Quote from: NeuroticFish on Today at 08:24:18 AM

Since the service OP was using has stated that it uses KYC/AML, it's somewhat at the limit between scam/stealing and not (although I guess that there's a bigger chance they keep those funds instead of sending them to the authorities). I would certainly avoid them, but I'm hesitant in calling them scammers.
OP should have been taking more precautions and avoid them earlier.

Knowing the mentality of the country in whose jurisdiction such a legal exchanger is opened, I can say with 100% probability that not a single confiscated amount will be transferred to the authorities under any circumstances. Those legal legal clippings to which they refer are fiction, since the existence of this text requires the letter of the law. Not to mention the nominee directors of this exchanger (as is often the case). Therefore, if the funds are not returned to the user at the address from which they came, I will consider this precedent as a fraud. This is even quite ironic and somewhat similar to the fact that a gray office confiscates the user's supposedly gray money, referring to the law.

Well said

Quote from: LoyceV

This brings another interesting question: what happens to "tained" Bitcoins once a service decides they're "tainted" (based on completely arbitrary criteria)? I wouldn't be surprised if they use this as an excuse to keep funds for themselves, AKA stealing. It's not as if they know Bob stole the Bitcoins from Alice, and they return them to Alice. So what's the plan after announcing some Bitcoins as "tainted"?

Also, I'm concerned about what LoyceV said and what i've seen for myself.

Quote from: LoyceV on Today at 09:42:55 AM

Note that the feedback has been bumped 48 times: BestChange allows the exchanger to cancel the claim (this happened 20 times). Then, Janyiah can renew the claim (which happened 19 times). That alone is very shady: imagine if any user on Bitcointalk could turn their negative feedback into neutral just by clicking it.