Funds from our hot addresses are automatically consolidated to our main addresses, as funds are sent from us only from our main addresses. Thus, law enforcement agencies see that the funds have been transferred to the addresses of our service. The funds remain frozen at our addresses, and when the frozen funds are seized by the authorities, they are also sent from our addresses.
- In this case, the OP is not the sender of the funds for the order. According to our rules, the sender of funds must provide information about the source of funds.
...
- Since the OP is not the sender of the funds, he has nothing to do with the funds sent to us. If the user had received funds for any service, we would have requested details of the transaction.
At the moment, the funds are frozen, and no operations are being carried out with them. If we receive a request from law enforcement agencies, they will see that these funds are located at a FixedFloat address. We have all the evidence base that confirms that the funds received by the sender are related to criminal activity. We value our reputation and do not want to be complicit in crimes, because of ignoring which our service may be blocked. We emphasize that we are very loyal to our users, but if we receive information confirming that the funds we received were clearly related to criminal activity, we are obliged to verify this information by requesting the source of the funds.
OK, so based on this information I come to two conclusions:
1. Absolutely nobody should be using FixedFloat. The BTC taint analysis should be conducted before funds are sent to the "main address." This way, the funds can simply refunded to the sender if they are found to be unacceptable according to their standards. What FixedFloat is doing is a bad business practice.
2. OP's employers are still on the hook for paying him the owed amount.