This document outlines how Crypto.com and MEXC allegedly colluded to divert funds using non-customer addresses, falsify refund processes, and block discovery by the Ombudsman and OSC.
MEXC allegedly moved BNB coin using a non-customer account address and sent it to Crypto.com. Crypto.com received the funds but then claimed the transfer “failed.” Instead of refunding to the rightful customer account, funds were redirected to a generic MEXC source address.
The refund address used by Crypto.com does not match the customer’s address. This discrepancy enables funds to “vanish” permanently at MEXC without regulatory oversight.
When challenged, Crypto.com agents allegedly locked support conversations to prevent screenshots. This required the complainant to use a separate device to record evidence. Screenshots were available until critical questions were asked, after which blocking was enabled.
This pattern mirrors earlier behavior documented in Document 2 regarding support request concealment.
Crypto.com agents allegedly engaged in gaslighting, providing irrelevant information, and stalling responses (including activity outside of normal hours) rather than addressing the issue. Funds exceeding $5,000 USD remain missing, with fraudulent reporting of where the crypto was moved.
Note: Binance’s withdrawal from Ontario is a red flag, as it appears to be aimed at avoiding regulatory scrutiny. However, this does not impact the complainant’s legal right to own BNB coin in Ontario through a registered exchange. Crypto.com’s actions cannot be justified by Binance’s exit.
An unedited original transcript of investigative file built for evidence with original drive links for images and videos.
*This page presents evidence and allegations based on publicly available data and personal experience. It does not constitute a legal finding or accusation.
- Refunds were processed to non-customer accounts, ensuring permanent loss of funds.
- Support system manipulation (screenshot blocking) obstructs regulatory discovery.
- Actions align with potential fraud, theft, and proceeds of crime offences under Canadian law.
- Complaintant alleges this represents systematic collusion between exchanges to evade OSC oversight.
This page presents evidence and allegations based on publicly available data, blockchain records, and personal experience. It is intended for informational and investigative purposes only.
Nothing on this site constitutes a legal finding, formal accusation, or financial advice. Readers are encouraged to conduct their own research and consult with appropriate regulatory bodies or legal professionals.
All linked documents, screenshots, and references are provided in good faith to support transparency and public awareness.