CryptoDac

Category: Platform source reviews

  • Poloinvest Limited: Platform source review

    Poloinvest Limited: Platform source review

    Poloinvest Limited appears in a source record attributed to Securities and Futures Commission. The identity, jurisdiction and finding below define the scope of this review.

    The identity in the source

    Recorded name
    Poloinvest Limited
    Source authority
    Securities and Futures Commission
    Source jurisdiction
    Hong Kong
    Source validation date
    2017-08-04
    Source modification date
    2025-03-21

    Read the primary authority source

    Read the finding in context

    The recorded category is reproduced above. Read the linked authority’s finding in its own terms. An authorization warning, restriction or other regulatory notice does not by itself establish every allegation about an entity or prove a particular person’s loss.

    Match the record to your experience

    Compare the complete website or profile address, payment destination and communications you used. A similar name is not enough to identify the same operator. Retain original messages, payment references and dates so that any differences remain visible.

    Follow the evidence and payment route

    CryptoDac investigates cryptocurrency fraud, traces digital assets and develops evidence to pursue appropriate lawful recovery routes. For a matter relating to Poloinvest Limited, the starting questions are which identity presented the service, how payments were sent, which records support the sequence and which relevant platform or authority may be able to act.

    A useful chronology separates amounts actually sent from displayed balances or advertised returns. Public transaction records can show movement between addresses, while ownership and legal responsibility may require further evidence. Recovery strategy depends on the facts and the actions of the relevant parties.

    Preserve what can support a review

    Keep exact website addresses, dated correspondence, transaction IDs, network details and the original records of payment and withdrawal requests. Describe uncertainty honestly. Do not send seed phrases, private keys, passwords or one-time codes.

    Dates and source scope

    Source dates are labelled separately above. The publication date on this article records its CryptoDac release and is not a claim that CryptoDac published the authority’s warning on its original date. Source records may change; consult the linked authority for its current notice and distinguish its jurisdiction from other countries.

    Source and investigation methodology · Request a correction · Return to Scam Brokers

  • Allen Baker: Platform source review

    Allen Baker: Platform source review

    Allen Baker appears in a source record attributed to Securities and Futures Commission. The identity, jurisdiction and finding below define the scope of this review.

    The identity in the source

    Recorded name
    Allen Baker
    Source authority
    Securities and Futures Commission
    Source jurisdiction
    Hong Kong
    Source validation date
    2017-10-24
    Source modification date
    2025-03-21

    Read the primary authority source

    Read the finding in context

    The recorded category is reproduced above. Read the linked authority’s finding in its own terms. An authorization warning, restriction or other regulatory notice does not by itself establish every allegation about an entity or prove a particular person’s loss.

    Match the record to your experience

    Compare the complete website or profile address, payment destination and communications you used. A similar name is not enough to identify the same operator. Retain original messages, payment references and dates so that any differences remain visible.

    Follow the evidence and payment route

    CryptoDac investigates cryptocurrency fraud, traces digital assets and develops evidence to pursue appropriate lawful recovery routes. For a matter relating to Allen Baker, the starting questions are which identity presented the service, how payments were sent, which records support the sequence and which relevant platform or authority may be able to act.

    A useful chronology separates amounts actually sent from displayed balances or advertised returns. Public transaction records can show movement between addresses, while ownership and legal responsibility may require further evidence. Recovery strategy depends on the facts and the actions of the relevant parties.

    Preserve what can support a review

    Keep exact website addresses, dated correspondence, transaction IDs, network details and the original records of payment and withdrawal requests. Describe uncertainty honestly. Do not send seed phrases, private keys, passwords or one-time codes.

    Dates and source scope

    Source dates are labelled separately above. The publication date on this article records its CryptoDac release and is not a claim that CryptoDac published the authority’s warning on its original date. Source records may change; consult the linked authority for its current notice and distinguish its jurisdiction from other countries.

    Source and investigation methodology · Request a correction · Return to Scam Brokers

  • SFM Limited: Platform source review

    SFM Limited: Platform source review

    SFM Limited appears in a source record attributed to Securities and Futures Commission. The identity, jurisdiction and finding below define the scope of this review.

    The identity in the source

    Recorded name
    SFM Limited
    Source authority
    Securities and Futures Commission
    Source jurisdiction
    Hong Kong
    Source validation date
    2018-12-13
    Source modification date
    2025-03-21

    Read the primary authority source

    Read the finding in context

    The recorded category is reproduced above. Read the linked authority’s finding in its own terms. An authorization warning, restriction or other regulatory notice does not by itself establish every allegation about an entity or prove a particular person’s loss.

    Match the record to your experience

    Compare the complete website or profile address, payment destination and communications you used. A similar name is not enough to identify the same operator. Retain original messages, payment references and dates so that any differences remain visible.

    Follow the evidence and payment route

    CryptoDac investigates cryptocurrency fraud, traces digital assets and develops evidence to pursue appropriate lawful recovery routes. For a matter relating to SFM Limited, the starting questions are which identity presented the service, how payments were sent, which records support the sequence and which relevant platform or authority may be able to act.

    A useful chronology separates amounts actually sent from displayed balances or advertised returns. Public transaction records can show movement between addresses, while ownership and legal responsibility may require further evidence. Recovery strategy depends on the facts and the actions of the relevant parties.

    Preserve what can support a review

    Keep exact website addresses, dated correspondence, transaction IDs, network details and the original records of payment and withdrawal requests. Describe uncertainty honestly. Do not send seed phrases, private keys, passwords or one-time codes.

    Dates and source scope

    Source dates are labelled separately above. The publication date on this article records its CryptoDac release and is not a claim that CryptoDac published the authority’s warning on its original date. Source records may change; consult the linked authority for its current notice and distinguish its jurisdiction from other countries.

    Source and investigation methodology · Request a correction · Return to Scam Brokers

  • Coin Wealth Trade: Platform source review

    Coin Wealth Trade: Platform source review

    Coin Wealth Trade appears in a source record attributed to Financial Markets Authority. The identity, jurisdiction and finding below define the scope of this review.

    The identity in the source

    Recorded name
    Coin Wealth Trade
    Website or profile identified in the source
    coinwealthtrade.com
    Source authority
    Financial Markets Authority
    Source jurisdiction
    New Zealand
    Recorded category
    Unregistered/Unlicensed entity offering financial products or services|Market Manipulation (pump and dump schemes, wash trades, etc.)
    Products identified
    Derivatives (options, futures, binary options, CFDs, forex, swaps, etc.)
    Source registration date
    2025-11-26
    Source validation date
    2025-12-02
    Source modification date
    2025-12-02

    Read the primary authority source

    Read the finding in context

    The recorded category is reproduced above. Read the linked authority’s finding in its own terms. An authorization warning, restriction or other regulatory notice does not by itself establish every allegation about an entity or prove a particular person’s loss.

    Match the record to your experience

    Compare the complete website or profile address, payment destination and communications you used. A similar name is not enough to identify the same operator. Retain original messages, payment references and dates so that any differences remain visible.

    Follow the evidence and payment route

    CryptoDac investigates cryptocurrency fraud, traces digital assets and develops evidence to pursue appropriate lawful recovery routes. For a matter relating to Coin Wealth Trade, the starting questions are which identity presented the service, how payments were sent, which records support the sequence and which relevant platform or authority may be able to act.

    A useful chronology separates amounts actually sent from displayed balances or advertised returns. Public transaction records can show movement between addresses, while ownership and legal responsibility may require further evidence. Recovery strategy depends on the facts and the actions of the relevant parties.

    Preserve what can support a review

    Keep exact website addresses, dated correspondence, transaction IDs, network details and the original records of payment and withdrawal requests. Describe uncertainty honestly. Do not send seed phrases, private keys, passwords or one-time codes.

    Dates and source scope

    Source dates are labelled separately above. The publication date on this article records its CryptoDac release and is not a claim that CryptoDac published the authority’s warning on its original date. Source records may change; consult the linked authority for its current notice and distinguish its jurisdiction from other countries.

    Source and investigation methodology · Request a correction · Return to Scam Brokers

  • Basic Trading Group 80: Platform source review

    Basic Trading Group 80: Platform source review

    Basic Trading Group 80 appears in a source record attributed to Financial Markets Authority. The identity, jurisdiction and finding below define the scope of this review.

    The identity in the source

    Recorded name
    Basic Trading Group 80
    Source authority
    Financial Markets Authority
    Source jurisdiction
    New Zealand
    Recorded category
    Market Manipulation (pump and dump schemes, wash trades, etc.)
    Products identified
    Stocks and bonds
    Source registration date
    2025-12-22
    Source validation date
    2026-01-06
    Source modification date
    2026-01-06

    Read the primary authority source

    Read the finding in context

    The recorded category is reproduced above. Read the linked authority’s finding in its own terms. An authorization warning, restriction or other regulatory notice does not by itself establish every allegation about an entity or prove a particular person’s loss.

    Match the record to your experience

    Compare the complete website or profile address, payment destination and communications you used. A similar name is not enough to identify the same operator. Retain original messages, payment references and dates so that any differences remain visible.

    Follow the evidence and payment route

    CryptoDac investigates cryptocurrency fraud, traces digital assets and develops evidence to pursue appropriate lawful recovery routes. For a matter relating to Basic Trading Group 80, the starting questions are which identity presented the service, how payments were sent, which records support the sequence and which relevant platform or authority may be able to act.

    A useful chronology separates amounts actually sent from displayed balances or advertised returns. Public transaction records can show movement between addresses, while ownership and legal responsibility may require further evidence. Recovery strategy depends on the facts and the actions of the relevant parties.

    Preserve what can support a review

    Keep exact website addresses, dated correspondence, transaction IDs, network details and the original records of payment and withdrawal requests. Describe uncertainty honestly. Do not send seed phrases, private keys, passwords or one-time codes.

    Dates and source scope

    Source dates are labelled separately above. The publication date on this article records its CryptoDac release and is not a claim that CryptoDac published the authority’s warning on its original date. Source records may change; consult the linked authority for its current notice and distinguish its jurisdiction from other countries.

    Source and investigation methodology · Request a correction · Return to Scam Brokers

  • Lquid Finance T/A Lquid Pay: Platform source review

    Lquid Finance T/A Lquid Pay: Platform source review

    Lquid Finance T/A Lquid Pay appears in a source record attributed to Financial Markets Authority. The identity, jurisdiction and finding below define the scope of this review.

    The identity in the source

    Recorded name
    Lquid Finance T/A Lquid Pay
    Website or profile identified in the source
    lquid.finance
    Source authority
    Financial Markets Authority
    Source jurisdiction
    New Zealand
    Recorded category
    Unregistered/Unlicensed entity offering financial products or services
    Products identified
    Crypto and Digital Assets
    Source registration date
    2025-05-02
    Source validation date
    2025-05-02
    Source modification date
    2025-05-02
    Additional source context
    Lquid Pay claims to offer cryptocurrency payment cards in New Zealand, but it is not registered to provide this service in New Zealand. Lquid Pay has claimed on social media that:it is fully compliant with New Zealand’s laws, andit holds a registered New Zealand trademark. The FMA requested Lquid Pay to provide explanation and evidence to substantiate their claims above. Lquid Pay has failed to provide a response to our request. We therefore suspect that claims made are false and misleading.Making false and misleading statements, particularly information relating to compliance in any jurisdiction(s), like those made by Lquid Pay mentioned above, is a common technique used by scam operations to create an air of legitimacy of their business.Lquid Pay is not authorised to provide financial services in New Zealand, and we do not believe it holds any New Zealand trademark.Website: lquid.financeEmail addresses: support@lquid.finance; contact@lquid.finance

    Read the primary authority source

    Read the finding in context

    The recorded category is reproduced above. Read the linked authority’s finding in its own terms. An authorization warning, restriction or other regulatory notice does not by itself establish every allegation about an entity or prove a particular person’s loss.

    Match the record to your experience

    Compare the complete website or profile address, payment destination and communications you used. A similar name is not enough to identify the same operator. Retain original messages, payment references and dates so that any differences remain visible.

    Follow the evidence and payment route

    CryptoDac investigates cryptocurrency fraud, traces digital assets and develops evidence to pursue appropriate lawful recovery routes. For a matter relating to Lquid Finance T/A Lquid Pay, the starting questions are which identity presented the service, how payments were sent, which records support the sequence and which relevant platform or authority may be able to act.

    A useful chronology separates amounts actually sent from displayed balances or advertised returns. Public transaction records can show movement between addresses, while ownership and legal responsibility may require further evidence. Recovery strategy depends on the facts and the actions of the relevant parties.

    Preserve what can support a review

    Keep exact website addresses, dated correspondence, transaction IDs, network details and the original records of payment and withdrawal requests. Describe uncertainty honestly. Do not send seed phrases, private keys, passwords or one-time codes.

    Dates and source scope

    Source dates are labelled separately above. The publication date on this article records its CryptoDac release and is not a claim that CryptoDac published the authority’s warning on its original date. Source records may change; consult the linked authority for its current notice and distinguish its jurisdiction from other countries.

    Source and investigation methodology · Request a correction · Return to Scam Brokers

  • Premium Crypto Lite: Platform source review

    Premium Crypto Lite: Platform source review

    Premium Crypto Lite appears in a source record attributed to Financial Markets Authority. The identity, jurisdiction and finding below define the scope of this review.

    The identity in the source

    Recorded name
    Premium Crypto Lite
    Website or profile identified in the source
    premiumcryptolite.com
    Source authority
    Financial Markets Authority
    Source jurisdiction
    New Zealand
    Recorded category
    Fraud and Other Types of Misconduct
    Products identified
    Crypto and Digital Assets
    Source registration date
    2025-06-10
    Source validation date
    2025-06-10
    Source modification date
    2025-06-10

    Read the primary authority source

    Read the finding in context

    The recorded category is reproduced above. Read the linked authority’s finding in its own terms. An authorization warning, restriction or other regulatory notice does not by itself establish every allegation about an entity or prove a particular person’s loss.

    Match the record to your experience

    Compare the complete website or profile address, payment destination and communications you used. A similar name is not enough to identify the same operator. Retain original messages, payment references and dates so that any differences remain visible.

    Follow the evidence and payment route

    CryptoDac investigates cryptocurrency fraud, traces digital assets and develops evidence to pursue appropriate lawful recovery routes. For a matter relating to Premium Crypto Lite, the starting questions are which identity presented the service, how payments were sent, which records support the sequence and which relevant platform or authority may be able to act.

    A useful chronology separates amounts actually sent from displayed balances or advertised returns. Public transaction records can show movement between addresses, while ownership and legal responsibility may require further evidence. Recovery strategy depends on the facts and the actions of the relevant parties.

    Preserve what can support a review

    Keep exact website addresses, dated correspondence, transaction IDs, network details and the original records of payment and withdrawal requests. Describe uncertainty honestly. Do not send seed phrases, private keys, passwords or one-time codes.

    Dates and source scope

    Source dates are labelled separately above. The publication date on this article records its CryptoDac release and is not a claim that CryptoDac published the authority’s warning on its original date. Source records may change; consult the linked authority for its current notice and distinguish its jurisdiction from other countries.

    Source and investigation methodology · Request a correction · Return to Scam Brokers

  • Standard Safe Trust Bank: Platform source review

    Standard Safe Trust Bank: Platform source review

    Standard Safe Trust Bank appears in a source record attributed to Financial Markets Authority. The identity, jurisdiction and finding below define the scope of this review.

    The identity in the source

    Recorded name
    Standard Safe Trust Bank
    Website or profile identified in the source
    http://www.standardsafetrust.org/
    Source authority
    Financial Markets Authority
    Source jurisdiction
    New Zealand
    Recorded category
    Unregistered/Unlicensed entity offering financial products or services|Fraud and Other Types of Misconduct
    Products identified
    Crypto and Digital Assets
    Source registration date
    2025-06-13
    Source validation date
    2025-06-16
    Source modification date
    2025-06-16

    Read the primary authority source

    Read the finding in context

    The recorded category is reproduced above. Read the linked authority’s finding in its own terms. An authorization warning, restriction or other regulatory notice does not by itself establish every allegation about an entity or prove a particular person’s loss.

    Match the record to your experience

    Compare the complete website or profile address, payment destination and communications you used. A similar name is not enough to identify the same operator. Retain original messages, payment references and dates so that any differences remain visible.

    Follow the evidence and payment route

    CryptoDac investigates cryptocurrency fraud, traces digital assets and develops evidence to pursue appropriate lawful recovery routes. For a matter relating to Standard Safe Trust Bank, the starting questions are which identity presented the service, how payments were sent, which records support the sequence and which relevant platform or authority may be able to act.

    A useful chronology separates amounts actually sent from displayed balances or advertised returns. Public transaction records can show movement between addresses, while ownership and legal responsibility may require further evidence. Recovery strategy depends on the facts and the actions of the relevant parties.

    Preserve what can support a review

    Keep exact website addresses, dated correspondence, transaction IDs, network details and the original records of payment and withdrawal requests. Describe uncertainty honestly. Do not send seed phrases, private keys, passwords or one-time codes.

    Dates and source scope

    Source dates are labelled separately above. The publication date on this article records its CryptoDac release and is not a claim that CryptoDac published the authority’s warning on its original date. Source records may change; consult the linked authority for its current notice and distinguish its jurisdiction from other countries.

    Source and investigation methodology · Request a correction · Return to Scam Brokers

  • Online Stocks Exchange FX Earnings: Platform source review

    Online Stocks Exchange FX Earnings: Platform source review

    Online Stocks Exchange FX Earnings appears in a source record attributed to Financial Markets Authority. The identity, jurisdiction and finding below define the scope of this review.

    The identity in the source

    Recorded name
    Online Stocks Exchange FX Earnings
    Website or profile identified in the source
    onlinestocksexchangefxearnings.com/
    Source authority
    Financial Markets Authority
    Source jurisdiction
    New Zealand
    Recorded category
    Unregistered/Unlicensed entity offering financial products or services|Registered/Licensed entity impersonators|Fraud and Other Types of Misconduct
    Products identified
    Stocks and bonds|Investment contracts|Derivatives (options, futures, binary options, CFDs, forex, swaps, etc.)
    Source registration date
    2025-08-29
    Source validation date
    2025-09-01
    Source modification date
    2025-09-01

    Read the primary authority source

    Read the finding in context

    The recorded category is reproduced above. Read the linked authority’s finding in its own terms. An authorization warning, restriction or other regulatory notice does not by itself establish every allegation about an entity or prove a particular person’s loss.

    Match the record to your experience

    Compare the complete website or profile address, payment destination and communications you used. A similar name is not enough to identify the same operator. Retain original messages, payment references and dates so that any differences remain visible.

    Follow the evidence and payment route

    CryptoDac investigates cryptocurrency fraud, traces digital assets and develops evidence to pursue appropriate lawful recovery routes. For a matter relating to Online Stocks Exchange FX Earnings, the starting questions are which identity presented the service, how payments were sent, which records support the sequence and which relevant platform or authority may be able to act.

    A useful chronology separates amounts actually sent from displayed balances or advertised returns. Public transaction records can show movement between addresses, while ownership and legal responsibility may require further evidence. Recovery strategy depends on the facts and the actions of the relevant parties.

    Preserve what can support a review

    Keep exact website addresses, dated correspondence, transaction IDs, network details and the original records of payment and withdrawal requests. Describe uncertainty honestly. Do not send seed phrases, private keys, passwords or one-time codes.

    Dates and source scope

    Source dates are labelled separately above. The publication date on this article records its CryptoDac release and is not a claim that CryptoDac published the authority’s warning on its original date. Source records may change; consult the linked authority for its current notice and distinguish its jurisdiction from other countries.

    Source and investigation methodology · Request a correction · Return to Scam Brokers

  • Indices Access Group: Platform source review

    Indices Access Group: Platform source review

    Indices Access Group appears in a source record attributed to Financial Markets Authority. The identity, jurisdiction and finding below define the scope of this review.

    The identity in the source

    Recorded name
    Indices Access Group
    Source authority
    Financial Markets Authority
    Source jurisdiction
    New Zealand
    Recorded category
    Unregistered/Unlicensed entity offering financial products or services
    Source validation date
    2023-11-22
    Source modification date
    2023-11-22
    Additional source context
    SHARE THISWe are concerned about Indices Access Group and its website, which has the hallmarks of a scam.Indices Access Group has made unsolicited offer of shares to a New Zealand investor and subsequently withheld funds. The investor can no longer contact the entity.Indices Access Group is not listed on the Financial Service Providers Register to provide financial services to New Zealand consumers and does not appear to be subject to regulation by an overseas regulator.Unsolicited offers of financial products are generally illegal in New Zealand and is a common hallmark of a scam.Entity name: Indices Access GroupWebsite: IndicesAccessGroup.comEmail: info@indicesaccessgroup.com; s.porter@indicesaccessgroup.com; m.taylor@indicesaccessgroup.com; m.anderson@indicesaccessgroup.com; h.johnson@indicesaccessgroup.comPhone: +85253866711; +85281971068; +85259538093; +442045791044Address: (Alleged) 51, Westminster Bridge Rd, London SE1 7XA. United Kingdom; 27th floor, YF Tower, 33 Lockhart Rd, Wan Chai. Hong Kong. (HKSAR)

    Read the primary authority source

    Read the finding in context

    The recorded category is reproduced above. Read the linked authority’s finding in its own terms. An authorization warning, restriction or other regulatory notice does not by itself establish every allegation about an entity or prove a particular person’s loss.

    Match the record to your experience

    Compare the complete website or profile address, payment destination and communications you used. A similar name is not enough to identify the same operator. Retain original messages, payment references and dates so that any differences remain visible.

    Follow the evidence and payment route

    CryptoDac investigates cryptocurrency fraud, traces digital assets and develops evidence to pursue appropriate lawful recovery routes. For a matter relating to Indices Access Group, the starting questions are which identity presented the service, how payments were sent, which records support the sequence and which relevant platform or authority may be able to act.

    A useful chronology separates amounts actually sent from displayed balances or advertised returns. Public transaction records can show movement between addresses, while ownership and legal responsibility may require further evidence. Recovery strategy depends on the facts and the actions of the relevant parties.

    Preserve what can support a review

    Keep exact website addresses, dated correspondence, transaction IDs, network details and the original records of payment and withdrawal requests. Describe uncertainty honestly. Do not send seed phrases, private keys, passwords or one-time codes.

    Dates and source scope

    Source dates are labelled separately above. The publication date on this article records its CryptoDac release and is not a claim that CryptoDac published the authority’s warning on its original date. Source records may change; consult the linked authority for its current notice and distinguish its jurisdiction from other countries.

    Source and investigation methodology · Request a correction · Return to Scam Brokers