FixedFloat — 0.0851 BTC frozen, no timeline, no answers (Order ZNTBD7)

your funds connected to some hacks? strange why it took 1 year to contact them? You could do the exchange but could not send them an email?

they have very bad reputation when dealing with funds involve in hacks or other bad situation. You could've used mixers or other service provider who handles dirty money. Again if you're dealing with hack funds always use exchanges that have their own liquidity and provide services to hackers or help laundering money. Fixedfloat don't have a representative on this forum so getting some answer from them here is not possible also they have couple of more scam accusation thread against them already.

Quote from: Murat on July 05, 2026, 12:50:21 PMyour funds connected to some hacks? strange why it took 1 year to contact them? You could do the exchange but could not send them an email?

they have very bad reputation when dealing with funds involve in hacks or other bad situation. You could've used mixers or other service provider who handles dirty money. Again if you're dealing with hack funds always use exchanges that have their own liquidity and provide services to hackers or help laundering money. Fixedfloat don't have a representative on this forum so getting some answer from them here is not possible also they have couple of more scam accusation thread against them already.
No, my funds are not connected to any hacks. The source of funds is completely legal, and I confirmed this with documents.

I couldn't respond for a year because there is a war in my country. I had to urgently change my place of residence several times, and I didn't have access to my email or other things. I don't want to go into details, but it was a forced pause, not an attempt to hide anything.

As soon as I was able, I immediately provided all documents and started active correspondence.

The exchanger continues to stall: first they asked for documents, I provided them. Then they said it wasn't enough and demanded things I don't have and never had. When I asked about timelines, they replied: "no clear timeframes." When I asked who exactly is conducting the review and who these "partners" are that they keep referring to — they refused to answer, citing confidentiality.

I also found via blockchain that my funds were moved from the order address to their hot wallet within 2 hours of arrival. They explained this as "standard consolidation," although earlier they claimed that during a review, funds should be temporarily held on a technical address and not directed to further exchange.

So they say one thing, do another, and respond to direct questions with copy-paste replies.

FF are notorious for doing this on high value exchanges,  although yours isnt what i would call that

One year gap just to raise a complaint is certainly bad look, but definitely not a reason for them to keep your money

They call it hijacked/stolen crypto yet they move them to their own hot walllet? Thats some BS

Quote from: rohang on July 05, 2026, 03:28:02 PMFF are notorious for doing this on high value exchanges,  although yours isnt what i would call that

One year gap just to raise a complaint is certainly bad look, but definitely not a reason for them to keep your money

They call it hijacked/stolen crypto yet they move them to their own hot walllet? Thats some BS
Agree, it looks strange. They claim my funds are "connected to criminal activity," but within 2 hours of receiving them, they moved them to their own hot wallet. If they're so "dirty" — why move them to the general operational pool? There's no logic in that.

Quote from: Lytvynets1 on July 05, 2026, 05:16:42 PMQuote from: rohang on July 05, 2026, 03:28:02 PMFF are notorious for doing this on high value exchanges,  although yours isnt what i would call that

One year gap just to raise a complaint is certainly bad look, but definitely not a reason for them to keep your money

They call it hijacked/stolen crypto yet they move them to their own hot walllet? Thats some BS
Agree, it looks strange. They claim my funds are "connected to criminal activity," but within 2 hours of receiving them, they moved them to their own hot wallet. If they're so "dirty" — why move them to the general operational pool? There's no logic in that.

Yea i use them too for small amounts..

They must have systems in place to track and categorize incoming funds as legitimate or not, from which they would have blocked your trade
But those very same systems should also block the funds on the receiving address and not mix them with their main wallet funds

That happened so FF are now also implicitly a part of whatever fraud they think happened with those coins, as they must have been spent already further

Quote from: Lytvynets1 on July 05, 2026, 05:16:42 PMThey claim my funds are "connected to criminal activity," but within 2 hours of receiving them, they moved them to their own hot wallet. If they're so "dirty" — why move them to the general operational pool? There's no logic in that.
They should have refunded your fund back to your original sending address and won't proceed with the transaction, that's the protocol if they are claiming it that it's dirty. And not to mention that in the past years, fixedfloat have got a lot of issues per se and that's why many have stopped using them including the one big hack that happened to them IIRC. But raising this concern after a year, I know that it's still valid but why it took you long to wait and open up the incident?

Quote from: tabas on July 05, 2026, 10:20:05 PMQuote from: Lytvynets1 on July 05, 2026, 05:16:42 PMThey claim my funds are "connected to criminal activity," but within 2 hours of receiving them, they moved them to their own hot wallet. If they're so "dirty" — why move them to the general operational pool? There's no logic in that.
They should have refunded your fund back to your original sending address and won't proceed with the transaction, that's the protocol if they are claiming it that it's dirty. And not to mention that in the past years, fixedfloat have got a lot of issues per se and that's why many have stopped using them including the one big hack that happened to them IIRC. But raising this concern after a year, I know that it's still valid but why it took you long to wait and open up the incident?
Thanks for the question. You're absolutely right — if they considered my funds "dirty," the logical thing would have been to return them to the sending address immediately. But they didn't return them, didn't exchange them — just moved them to their hot wallet within 2 hours and have been holding them ever since.

Why I didn't open the case earlier — honestly, there's a war in my country. I had to change my place of residence several times urgently, and I didn't have access to my email or many other things. As soon as I was able, I contacted them and provided all the documents. It was a forced pause, not an attempt to hide anything.

Now I'm doing everything I can to get my funds back, and I'm sharing this story so others know how FF operates.

Quote from: Lytvynets1 on July 06, 2026, 03:09:24 AMQuote from: tabas on July 05, 2026, 10:20:05 PMQuote from: Lytvynets1 on July 05, 2026, 05:16:42 PMThey claim my funds are "connected to criminal activity," but within 2 hours of receiving them, they moved them to their own hot wallet. If they're so "dirty" — why move them to the general operational pool? There's no logic in that.
They should have refunded your fund back to your original sending address and won't proceed with the transaction, that's the protocol if they are claiming it that it's dirty. And not to mention that in the past years, fixedfloat have got a lot of issues per se and that's why many have stopped using them including the one big hack that happened to them IIRC. But raising this concern after a year, I know that it's still valid but why it took you long to wait and open up the incident?
Thanks for the question. You're absolutely right — if they considered my funds "dirty," the logical thing would have been to return them to the sending address immediately. But they didn't return them, didn't exchange them — just moved them to their hot wallet within 2 hours and have been holding them ever since.I think one reason is that the price of Bitcoin at that time was quite high and $100k+ and it took them long to return it so the value probably have dropped already as of asking them to do the refund. But even so, it should be an automatic action from their system that the transaction won't proceed and will be declined automatically so is the start of the refund about the rejection.

Quote from: Lytvynets1 on July 06, 2026, 03:09:24 AMWhy I didn't open the case earlier — honestly, there's a war in my country. I had to change my place of residence several times urgently, and I didn't have access to my email or many other things. As soon as I was able, I contacted them and provided all the documents. It was a forced pause, not an attempt to hide anything.

Now I'm doing everything I can to get my funds back, and I'm sharing this story so others know how FF operates.
I understand now and I hope that your funds will be back asap. And with your relocation, I hope you're doing fine.

Quote from: tabas on July 06, 2026, 10:31:41 AMQuote from: Lytvynets1 on July 06, 2026, 03:09:24 AMQuote from: tabas on July 05, 2026, 10:20:05 PMQuote from: Lytvynets1 on July 05, 2026, 05:16:42 PMThey claim my funds are "connected to criminal activity," but within 2 hours of receiving them, they moved them to their own hot wallet. If they're so "dirty" — why move them to the general operational pool? There's no logic in that.
They should have refunded your fund back to your original sending address and won't proceed with the transaction, that's the protocol if they are claiming it that it's dirty. And not to mention that in the past years, fixedfloat have got a lot of issues per se and that's why many have stopped using them including the one big hack that happened to them IIRC. But raising this concern after a year, I know that it's still valid but why it took you long to wait and open up the incident?
Thanks for the question. You're absolutely right — if they considered my funds "dirty," the logical thing would have been to return them to the sending address immediately. But they didn't return them, didn't exchange them — just moved them to their hot wallet within 2 hours and have been holding them ever since.I think one reason is that the price of Bitcoin at that time was quite high and $100k+ and it took them long to return it so the value probably have dropped already as of asking them to do the refund. But even so, it should be an automatic action from their system that the transaction won't proceed and will be declined automatically so is the start of the refund about the rejection.

Quote from: Lytvynets1 on July 06, 2026, 03:09:24 AMWhy I didn't open the case earlier — honestly, there's a war in my country. I had to change my place of residence several times urgently, and I didn't have access to my email or many other things. As soon as I was able, I contacted them and provided all the documents. It was a forced pause, not an attempt to hide anything.

Now I'm doing everything I can to get my funds back, and I'm sharing this story so others know how FF operates.
I understand now and I hope that your funds will be back asap. And with your relocation, I hope you're doing fine.
Thank you. Now that I've moved, everything is going well—at least better than it was a few months ago.

This is unfortunately not an isolated case with FixedFloat. The pattern is well documented — AML flags triggered without clear thresholds, funds moved to operational wallets while simultaneously being labeled "dirty," and no clear refund timeline or escalation path.

The core issue here is the asset-trap model: funds get flagged, moved, and held indefinitely with no transparency on who is reviewing or what criteria they're using. "No clear timeframes" is not an acceptable answer when someone's funds are frozen.

The war context adds an unfortunate but legitimate explanation for the delay. A forced pause in communication shouldn't be treated as evidence of wrongdoing.

For anyone reading this — this is exactly why non-custodial, no-KYC services with a clear refund-on-refusal policy matter. If KYC is triggered, your funds should be returned automatically, not held as leverage.

Quote from: marto25 on July 06, 2026, 12:26:45 PMThis is unfortunately not an isolated case with FixedFloat. The pattern is well documented — AML flags triggered without clear thresholds, funds moved to operational wallets while simultaneously being labeled "dirty," and no clear refund timeline or escalation path.

The core issue here is the asset-trap model: funds get flagged, moved, and held indefinitely with no transparency on who is reviewing or what criteria they're using. "No clear timeframes" is not an acceptable answer when someone's funds are frozen.

The war context adds an unfortunate but legitimate explanation for the delay. A forced pause in communication shouldn't be treated as evidence of wrongdoing.

For anyone reading this — this is exactly why non-custodial, no-KYC services with a clear refund-on-refusal policy matter. If KYC is triggered, your funds should be returned automatically, not held as leverage.

Thank you. I'm doing everything I can right now to get the money back. I'll post here if there are any updates.

Quote from: Lytvynets1 on July 05, 2026, 12:32:28 PMHello everyone. I want to share my situation with FixedFloat.

In July 2025, I sent 0.0851 BTC for exchange (BTC → XMR). The funds arrived at the order address, and the order was immediately placed under AML review. Within 2 hours of arrival, the funds were moved from the order address to FixedFloat's main hot wallet bc1qns9f7yfx3ry9lj6yz7c9er0vwa0ye2eklpzqfw (I found this out recently when FF started stalling).

Due to personal reasons, I couldn't contact the exchanger for almost a year. As soon as I was able, I provided all documents confirming the source of funds. I've been in active correspondence since then.

When I asked about timelines, FF replied: "no clear timeframes." When I asked for the contacts of "partners," they refused, citing confidentiality.

What I found via blockchain: my 0.0851 BTC were moved from the order address bc1qzm50817dwp990w0wvgtphxtcx209a2dlcestxh to FF's hot wallet bc1qns9f7yfx3ry9lj6yz7c9er0vwa0ye2eklpzqfw within 2 hours of arrival. At the same time, FF's website states they are a non-custodial service and do not store user funds. But in reality, my funds are sitting on their hot wallet, and they decide when to return them.

What I have already done: filed a complaint on BestChange (https://www.bestchange.ru/fixedfloat-exchanger.html?review=3903698). FF stated in their response that "information on this case was provided to BestChange administration." But BestChange remains silent. Also published a thread on Bits.media (https://forum.bits.media/index.php?/topic/229003-caйт-нe-oткpывaeтcя-fixedfloat-—-мгнoвeнный-и-aвтoмaтичecкий-oбмeн-кpиптoвaлюты/#findComment-2515363) and left a review on Trustpilot.

Can anyone share experience on how to get FF to return funds? Any advice would be appreciated. Order ID: ZNTBD7.

Hello @Lytvynets1,

We are happy to provide an official response regarding your case.

We have received information from our partners indicating that the funds sent to our service may be associated with ransomware-related activity. We cannot ignore such reports. Our service does not support fraud, criminal activity, hacking, ransomware, or the theft of cryptocurrency in any form. Every such report is carefully reviewed, and we never suspend exchanges without a legitimate reason. Users whose funds are not connected to criminal activity have no reason to fear such checks, as can be confirmed by the vast number of exchanges successfully completed through our service. Ignoring credible reports of illicit funds could expose our service to legal consequences and potentially result in sanctions or the inability to continue operating.

The use of our service for criminal or fraudulent purposes is strictly prohibited under our Terms of Service, specifically Sections 6 and 7.

There are numerous examples within the cryptocurrency industry where services that failed to perform appropriate compliance checks were sanctioned or had their assets seized by law enforcement authorities. For this reason, when we receive information from trusted partners or victims indicating that funds may have been obtained through criminal activity, we temporarily suspend the exchange until sufficient information is provided to establish the legitimate origin of the funds. Once the review is completed, we either resume the exchange or return the funds, depending on the outcome.

The duration of the review depends on several factors, including the time required for the involved parties to process information and provide the data necessary to complete the investigation. On our side, we are taking all possible measures to facilitate the process and complete the review as quickly as possible.

The suspension of funds is a temporary compliance measure intended to allow additional verification of the origin of the assets, prevent the further movement of potentially compromised funds, and fulfill our obligations to our partners and, where applicable, law enforcement authorities. This is standard practice across the cryptocurrency industry and is followed by the majority of reputable service providers.

Each case is reviewed individually. Our assessment takes into account the source of the funds, the nature of the transaction, information received from partners, and the overall circumstances of the case. We do not rely solely on automated systems and every case undergoes additional review before any decision is made. Funds may be returned if there is no confirmed connection to criminal activity, no active request from law enforcement authorities, and no ongoing investigation being conducted by our partners.

We would also like to emphasize that our service derives no financial benefit from suspending or holding customer funds. These measures are implemented solely to comply with AML requirements, protect our users, and assist legitimate investigations.

Regarding your observation that the funds were transferred from one of our hot wallets to our main wallet, this is part of our standard operational procedure. Funds received by our hot wallets are automatically consolidated into our primary wallets, as all outgoing transactions are processed exclusively from our main addresses. This allows law enforcement authorities and blockchain investigators to clearly identify that the funds remain under the control of our service.

The funds remain frozen on our addresses throughout the review process. If frozen assets are ever seized pursuant to a lawful request from the competent authorities, such transfers are likewise executed from our service's main addresses.

Quote from: fixedfloat on July 06, 2026, 03:33:06 PMQuote from: Lytvynets1 on July 05, 2026, 12:32:28 PMHello everyone. I want to share my situation with FixedFloat.

In July 2025, I sent 0.0851 BTC for exchange (BTC → XMR). The funds arrived at the order address, and the order was immediately placed under AML review. Within 2 hours of arrival, the funds were moved from the order address to FixedFloat's main hot wallet bc1qns9f7yfx3ry9lj6yz7c9er0vwa0ye2eklpzqfw (I found this out recently when FF started stalling).

Due to personal reasons, I couldn't contact the exchanger for almost a year. As soon as I was able, I provided all documents confirming the source of funds. I've been in active correspondence since then.

When I asked about timelines, FF replied: "no clear timeframes." When I asked for the contacts of "partners," they refused, citing confidentiality.

What I found via blockchain: my 0.0851 BTC were moved from the order address bc1qzm50817dwp990w0wvgtphxtcx209a2dlcestxh to FF's hot wallet bc1qns9f7yfx3ry9lj6yz7c9er0vwa0ye2eklpzqfw within 2 hours of arrival. At the same time, FF's website states they are a non-custodial service and do not store user funds. But in reality, my funds are sitting on their hot wallet, and they decide when to return them.

What I have already done: filed a complaint on BestChange (https://www.bestchange.ru/fixedfloat-exchanger.html?review=3903698). FF stated in their response that "information on this case was provided to BestChange administration." But BestChange remains silent. Also published a thread on Bits.media (https://forum.bits.media/index.php?/topic/229003-caйт-нe-oткpывaeтcя-fixedfloat-—-мгнoвeнный-и-aвтoмaтичecкий-oбмeн-кpиптoвaлюты/#findComment-2515363) and left a review on Trustpilot.

Can anyone share experience on how to get FF to return funds? Any advice would be appreciated. Order ID: ZNTBD7.

Hello @Lytvynets1,

We are happy to provide an official response regarding your case.

We have received information from our partners indicating that the funds sent to our service may be associated with ransomware-related activity. We cannot ignore such reports. Our service does not support fraud, criminal activity, hacking, ransomware, or the theft of cryptocurrency in any form. Every such report is carefully reviewed, and we never suspend exchanges without a legitimate reason. Users whose funds are not connected to criminal activity have no reason to fear such checks, as can be confirmed by the vast number of exchanges successfully completed through our service. Ignoring credible reports of illicit funds could expose our service to legal consequences and potentially result in sanctions or the inability to continue operating.

The use of our service for criminal or fraudulent purposes is strictly prohibited under our Terms of Service, specifically Sections 6 and 7.

There are numerous examples within the cryptocurrency industry where services that failed to perform appropriate compliance checks were sanctioned or had their assets seized by law enforcement authorities. For this reason, when we receive information from trusted partners or victims indicating that funds may have been obtained through criminal activity, we temporarily suspend the exchange until sufficient information is provided to establish the legitimate origin of the funds. Once the review is completed, we either resume the exchange or return the funds, depending on the outcome.

The duration of the review depends on several factors, including the time required for the involved parties to process information and provide the data necessary to complete the investigation. On our side, we are taking all possible measures to facilitate the process and complete the review as quickly as possible.

The suspension of funds is a temporary compliance measure intended to allow additional verification of the origin of the assets, prevent the further movement of potentially compromised funds, and fulfill our obligations to our partners and, where applicable, law enforcement authorities. This is standard practice across the cryptocurrency industry and is followed by the majority of reputable service providers.

Each case is reviewed individually. Our assessment takes into account the source of the funds, the nature of the transaction, information received from partners, and the overall circumstances of the case. We do not rely solely on automated systems and every case undergoes additional review before any decision is made. Funds may be returned if there is no confirmed connection to criminal activity, no active request from law enforcement authorities, and no ongoing investigation being conducted by our partners.

We would also like to emphasize that our service derives no financial benefit from suspending or holding customer funds. These measures are implemented solely to comply with AML requirements, protect our users, and assist legitimate investigations.

Regarding your observation that the funds were transferred from one of our hot wallets to our main wallet, this is part of our standard operational procedure. Funds received by our hot wallets are automatically consolidated into our primary wallets, as all outgoing transactions are processed exclusively from our main addresses. This allows law enforcement authorities and blockchain investigators to clearly identify that the funds remain under the control of our service.

The funds remain frozen on our addresses throughout the review process. If frozen assets are ever seized pursuant to a lawful request from the competent authorities, such transfers are likewise executed from our service's main addresses.

Thank you for the detailed response. This is the first time you've named a specific allegation — ransomware — rather than just a general "criminal origin." This is a serious accusation, and I want to understand what it's based on.

1. I've already provided you with documents confirming the legal origin of the funds. You say you received this information from partners. I understand you can't name them, but then tell me: how can I verify this accusation myself? On what basis were my funds linked to ransomware?

2. Does the ransomware flag relate to my address, to the buyer's address, or to something further back in the chain that I have nothing to do with?

3. You state that funds may be returned if there is no confirmed connection to criminal activity, no law enforcement request, and no ongoing investigation. Can you clearly answer: is there currently an active law enforcement request specifically for my order ZNTBD7? If so — I'm ready to accept the case number so I know who I'm dealing with and how I can assist.

I'm not against checks. I'm against being kept in the dark and accused of a crime without evidence and without any way to verify it.

The official response from FixedFloat raises more questions than it answers, and Lytvynets1's three follow-up questions (#14) are exactly the right ones.
A few things worth adding to the record:
On the ransomware flag: This is the first time a specific category has been named after a year of correspondence. Blockchain AML tools routinely flag funds based on transitive exposure — meaning a wallet that received funds several hops away from a known bad actor can trigger a flag even if the user had zero knowledge or involvement. Whether the flag is direct or indirect is a critical distinction that FixedFloat should be able to clarify without revealing their partners.
On the non-custodial claim: FixedFloat markets itself as a non-custodial service. Automatically consolidating flagged funds into operational hot wallets and holding them there for over a year is, by any reasonable definition, custody. These two positions cannot coexist. If they're holding funds and making decisions about when and whether to return them — that's a custodial relationship, with all the legal responsibilities that come with it.
On the process: "No financial benefit" is beside the point. The issue is the absence of any defined review process, no independent escalation path, no case number tied to law enforcement, and no way for the user to verify or contest the allegation. AML compliance that operates with zero transparency toward the accused isn't compliance — it's a black box.
Lytvynets1 deserves a direct answer to question #3: is there or is there not an active law enforcement request for order ZNTBD7? That's a yes or no question.

Fixedfloat is champion in freezing customer coins, so I am not surprised to see another topic like this.
I can understand if they don't want to perform exchange for some reason, but than they should simply return coins to sender (minus fees).

PS
OP for Bitcoin to Monero exchange you can use atomic swaps or decentralized exchanges.

Lytvynets1, can you track the further flow of your coins based on the transaction?
Are they really on one of the FF addresses, or are they used further in other orders. Also if they added them to the pool, doesn't that mean they "contaminated" all the other coins in that way?

Quote from: fixedfloat on July 06, 2026, 03:33:06 PMOnce the review is completed, we either resume the exchange or return the funds, depending on the outcome.
Are you claiming that in any scenario, the user will get his coins back?

Quote from: examplens on July 07, 2026, 11:40:54 AMLytvynets1, can you track the further flow of your coins based on the transaction?
Are they really on one of the FF addresses, or are they used further in other orders. Also if they added them to the pool, doesn't that mean they "contaminated" all the other coins in that way?

Quote from: fixedfloat on July 06, 2026, 03:33:06 PMOnce the review is completed, we either resume the exchange or return the funds, depending on the outcome.
Are you claiming that in any scenario, the user will get his coins back?

Yeah, I thought the same thing—that all their coins were compromised—but FF explained it: they said it’s standard practice for their service.

P.S. I’m currently in contact with FF, and I might get my funds back. I’ll be sure to let you know here how it all turns out.

Quote from: Lytvynets1 on July 07, 2026, 05:08:41 PMP.S. I’m currently in contact with FF, and I might get my funds back. I’ll be sure to let you know here how it all turns out.

Good to hear. Please do let us know because I issued a tag on FixedFloat and used this thread as a reference.

My main problem with FixedFloat is they move their coins to a hot wallet immediately, and then proclaim them to be tainted afterward. The taint analysis could be performed before the transfer. That way if there was any doubt about the origin of the coins, they could just be returned to sender without having to become part of the hot wallet.

Quote from: nutildah on July 07, 2026, 10:19:59 PMGood to hear. Please do let us know because I issued a tag on FixedFloat and used this thread as a reference.

My main problem with FixedFloat is they move their coins to a hot wallet immediately, and then proclaim them to be tainted afterward. The taint analysis could be performed before the transfer. That way if there was any doubt about the origin of the coins, they could just be returned to sender without having to become part of the hot wallet.
To me, I feel like the tainted coin claim by most of this exchange is always a scam. Because once the user fails to let's say carry out KYC verification or prove the source of the funds. They keep that money to themselves. I don't think they even hand over those funds to the authorities, and if they do, then they never document it.

@nutildah makes the key point — taint analysis performed after moving coins to the hot wallet is operationally backwards. If the funds were genuinely suspect, the correct sequence is: flag → analyze → return or proceed. Not: receive → consolidate → flag → hold indefinitely.

The asset-trap concern @Bitcoin_Arena raises is legitimate too. Without transparent reporting of what happens to frozen funds, there's no way to distinguish "compliance" from simple confiscation.

Thank you all so much! Was I able to get my funds back from FF!I went through an additional identity verification process with FF, and they returned my BTC!