Slashdot Mirror
Bitcoin Exchange Sues Wells Fargo Over Massive Wire Transfer Suspension (bitcoin.com)
An anonymous reader quotes this report from the cryptocurrency news site Bitcoin.com:
Bitfinex, on Wednesday, filed a lawsuit against Wells Fargo for suspending its outgoing U.S. dollars wire transfers. In addition to "a preliminary and permanent injunction against Wells Fargo," the exchange is seeking compensatory damages in excess of $75,000 and any additional relief the court may deem fair as well as a jury trial for the case... The court document states that Bitfinex is a customer of four Taiwan-based banks but is not itself a customer of Wells Fargo. However, its banks in Taiwan use Wells Fargo as a correspondent bank to process U.S. dollar wire transfers, which is a normal practice in cross-border payments.
"So far, close to US$180M in funds is locked up in Wells Fargo accounts," writes The Merkle, "with no clear path to a resolution in sight." But a Bitfinex representative on social media pointed out that "Funds are not frozen," adding that Wells Fargo is just a correspondent bank, and "They have chosen to block wire transfers between us and our customers which we are challenging in court."
Another post from BFX_Brandon states that "If we allow them to simply flip a switch and disrupt business, then there becomes a precedence in the Bitcoin industry beyond just Bitfinex, so we believe it is the appropriate time to take action."
"So far, close to US$180M in funds is locked up in Wells Fargo accounts," writes The Merkle, "with no clear path to a resolution in sight." But a Bitfinex representative on social media pointed out that "Funds are not frozen," adding that Wells Fargo is just a correspondent bank, and "They have chosen to block wire transfers between us and our customers which we are challenging in court."
Another post from BFX_Brandon states that "If we allow them to simply flip a switch and disrupt business, then there becomes a precedence in the Bitcoin industry beyond just Bitfinex, so we believe it is the appropriate time to take action."
From fake accounts, to reorganizing deposits to come after payments so they charge outrageous penalties, to arbitrarily changing 30+ year old account agreements so that they can charge exorbitant "fees" for something that costs them absolutely nothing.
I recall historically when Wells Fargo meant security, safety for your funds. Now it's just a cover-up for highway robbery.
Can't they settle with their clients in BTC?
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
Unless you have a net worth in the 8 figures, you really shouldn't ever do business with a for-profit bank in the US. They'll fuck you, hard. Credit unions are for normal people in the US.
I don't respond to AC's.
What's illegal about it? Anyone can file a lawsuit for any reason, doesn't mean anything until they win.
Rival money laundering groups don't see eye to eye.
Inheritance is the sincerest form of nepotism.
Are there any trustworthy services to do that with a credit card that don't involve some sort of complicated registration / setup / etc process?
Short answer - no.
Long answer - no.
Bitcoin is not money. It is just made-up bullshit for money laundering and other illegal operations. And a few speculators hoping they can make a quick buck -- who usually end up getting ripped off by bitcoin exchanges who disappear and tale your money with them.
The number if people actually using bitcoin ffor legitimate purposes is roughly analogous to the number of people using bit-torrent to download non-copyright infringing materials.
Using a credit card complicates things even more because the credit card company takes a cut of every transaction.
I get that everyone wants to go off the grid with their magical ether currency...
But without actual regulation on what a real bank / transfer looks like, Wells would be on the hook if one of these magical bit banks faked it out.
You can't both be "I'm totally off the grid and don't need your silly corporate/country moneys" and also "How come the bank won't give me real money for my non traceable money thing" at the same time.
You're asking for the security of the real monetary system, but without the checks. Not going to happen. You want your secret bit money, fine, but don't expect real money to magically appear at your whim and following your magical bit rules, because the real world has to deal with regulations and lawyers and things.
When the American Bank wants your money, they can just steal it, knowing fully well that their government will keep their backs. There is an easy solution: never ever do business with American banks or financial institutes, and generally, if you keep the U.S. out of your business, you will fare the better.
I know a bit about wire transfers but have no idea what a 'correspondent bank' is, or how funds can be locked up without being frozen. What exactly is the problem here? Furthermore, why is an injunction being sought? Is it an 'affirmative action' type injunction, to compel Wells Fargo to process the transfers? I could read the article but the summary shouldn't be so impenetrable.
Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
the price of bitcoin has recovered around $300 since March 25th, however this is only because people have no way to get money out of bitfinex except to buy bitcoins. there are complaints about delayed withdrawals from multiple users who tried to withdraw just before the price run up http://i.imgur.com/O7IWseg.png
... all the "Wells Fargo, Bitfinex, Taiwan-based, The Merkle, BFX_Brandon" references are pseudonyms and stuff.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Inn recent years I've been cashing savings bonds (series E I believe). I first went to Wells Fargo because they were the closest bank open on Saturday.
My god, it was a fucking hassle. I knew it would be bad, and I expected the teller to have no fucking clue what a savings bond was let alone how to process it, but what I didn't expect was the damn resistance to actually cashing it because I wasn't a Wells Fargo customer.
You're a fucking bank, and there are still (some) laws you have to respect. After 3 people had a powwow and figured out where the scanner was, and after putting the bond (which was clean and undamaged and unfolded) through it about 3 dozen times, they finally forked over the cash. They also handed over a receipt and a large side of attitude, with a parting recommendation to switch my banking over to Well Fargo. No fucking thanks. Those clowns made Bank of America look competent, and I had to ditch those crooks about a decade ago for refusing to do anything about fraudulent ACH activity on my checking account.
Closing my accounts on those fuckers and walking out with a stack of cash was particularly satisfying.
So every savings bond after that was taken to the same Wells Fargo, just to maximize their inconvenience. Each teller I encounter is flabbergasted that a non-customer can walk in, make them do some actual work, and get money without any fees attached.
That's shit-though-mouth backwards. The issuing bank can more readily identify the account, available funds, detect fraud, minimize clearing times, etc. Of course they fucking don't, because all the clearing and processing times are artificial, and are designed to hit an account holder with fees later should the check bounce. It's the same with the overdraft "protection" scam.
It's not money, no, but "made-up bullshit" is itself the made-up bullshit. Bitcoin is a payment network, designed for moving your existing money around -- something that it does actually work perfectly well for.
Banks have to make money.
Do we get to vote on that? Because somehow I could foresee that the general consensus says otherwise.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Times change. Banks have to make money. If you were a banker, you would instantly recognize simple facts. But you are not, so you will never understand. Charge 9% on student loans? Their's a good reason for that.
Nobody deserves to make as much of a share of the wealth in circulation as they do. The fact they make it is reason enough to hang them all.
Each teller I encounter is flabbergasted that a non-customer can walk in, make them do some actual work, and get money without any fees attached.
As someone who has never worked in banking or finance, that is news to me as well. How did you learn that they were required to do that?
"I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
Charge 9% on student loans? Their's a good reason for that.
Care to elaborate on what that good reason is? Return is proportional to risk. Student loans are just about the lowest risk loans that can be made, and should be "priced" accordingly.
cheques are for losers...
I mean, who in this day and age should be forced to receive a physical cheque, go to a physical bank, fall in line, fill out the paperwork, and then wait in line for his own money!
In Europe they do it much better, quicker and more efficiently: Just transfer the money to payee's bank account. In a flick. No charges. Europe-wide.
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.
That's exactly what they're doing, only they don't know it... yet.
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.
Bitcoins are totally traceable through the blockchain.
If you buy them from an exchange, they are coupled to your name, until they get transferred to your payee, from where the coin can be tracked further.
Try that with cash...
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.
Sorry, no. The only thing that's changed is the urge to make more money faster has overridden concerns that banks could go away if they lose consumer confidence.
Part of this changing times is that these days a bank account is more important to fully participating in society. Stuffing it under the mattress is just not much of an option anymore.
It would be interesting to see your excuse for charging customers fees for services they didn't sign up for and saw no benefit from.
https://www.savingsbonds.gov/
A "savings bond" most commonly refers to a bond issued by the government at a fixed interest rate. In the past, the government offered decent interest rates and people trusted the US Dollar, or the government was desperate and offered high interest rates and people wanted to help the government (war bonds). The last time savings bonds were popular was with series EE in the 80s.
People often bought them for newborns and young children. They carried a fixed interest rate (7 percent or something in the 80s) and took 30 years to fully mature. EE Bonds were sold at half of their face value, I believe, so if you cashed them early you lost out. They reach their face value after a certain number of years and continue earning for years after (EE bonds were 30 years, I think). You pay taxes on the income once they stop earning interest, or once you cash it in (whichever is earlier).
They're a government-backed bond, meaning you can present that to any legitimate US bank and get the money, so long as you show that you're the person entitled to the bond (you're named on the bond or you're the the beneficiary of a dead person named on the bond) with some ID and give them address, SSN, etc. for tax purposes.
The bank has to fork over the cash regardless of your relationship with them You don't have to be a customer. The bank gets the cash back from the government, but it's a huge hassle for them to process each bond. There's lots of manual keying in and record keeping, scanning the paper bond, checking ID, fingerprinting, verifying address, etc.
While I'm not aware of any specific restriction that prevents them from charging a fee for processing a savings bond, they'd get a lot of blow back if they tried. Different bond series have different rules. I believe in some cases the bank doesn't have to cash you out directly but still has to do all the work of verifying your identity/signature and giving you proof of that so that you can send shit off to feds directly. This can ultimately be more work for the bank, and more unusual, so they'd prefer to just cash you out.
The answer is obvious- since the funds aren't actually frozen, sign up with another US partner who IS willing to do international wire transfer, transfer funds to them.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
Except it's a little harder to walk off with your dollars you have in your hand than it is for a Bitcoin exchange to simply vanish.
At least it's harder to abscond with your dollars without some struggle, or at least noticing...
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.