The Australian online newspaper Ticker News today told a very curious story.
In fact, it reports that a Melbourne woman received $10.5 million from Crypto.com by mistake.
The woman had requested a “refund” of $100, but the exchange accidentally sent her $10.5 million.
The woman who received more than $10 million from Crypto.com
The woman hid the incident from Crypto.com, and it took more than seven months for the exchange to find out. The problem occurred in May 2021, while the bug was discovered shortly before Christmas thanks to a company audit.
Together with her sister, in fact, the woman with the money she received bought a mansion in Craigieburn worth several million dollars. When the exchange tried to get the money back, she had already moved and spent.
At the time, lawyers for the exchange took legal action in the Australian High Court against the two sisters to try and get the money back. The court has now ordered the sale of the property and the return of the remaining money.
During the trial, the court determined that the company allegedly accidentally entered the bank account number in the payment field, instead of the amount of $100.
From what is known, it is a case that is more unique than rare, both because of the quantity and above all because it took seven months to realize it. In the end, however, the woman would probably have been better off reporting the problem to the exchange early on, to avoid prosecution and loss of profits.
The problem with P2P transactions
On the contrary, such errors are not at all rare when it comes to direct P2P transactions between individuals, that is, that do not go through a service provided by a third party, such as an exchange.
The fact is that, unlike this matter, which involves well-defined and easily identifiable entities, P2P transactions, on the other hand, can take place even between unidentifiable parties. In addition, they are irreversible, so in the event of errors in P2P transactions in which the recipient is not identifiable, the chances of recovering the erroneously sent funds are almost nil.
Relying on third-party companies has numerous disadvantages, including, for example, losing funds in the event of bankruptcy, but sometimes it also has some advantages, although in this case, it was the company itself that could benefit.
Finally, it should be noted that the transaction in question was made in dollars, therefore fiat currency, and not in cryptocurrencies, but again it turned out to be irreversible because the money had already been spent when the exchange tried to recover it.
