Hi Bitcointalk community.
I am opening this thread to document an ongoing issue with HTX (formerly Huobi) regarding 3800.1 USDT (TRC-20) sent to an HTX system address during a deposit/return process from another platform.
Key Details:
Amount: 3800.1 USDT (TRC-20)

First Support Contact: June 17, 2026

Confirmation of payout "soon": July 10, 2026

HTX User UID: 580234845

Timeline of Events:

1.  Initial Appeal (June 17, 2026): I contacted HTX support regarding funds sent to their system contract/address — a standard routine procedure for any major exchange.

2.  Promised Resolution (July 10, 2026): After submitting proofs on July 1st, I received an official email from HTX stating that the payout would be processed soon.

3.  Endless Stalling & Circular Requests: Instead of processing the transfer, support started an endless cycle of template responses ("wait 24-48 hours", requesting same TXIDs and details repeatedly).

4.  Ultimatum & Video Demand (Early August): After I explicitly warned support that I would makethis case public (VC.ru, Bitcointalk, Reddit), they suddenly added a new strict requirement: record a full high-resolution video proving wallet/account ownership.

5.  Broken Support Upload Form: The video recorded with all required details was 1.2 GB. When trying to attach it, HTX's support form simply freezes silently without showing any progress bar or error message.

6.  Google Drive Submission: To bypass their broken form, I uploaded the 1.2 GB video to Google Drive (with public access) and provided the link in the ticket.

7.  The Silent [REJECT]: Immediately after providing the link, HTX silently closed the ticket with a [REJECT] status. The comment in Chinese
stated: "Closed because you haven't responded for a long time" — completely ignoring the submitted video link.

Conclusion:

HTX support delays payouts for months, gives false promises, and then uses fake excuses (claiming "no response from user") to close tickets with a [REJECT] status as soon as public exposure is mentioned.
Proofs (Screenshots):

Outgoing Transaction Details: https://ibb.co/chmXZfwM

Transaction ID & HTX Refund Details: https://ibb.co/prrL6fc2

HTX Confirmation Email (Jul 10): https://ibb.co/TBTTKWGk

Submitted Video Proof Link Email: https://ibb.co/5gDcmH9W

HTX Ticket [REJECT] Reason in Chinese: https://ibb.co/0yTTwtG2

I demand HTX support review the submitted Google Drive video from the ticket records and credit 3800.1 USDT to account UID 580234845.

Avoid Huobi/HTX.com!

Don’t support Justin Sun’s projects.. they’re all shady.

What is the issue with opening a new complaint ticket?
You are the second person this month to raise this same issue and encounter obstacles regarding the video proof requirement. https://bta.lk/t/5590235.0
I suspect their demands won't end even after they review your video. Given the small amount involved, it isn't worth enlisting the authorities to handle your case.

Quote from: RGBTC on August 06, 2026, 11:55:40 AM

What is the issue with opening a new complaint ticket?

You are the second person this month to raise this same issue and encounter obstacles regarding the video proof requirement. https://bta.lk/t/5590235.0

I suspect their demands won't end even after they review your video. Given the small amount involved, it isn't worth enlisting the authorities to handle your case.

Thanks for the input!

Regarding the new ticket: I actually tried, but their support workflow just loops back. When a ticket gets marked as [REJECT] with "no response from user", opening a new one usually results in the exact same automated response or a total ignore, asking to fulfill the terms of the previous ticket—which is impossible because they unilaterally closed it!

Also, it's very telling that I'm the second person this month facing this exact same video-proof barrier. It clearly shows a pattern of deliberate delay rather than a genuine KYC standard.

I agree that official authorities might not be practical for this amount, which is exactly why public visibility here on Bitcointalk and other platforms is my primary tool to hold them accountable.

These guys have become big scammers; they've been accused of fraud on this forum since 2024, as you can see here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5506545.0

While the first page of Trustpilot lists 19 scam accusations against them, there isn't a single positive review on the first page, as you can see here:

https://www.trustpilot.com/review/htx.com

On the second page there are 18 accusations of fraud against them and zero positive comments in their favor. As you can see here:

https://www.trustpilot.com/review/htx.com?page=2

On the third page they have 21 scam accusations against them and zero positive comments in their favor. As you can see here:

https://www.trustpilot.com/review/htx.com?page=3

On the fourth page they have 10 scam accusations against them and 1 positive comment in their favor. As you can see here:

https://www.trustpilot.com/review/htx.com?page=4

These guys have had scam accusations against them since 2024 on trustpilot, we're talking about 2 years, so you should have researched them before using this exchange. It's clear that these scammers aren't going to solve your problem. They'll keep your money, and the most unbelievable thing is that they're ranked 10th in Coinmarkcap's exchange ranking. I find it unbelievable because even with so many accusations, there are still people using this exchange.

Quote from: mystery99 on August 06, 2026, 01:34:18 PM

It clearly shows a pattern of deliberate delay rather than a genuine KYC standard.

Your issue actually falls outside standard KYC procedures, as you deposited funds outside of established protocols. Most services tend to view special cases like yours as complicated, especially when the recoverable amount doesn't seem to justify the effort from their perspective; though they should still cooperate with the recovery process even if it means explicitly stating the associated costs.

In May, the UK introduced sanctions against Huoba, later adopted by the EU. The result is that all coins connected to HTX are automatically marked as dirty, which significantly increases (freezing) the risk of using such funds.
I am interested in the motives of a person to send a centralised stablecoin to such an exchange today and whether such a person is aware of the risks. Even if HTX has no wrong intentions and has the best will to process all transactions, there is a third party that can stop the funds there.

Quote from: RGBTC on August 08, 2026, 11:56:38 PM

Quote from: mystery99 on August 06, 2026, 01:34:18 PM

It clearly shows a pattern of deliberate delay rather than a genuine KYC standard.

Your issue actually falls outside standard KYC procedures, as you deposited funds outside of established protocols. Most services tend to view special cases like yours as complicated, especially when the recoverable amount doesn't seem to justify the effort from their perspective; though they should still cooperate with the recovery process even if it means explicitly stating the associated costs.

I disagree that a non-standard deposit justifies a total breakdown in compliance.

Even if a manual recovery requires extra effort, a major exchange should either provide a clear protocol/fee for manual processing or explicitly declare its technical limitations.

Demanding a 1.2 GB screen recording, putting the user through complex video-KYC, and then silently marking the ticket as [REJECT] with "no response from user" isn't a "technical complexity"—it's a deliberate lack of transparency. If they have recovery fees, they should state them instead of running users in circles.

Quote from: examplens on August 09, 2026, 09:15:11 AM

In May, the UK introduced sanctions against Huoba, later adopted by the EU. The result is that all coins connected to HTX are automatically marked as dirty, which significantly increases (freezing) the risk of using such funds.

I am interested in the motives of a person to send a centralised stablecoin to such an exchange today and whether such a person is aware of the risks. Even if HTX has no wrong intentions and has the best will to process all transactions, there is a third party that can stop the funds there.

Valid point regarding the AML risk scoring and recent UK/EU sanctions.

In my case, this was a specific transaction context, and I certainly didn't anticipate HTX’s internal automated flag loop. However, the core issue isn't even a third-party issuer freeze (like Tether blacklisting an address).

The issue is HTX’s own compliance handling: accepting the deposit, demanding exhaustive video-KYC (1.2 GB), and then silently defaulting to a [REJECT] status with incorrect labels like "user didn't respond".

If a deposit is rejected due to sanction-related AML scoring or third-party restrictions, an exchange should explicitly state that reason or issue a formal return protocol, rather than running users in bureaucratic circles.

Quote from: mystery99 on August 12, 2026, 08:10:10 AM

Valid point regarding the AML risk scoring and recent UK/EU sanctions.

In my case, this was a specific transaction context, and I certainly didn't anticipate HTX’s internal automated flag loop. However, the core issue isn't even a third-party issuer freeze (like Tether blacklisting an address).

The issue is HTX’s own compliance handling: accepting the deposit, demanding exhaustive video-KYC (1.2 GB), and then silently defaulting to a [REJECT] status with incorrect labels like "user didn't respond".

If a deposit is rejected due to sanction-related AML scoring or third-party restrictions, an exchange should explicitly state that reason or issue a formal return protocol, rather than running users in bureaucratic circles.

Everyone should keep in mind the problem with the sanctions against HTX. Even if everything went without problems in your case, once you withdraw coins to your wallet, they will definitely have a high risk score, just because of the connection with HTX. This can later bring you new problems on other platforms.

Many AML checkers have an added analysis of coins related to sanctioned exchanges from day one.

Quote from: mystery99 on August 12, 2026, 08:01:28 AM

I disagree that a non-standard deposit justifies a total breakdown in compliance.

Even if a manual recovery requires extra effort, a major exchange should either provide a clear protocol/fee for manual processing or explicitly declare its technical limitations.

Demanding a 1.2 GB screen recording, putting the user through complex video-KYC, and then silently marking the ticket as [REJECT] with "no response from user" isn't a "technical complexity"—it's a deliberate lack of transparency. If they have recovery fees, they should state them instead of running users in circles.

I am speaking generally here; essentially, they simply hide behind their risk policies, such as the rule stating that sending funds to the wrong address or network results in the loss of your coins. This implies a limitation on taking standard technical measures to resolve the issue.

This means they didn't establish specific protocols for such situations from the start. Consequently, when a case like yours arises, the handling process involves bizarre request, demands that are often merely initiatives by customer service staff to stall for time.

This doesn't mean I am defending HTX; I am simply drawing on lessons from similar cases in the past. Anyway, I hope you get some good news from HTX.

Quote from: RGBTC on August 08, 2026, 11:56:38 PM

Quote from: mystery99 on August 06, 2026, 01:34:18 PM

It clearly shows a pattern of deliberate delay rather than a genuine KYC standard.

Your issue actually falls outside standard KYC procedures, as you deposited funds outside of established protocols. Most services tend to view special cases like yours as complicated, especially when the recoverable amount doesn't seem to justify the effort from their perspective; though they should still cooperate with the recovery process even if it means explicitly stating the associated costs.

Thanks for taking the time to gather those links and stats. Looking at the Trustpilot feedback and earlier threads, it's pretty clear this isn't just an isolated glitch, but a widespread issue with how non-standard deposits and KYC/video requests are handled.

I definitely should have looked deeper into their recent track record before depositing. That said, since the funds are already stuck, I’ll keep this thread updated with exact timelines and proof.

If senior support or compliance decides to review my case  and resolve it properly, I’ll document that here as well. Until then, hopefully this thread serves as a clear heads-up for anyone else searching for recent feedback on HTX.

  Sorry, I actually meant to quote a Slow death`s post with links