Jorge, this is another example of you discarding information that doesn't meet your starting criterion of bitcoin = scam.
Confirmation bias doesn't do you any favours.
I have no reason to believe that Bitstamp is insolvent, but, if it were, it could and would easily fake that test. That the test is accepted without criticisms only confirms how gullible bitcoiners are.
Bitcoin is not itself a scam, but I have never in my life seen an economic sector so chock full of scammers. Every crook in the world who learns a little about bitcoin would want to "adopt" it. It is a much more lucrative and "safe" vehicle for scams than the classical ones -- stolen credit cards, counterfeit cash, phony viagra, nigerian heirlooms, penny stocks, ponzi funds, ...
How about the current European Banking Sector Asset Quality Review - i'll take the evidence presented of Bitstamp's solvency as superior to any of the smoke and mirrors provided by the existing fiat system.
If I recall Ireland's banking sector was solvent under the first ECB test, until it wasn't just a few months later.
Banks are no better- scams and shysters are everywhere, some of them get paid millions of pounds by companies owned by the same shareholders they extort - criticise bitcoin if you will and many involved in it deserve the criticism but Stamp have functioned well to date. The questions around KYC are far more likely to be evidence of an exchange co-operating with authorities than an exchange intentionally attempting to defraud customers or in financial difficulty
Direct some of your penetrating insight on the conventional fiat system you appear to support over bitcoin, I work in it, and have done for twenty years and I know its full of scams, most of them much smarter and much more complex than anything you have seen yet in bitcoin.