Quote from: Labrader on October 31, 2019, 10:51:05 AM

This ( https://www.grantthornton.co.nz/update-for-cryptopia-account-holders-25-October-2019/ )is an interesting update and let's do an analysis of the weasel words they use:

Quote

1. Customers did not have individual wallets and it is impossible to determine individual ownership using just the keys in the wallets. While Cryptopia held details of customer holdings and reported these on the Exchange, the crypto-assets themselves were pooled (co-mingled) in coin wallets. As a centralised exchange, customers' trades would occur in the exchange's internal ledger without confirmation on the blockchain.

Stating the obviuos. That's how every centralised exchange works. But why do they state the obvious?

Quote

2. No detailed reconciliation process between the customer databases and the crypto-assets held in the wallets has ever been completed.

They keep stating the obvious because in the actual wallets there's less than the database says should be.

Quote

We have split the reconciliation process into three main phases:

Phases 1 and 2 are of no interest to us.

But phase 3:

Quote

3. Identifying users and repatriation of returns - This phase is at an early stage. A number of legal matters need to be resolved before this phase can progress.

What legal matters? We find the answer in the legal documents they provided in the update. They are asking the court to decide if:
- they should sell all the crypto, pay the creditors with fiat and disburse the rest to customers (haha, that would leave nothing for us)
- they should consider the crypto property held on trust and return it as is (obviously the better outcome)

Either way, the documents reveal that no matter the decision, they are asking for permission to first dip (i.e. steal) into our crypto, to sell it and pay for their liquidation fees. They are also somewhat revealing they stole the haircut crypto and consider it to be Cryptopia property and already paying fees from it. That's why this has to drag: to inflate their bill.

Quote

The KYC process cannot be avoided, as it is a legal requirement in New Zealand.

A lie my misrepresentation. KYC is required if you plan to distribute fiat (through banks). It wasn't required when Cryptopia was operational, because it was operating purely on crypto.

Unfortunately it is a legal requirement:

https://www.dia.govt.nz/AML-CFT-Frequently-Asked-Questions-for-DIA-Reporting-Entities#J