagged his account for suspicious crypto transfers and he needed to transfer a large sum of his bank money, about 80% to be precise, into crypto and send it via Coinbase to that exact same external address to prove his innocence. He had this money and thought that by just sending it to the address he knew and could already trust these past months with his previous/smaller deposit that the matter would be closed.

He ended up losing about 530.000 Euros to the scammers. He went to the police and the scammers have never been found so he set his sight on Coinbase and demanded his 530K losses back from them. It never logically states why, probably because there is no logic to this court case but nevertheless he states that Coinbase acted irresponsibly and unjustly. Ohh, he also demanded the trial expenses and some additional 5.000 Euro expense he made from Coinbase as well.😂

I think his mindset at this point was like that poker player who had like 75% of his money in the pot and at the final showdown was put all in by his opponent and thought that despite his rather weak hand he might as well just put that remaining 25% in as well in order to win the total 150% instead of being left with a mere 25% stack. It has to be, there's no way he thought this case was in his favor.

He tried to play the old "ohh now that I lost money, Coinbase was not legally offering their services in my country where they would be under regulatory compliance so I demand it all back" card. So the core question the judge has to answer is "Can plaintiff claim the losses back based on wrongful and insufficient acts by Coinbase".

The judge rules that since there is no correlation between the "legally offering services and regulatory compliance" claim in relation to him sending his assets to scammers, the answer to that question in this rather bizarre trial is "No." It has to be, I mean imagine if it wasn't. All your bank transfers you sent out to scammers could now also be brought to trial. Sure banks do have licenses and are under compliance, but what's the difference between you sending crypto to scammers via non-regulated exchanges, and you sending fiat to scammers via licensed banks?

Now here's where things can get tricky. This year, a court also ruled that some man losing like 200K on one of Europe's largest online gambling sites, had to be reimbursed by the online bookie/casino because it was operating in his country without a license. For some odd reason the online gambling site did not respond in court and thus made the verdict easier but this not only opened the door to many others trying to sue that same site for their losses, it also opened the door a little bit to unregulated crypto exchanges.

If you lost money on an unregulated exchange, not by sending it so scammers of course but by e.g. investing in Safemoon, you could technically try your luck and refer to the unlicensed casino and try to prove a link with the unlicensed exchange. But as you should also have learned from this Coinbase case, it might just end up costing you an extra 14.000 Euro as the Coinbase plaintiff after losing over 530K to scammers, now also had to pay for the failed trial costs as well.

How do you rate this article?


Geo-Political & Economical developments
Geo-Political & Economical developments

Things are almost never as they seem. If you sincerely think that world powers would spend their money and resources in order to just "help" citizens from foreign nations, you might want to ask yourself why they've been neglecting and out right murdering their own citizens for decades. What are their true motives for wanting to fund foreign (terror) groups, start global confrontations and wars? I'll let you in on a little secret; It has NOTHING to do with "human rights" nor "democracy".

Send a $0.01 microtip in crypto to the author, and earn yourself as you read!

20% to author / 80% to me.
We pay the tips from our rewards pool.