Exdex exchanger

Hello Jo,

You found has not pass aml do to gambling risk contact support via email or support chat on the website

Exdex Support

This matter is still unresolved.
I was not informed of any verification requirements before or during the transaction. I am not submitting identity documents.
Return the full amount to the original sending address. That requires no verification from me — the source is proven by transaction itself.
Confirm the return and the timeframe.

Dear User,

Please note that only one claim can be submitted per order. The duplicate claim has been removed by the administration.

Please continue the communication in the existing claim thread.

Kind regards, BestChange administration.

Thank you for the clarification regarding duplicate claims. To explain: I submitted the second claim only because my original claim was not visible to me on the.ru version of the site, and I assumed it had not gone through. It was not an attempt to open a parallel dispute. I will keep all communication in this thread from now on.
To the BestChange administration:
I am not disputing the exchanger’s right to perform an AML check. My claim concerns their conduct after it.
1. The exchanger has marked this claim as solved while the matter remains entirely unresolved and the funds remain withheld.
2. I have asked for the funds to be returned to the original sending address. A return to the originating address requires no verification of me, and the exchanger has given no specific reason why it cannot be done.
3. Exdex’s own Terms provide that disputes which cannot be settled between the parties are referred to a competent court. I am therefore requesting, here and publicly, that Exdex provide the details of their legal entity — registered company name, registration number and registered address — so that I can proceed accordingly. These details are not published on their website or in their Terms.
To Exdex: please provide the above legal entity details in your reply in this thread.
I ask the administration to review the AML documentation Exdex states it has submitted to you, and to note whether the exchanger is willing to identify itself.

Jo,

Hello Jo,

We have sent detailed instructions to the email address associated with your order regarding the compliance review.

To proceed, you are required to:

1. Complete KYC verification using the secure link provided in the email.
2. Provide Source of Funds (SoF) evidence showing where the cryptocurrency sent under this order was obtained or withdrawn from (exchange, trading platform, OTC service, or exchanger).

Please note that a blockchain transaction or the originating wallet address alone does not constitute sufficient proof of Source of Funds. Returning funds to the same address does not eliminate the requirement to complete an ongoing AML compliance review.

Once the requested KYC and SoF information has been received, the compliance team will review the documentation and determine the next step regarding the transaction.

Please provide the requested documentation by replying to the email sent to you.

Best regards,
EXDEX Support

In my previous message I asked Exdex, publicly and directly, to provide the details of their legal entity — registered company name, registration number and registered address. Their reply of September 6 does not address this request at all. The question was ignored in full.
Exdex’s own Terms provide that unresolved disputes are referred to a competent court. An exchanger cannot rely on that provision while refusing to identify the entity a claimant would be dealing with. These details are published nowhere on their site.
On the funds themselves: Exdex has stated that a return to the sending address does not end their compliance review, but they have given no deadline for that review, no stated conditions under which the funds would be released or returned, and no outcome in which I get my money back at all. The funds are being held indefinitely with no defined resolution.
I would also note that Exdex marked this claim as solved in the same message in which they state that the compliance review is ongoing. The claim is, by their own account, unresolved.
I ask the administration to confirm whether Exdex has provided BestChange with the details of its legal entity as part of its listing, and to request that the exchanger state them in this thread, together with a deadline for the compliance review.
To Exdex: please provide your registered company name, registration number and registered address in your next reply.

Your repeated requests regarding corporate information do not change the compliance requirements applicable to your order and are not a substitute for completing the requested AML/KYC procedure.

Before creating the order, you accepted EXDEX Terms of Service and AML/KYC requirements. The possibility of additional verification and Source of Funds requests forms part of those conditions. AML-related procedures are also governed by the applicable rules of the BestChange monitoring platform.

You have now been provided with clear instructions by email

This message is addressed to the BestChange administration.
I have now asked Exdex twice, in this thread, to state their registered company name, registration number and registered address. They have refused both times — first by ignoring the question, and now by dismissing it as irrelevant.
Exdex states in their latest reply that AML-related procedures are governed by the applicable rules of the BestChange monitoring platform. I therefore ask BestChange to apply them, and to answer one question:
Does BestChange hold the legal entity details of Exdex as part of its listing, and does BestChange consider it acceptable for a listed exchanger to refuse to identify itself to a claimant while holding that claimant’s funds indefinitely?
Exdex has set no deadline for their review and named no outcome in which the funds are ever released or returned. They have also marked this claim as solved three times while stating that the review is ongoing.
I also ask that Exdex answer in this thread rather than redirecting me to private email. I am not asking them to publish anyone’s documents — only to state, publicly and on the record, their legal entity details, the deadline of their review, and the conditions under which the funds would be released or returned. Redirecting the dispute into private correspondence removes it from the monitor’s oversight, which is precisely what this claim mechanism exists to prevent.
I am not asking BestChange to overrule the AML check. I am asking BestChange to rule on the exchanger’s conduct: refusal to identify itself, and indefinite retention of funds with no stated resolution.

Jo,

The situation has already been explained clearly.

Before creating the exchange order, you accepted our Terms and AML/KYC Policy. Under Sections 5.1–5.7 and 7.1–7.8, transactions presenting elevated AML risk may be suspended, KYC and Source of Funds may be required, and a refund cannot be processed until the compliance review is completed.

The transaction was flagged within the processing chain and you were requested to complete KYC and provide Source of Funds evidence. You have still not completed these requirements.

Section 6.2 provides a standard review period of up to 3 business days for submitted KYC/SoF documentation. This period cannot begin until you actually provide the requested documents. Additional checks may take longer under Sections 6.3–6.4.

Regarding the financial claim: you repeatedly reactivate the same claim without providing any new information and without completing KYC/SoF. Marking the repeated claim as resolved does not mean that the compliance review itself has been completed.

Reopening the same claim does not replace the verification requirements you accepted before the exchange.

Complete KYC and provide the requested SoF documentation. Once received, the compliance procedure will proceed in accordance with the published AML/KYC Policy.

Support

To the BestChange administration — this message concerns a breach of the Conditions of exchanger participation in the monitor (last edition 07/07/2026).
Clause 9 states that an exchanger may withdraw a client's claim only where financial obligations to the client have been fulfilled in full, or where the regulated exchange period has not yet passed.
Exdex has marked this claim as solved four times. In their own replies they confirm that the compliance review is ongoing and that the order is not completed. Their financial obligations to me are not fulfilled, and the regulated exchange period has long passed. Each of those four closures is a breach of clause 9. Their stated reason — that I have not completed KYC — is not one of the two grounds clause 9 provides.
Clause 12 requires exchangers to inform the monitor's administration of their registration and location. I have asked Exdex three times, in this thread, to state their registered company name, registration number and registered address. They have refused each time. I therefore ask the administration directly: does BestChange hold these details for Exdex under clause 12, and will BestChange require the exchanger to state them here?
The rules provide that the administration may suspend a violating exchanger from the listing, with longer terms for repeated violations. I ask that this be applied to the four breaches of clause 9, and that Exdex be required to state either a definite date on which my funds are released or returned, or the grounds on which they are permanently retained.

Hello Jo,

Your latest message does not change the status of the order.

You have still not completed the KYC verification or provided the requested Source of Funds documentation. These requirements were accepted before the exchange and remain outstanding.

The review period cannot begin until the requested documents are received. Repeatedly reopening the claim does not replace or waive these requirements.

Once KYC and SoF are provided, the compliance review will proceed in accordance with the published AML/KYC Policy.

Support

To the BestChange administration — a separate request concerning the AML transparency tag assigned to Exdex.
Exdex currently carries a yellow tag, which per your published criteria means its AML practice is still being evaluated and that no critical issues have been identified. I submit this case as confirmed information for that evaluation.
Against your own criteria for low AML transparency:
1. Lengthy checks and delays. My funds have been held since the order was created. Exdex has named no deadline, no conditions under which the funds would be released, and no outcome in which they are returned.
2. Non-transparent handling of an AML case. Exdex has now refused four times, in this public thread, to state its registered company name, registration number and registered address, while relying on its own Terms provision about referring disputes to a court.
3. Failure to resolve an identified issue. In my previous message I set out that closing a claim while financial obligations remain unfulfilled breaches clause 9 of the Conditions of exchanger participation. Exdex did not address that point at all in their reply of September 11 — and closed the claim again in the same message. That is the fifth closure, and it took place before the administration had an opportunity to respond.
Your criteria list the exchanger's willingness to correct identified issues as a factor in the assessment. Over the full period of this claim, Exdex has taken no step toward resolution and has not engaged with a single procedural point raised.
I ask the administration to take this case into account when reviewing the AML tag assigned to Exdex.

Jo,

We have emailed you requesting a wallet address for the refund and are awaiting your reply.

Best regards,
Exdex Admin

Dear Jo,

The exchanger is awaiting a response from you via email to process the refund. Please provide a response.

Kind regards, BestChange administration.

Texted them yesterday, still waiting for response.

I wanted to exchange $100, but for many hours now I haven't even received a valid reason why my transaction hasn't been completed. Customer support isn't helping at all. They just say, “Please wait,” and that's it. I strongly advise against using this service for currency exchange if you don't want to lose your money.

Hello,

We request the exchanger's administrator to respond to the user's complaint.

Sincerely, administration of the BestChange exchanger monitor.

A lot of time has already passed, but the exchange still hasn't been processed, and they won't issue a refund. I don't understand what we're supposed to be waiting for; when I ask, they just give me boilerplate responses saying I just need to wait, but I don't understand who or what I'm supposed to be waiting for.

BestChange Administration, please upgrade my review to a complaint, as it has been almost a full day, but I still haven’t received a clear response and am not sure if I will receive my funds. They also haven’t issued a refund.

The platform has just completed the exchange. If you want to spare yourself the stress, I wouldn’t recommend using this service. As far as I’m concerned, the matter is closed.

Hello Robert,

Your order has been paid,

TxID: 4rUzzgkSW8FpReDCVeZq2jJmhbhR2CJUbEhjEa96RG9eezgvJttwAh2cUnebpXbEhQnEfa9vQCPLVSsr9huTHPde

Exdex Support

Dear Bestchange administration, please remove this exchange office from the search results in your aggregator until the financial claim is resolved. At the very least, they do not meet the requirements for customer support.

Hello,

We request the exchanger's administrator to respond to the user's complaint.

Sincerely, administration of the BestChange exchanger monitor.

Thanks! They didnt answer still.

Hello.

The transaction has been automatically suspended due to the AML compliance procedure.

According to the AML analysis, the transaction has a Risk Score of 78.08%, including exposure to Sanctioned Exchange (8.6%), Gambling (3%), Enforcement Action (1.57%), and other high-risk categories.

In accordance with our AML Policy, transactions exceeding the established risk threshold are subject to mandatory compliance review and cannot be processed automatically.

The user has already been informed of the verification procedure and the list of required documents. The review will be completed after all requested information is received and checked by the compliance department.

The exchange office is acting strictly in accordance with its published AML Policy, which the user accepted before creating the order.

Exdex Support

Their report also indicates that the volume of risky assets in the transaction is 0 USDT. Firstly, I constantly send them many times from this wallet and there have never been any problems, secondly, an error fell out and this error was on their side, there were no AML allerts. In addition to the fact that they do not have the declared support even during working hours, they are also trying to illegally detain my money.

They are even lying here, in this financial claim, because even if there was a real problem with AML, no one asked me for a list of documents. They just sent a screenshot of the AML check, which clearly states that there are 0 USDT of risky assets in my transaction. They are just trying to get out of their omission and steal my money. we need help from the BestChange administration.

Max,

Verification link has been send you your which you have mention in the order.

They sent me a link to verification only after I reopened the financial claim! He was also called a liar after more than half a day of silence! Dear BestChange administration, please study the AML report, it clearly and clearly states that there are no risky assets among my funds at all.

Max,

Your repeated statements that the exchange office is “trying to steal your money” are false and unsupported by any evidence.

You accepted our AML/KYC Policy before creating the order. Under that Policy, a transaction may be suspended if the Risk Score exceeds 75% or if critical AML indicators such as SANCTIONS or ENFORCEMENT ACTION are detected.

Your transaction received an overall Risk Score of 78.08%, which independently exceeds our established threshold and therefore requires mandatory compliance review.

Your references to the “0 USDT of risky assets” field are misleading. This value does not determine whether a transaction passes AML review and does not override the overall Risk Score or detected compliance indicators.

The verification link was sent to the email address specified in your order. Instead of completing the required compliance procedure, you continue making unsupported accusations.

Until the requested verification is completed, the transaction will remain suspended in accordance with our published AML/KYC Policy. No further comments will change this requirement.

We kindly ask the BestChange administration to take into account that the exchange office is acting strictly in accordance with its publicly available Terms of Service and AML/KYC Policy accepted by the user before creating the order.

Exdex Support

Allegedly, AML risk, to which their exchange allegedly reacted, was checked the day after the real mistake of their merchant. That is, they send a report that allegedly sent an alert to their merchant, but this report was made the next day and in fact directly indicates that there are 0 oken in my transaction that contain risky assets. I don't understand why you complicate life for yourself and others. Just give me my money back! BestChange administration, please study the situation and AML report.

Max,

The exchange office has already provided the BestChange administration with the relevant AML documentation and supporting materials for review.

The compliance procedure is being conducted strictly in accordance with our published AML/KYC Policy accepted by the user before creating the order.

The verification link has been sent to the email address specified in the order. For security and confidentiality reasons, all further communication regarding this compliance case will be conducted exclusively through our official support email.

We consider this matter closed in the public discussion until the required verification procedure has been completed.

Exdex Support

Of course, it's great that you decided to close this issue unilaterally. But I don't agree with this unilateral decision of yours, and that's why I asked for bestchange support.
Because all your actions look like an attempt to whitewash your reputation and an attempt to punish me for bringing your mistake to the public.
Despite the fact that you are wrong.
1. Your merchant reported an error that was caused by simple temporary bugs in the usdt explorer. Not because of failure to pass AML.
2. You don't have a stated live customer support, even during normal business hours, let alone round-the-clock service.
3. Because of the previous point, I created a financial claim, for perfectly reasonable reasons.
4. In response, you decided to attack me to explain your mistake by the fact that my AML was allegedly overestimated. At the same time, attach the document that was generated the next day, and not at the time of your merchant's error. At the same time, the same report clearly states that in my transaction there is not even one thousandth of a percent of one token of a risky asset (out of almost 350 whole tokens).

I do not agree and do not believe that there was a situation with an aml risk, and not with a simple mistake that you are trying to mask. In total, we have a very controversial situation in which neither you nor I can close the public discussion unilaterally without the consent of both parties. And since we do not have an agreement with you, please do not close the discussion until the bestchange administration decides. My problem is not resolved still.

Dear bestchange administration, if you do not have enough information that I have provided to make a positive decision in my favor, please let me know, I can provide even more irrefutable evidence that the problem was not the risk of AML, namely the problem of trying to hide my mistakes on the part of the service and trying to punish me for publicizing the problem.

I'm sorry, *the problem of trying to hide they mistakes on the part of the service*

Max,

The exchange office has already provided the BestChange administration with all relevant AML documentation and supporting materials for review.

The user has been provided with the AML/KYC verification link but has not completed the required compliance procedure.

The repeated reopening of the financial claim without completing the mandatory verification and the repetition of previously addressed allegations constitute an abuse of the public dispute mechanism and do not contribute to resolving the case.

For security, confidentiality, and compliance reasons, all further communication regarding this matter will be conducted exclusively through our official support email.

No further comments will be provided in this public discussion until the AML/KYC procedure has been completed.

Exdex Support

I am glad that you will no longer close the dispute without resolving it. It is very good that you have provided all the information to the BestChange administration, but this does not mean that the above administration has made a decision, which means that it is not worth closing the dispute.

Max,

Please do not abuse the technical capabilities of the BestChange aggregator, making an off-topic and closing a financial claim without actually solving it. We are still waiting for the decision of the BestChange administration.

According to the rules of this exchange service and clause 9.3. ("In case of failure to reach an agreement, the dispute is referred to the competent court of the relevant jurisdiction."), I requested the data of the legal entity from the service in order to form a lawsuit in the competent court of the relevant jurisdiction. In response, I received a link to the rules of the service and an indication of the clause with details, where, in theory, the data of the legal entity of the service should be indicated, but there are no details either at this link or on other available pages of the site. They also added that "first you need to complete the KYC procedure." The service refuses to provide the data of a legal entity to resolve the dispute in court. The problem is still not solved!

Max,

Your transaction is currently subject to a mandatory compliance review under the EXDEX AML/KYC Policy accepted before the order was created.

According to Sections 5.1, 5.5, 5.7, 7.2 and 7.3 of the Policy, the user must complete the KYC procedure and provide the requested information before the compliance review can be finalized or any refund request can be considered.

The AML/KYC verification link has already been sent to the email address specified in your order. Until the required verification has been successfully completed, the exchange office’s position remains unchanged.

The exchange office has already provided the BestChange administration with the relevant AML documentation and supporting materials for review.

For security, confidentiality, and compliance reasons, all further communication regarding this matter will be conducted exclusively through our official support email.

Exdex Support

The service refuses to provide data about its legal entity. Instead, they illegally ask for information about me and the jurisdiction in which i am located. Dear administration of bestchange, please limit the operation of the exchange service until the circumstances of the attempted fraud of the service are clarified, as well as the legality of its existence.

Claim not solved still.

The user accepted the AML/KYC Policy before creating the order. The transaction exceeded the established Risk Score threshold and was therefore suspended for mandatory compliance review. The required AML/KYC procedure has not yet been completed by the user. Until the compliance review is finalized, the exchange office’s position remains unchanged.,

The service still evades the transfer of legal data by all means and creates an off-topic in the financial claim.

Claim not solved!

Max,

As a result of the completed compliance review, the funds have been returned to the original sending address in accordance with our AML/KYC Policy.

The transaction has been fully processed and the exchange office considers its obligations fulfilled.

We kindly ask the user to mark the claim as resolved.

Exdex Supprt

After 20 hours and many letters, they managed to return the money. KYC, as it turned out, has nothing to do with it. The financial claim is closed. But the aftertaste remained, I hope this story will remain too as an example. I wish the service to fix problems with support, these problems are huge and cause great inconvenience. Minus one regular customer.

Hello Gear,

The user’s statement is misleading and does not reflect the actual situation.
1. The screenshot provided by the client (WestWallet) is NOT a valid Source of Funds (SoF).
WestWallet is a non-custodial wallet interface, and a transaction hash or wallet screenshot does not confirm the origin of funds, only their movement.
2. From the very beginning, the client was clearly informed that valid SoF must include proof of acquisition, such as:

• exchange purchase history
• OTC deal confirmation
• withdrawal from a regulated platform with visible details

Wallet screenshots (including WestWallet, Trust Wallet, Ledger, etc.) are explicitly not accepted as SoF, as they do not provide traceable origin.
3. The client was requested to complete KYC + proper SoF submission, however:

• no valid SoF was ever provided
• only transaction hash / wallet interface screenshots were sent

4. The case remains under compliance review due to incomplete verification from the client’s side, not due to any delay on our end.
5. As per AML/KYC policy accepted by the client at the moment of order creation:

• verification is mandatory in such cases
• refunds or further processing are not possible without successful KYC + valid SoF

We are still awaiting proper documents from the client.

I have sent all the necessary details and waiting for a reply from Exdex support...

Gear,

Just now we got your email. Sent for verification once we get reply we will forward email to you.

Exdex Supprt

How long will this process take? I’ve been waiting for my money back for almost 3 months now...

Gear,

Firstly, we note that the Source of Funds (SoF) was only provided recently, after a significant delay. Prior to this, only transaction hashes and wallet screenshots were submitted, which do not qualify as valid SoF.

Secondly, the screenshot you provided from Binance does not correspond to the actual transaction chain:
• the withdrawal address shown in your Binance screenshot does not match the sender address of the transaction received by our service;
• the provided TXID represents a batch transaction, where your address is only one of multiple recipients, not a direct individual transfer.

Additionally, after receiving funds, they were immediately forwarded through another transaction involving multiple inputs (aggregation), which breaks the transparency of the fund flow and prevents reliable verification of origin.

Taking into account:
• the inconsistency between provided data and actual blockchain records,
• the use of an intermediate wallet and subsequent aggregation,
• and the previously identified high AML risk,

the submitted information still cannot be accepted as valid Source of Funds.

The case remains under compliance review.
We are awaiting proper and verifiable documentation confirming the origin of funds.

The process you have described is how WestWallet works. I have also sent you a screenshot showing that I received this transaction in my WestWallet. I already provided a screenshot of the funds being sent from WestWallet to your account details at start of our conversation...

I sent you all the necessary data and screenshots, but I haven’t received a reply. What’s going on?

Gear,

The client continues to misrepresent the situation.

WestWallet is a wallet interface, not a source of funds.
Showing receipt of funds in WestWallet or sending funds from it does not confirm origin, it only reflects transfer between wallets.

We explicitly require Source of Funds that proves how the assets were originally acquired, such as:
• purchase on an exchange
• trading history
• OTC deal confirmation

The client has not provided any such documentation.

Additionally:
• the Binance screenshot provided does not match the actual transaction chain
• funds were routed through an intermediate wallet (WestWallet) and then aggregated
• this breaks the traceability of funds

Therefore, the provided materials cannot be accepted as valid SoF.

We also note that:
• the client was informed multiple times about the requirements
• only wallet screenshots and TXIDs were submitted

The case remains pending due to the client’s failure to provide proper verification.

We are still awaiting valid and verifiable Source of Funds.

Gear,

The client continues to misrepresent the situation by providing only the movement of funds (WestWallet), not their origin.

Wallet screenshots and TXIDs only reflect transfers between wallets and cannot be accepted as valid Source of Funds, as they do not confirm how the assets were originally acquired.

The required documentation has not been provided despite multiple requests.

We are still awaiting valid and verifiable Source of Funds.

Exdex Support

Hello Stefan,

Contact support via chat on the website, we didn’t received any messages from you on the chat at the website

Or send us email, for quick responds I recorded you contact by chat on the website

Exdex support