Exchange and wallet disputes
A structured legal review of restricted access, disputed transactions and platform obligations.
Who this practice helps
When access or platform obligations are disputed
This practice covers restricted accounts, custody questions, disputed transactions and unresolved platform complaints. The initial review focuses on the account relationship, the relevant legal entity and the reason given for the disputed action.
Understanding the legal issue
An inaccessible account or restricted withdrawal can have several causes. We review the actual platform, its legal terms, account correspondence and the stated basis for the restriction. Establishing the correct contracting entity is an essential part of deciding where a complaint or proceeding belongs.
Records that help establish the facts
- Applicable platform terms and account verification history
- Support correspondence and restriction notices
- Transaction and account statements
- The exact platform domain and legal entity named in the terms
Keep originals and preserve dates and context. Initial enquiries should contain only a concise overview. We will explain how further records should be shared.
Assessing the available route
Counsel may assess contractual complaint procedures, preservation requests, dispute resolution clauses and other remedies. A legal request does not ensure that a platform will unlock an account or reverse a completed blockchain transaction.
Free review and the later engagement
We begin with a free initial case review and no firm retainer. If suitable, a recommended independent recovery company evaluates the technical position and reports to the firm. After report review, any paid legal engagement sets out the standard fee, applicable retainer terms and authorization and jurisdictional submission work. Relevant reviews and approvals precede the next steps that depend on them.
Related guidance
How we work · Preserving relevant records · Common questions
Custody, access and the contractual relationship
An exchange account, a hosted wallet and a self-managed wallet may involve very different control arrangements. The first review should identify who holds signing authority, which entity provides the service and what rights the account terms describe. The existence of a wallet address does not answer those contractual questions.
Collect the version of the terms relevant to the events, rather than assuming the current website terms applied throughout. Account opening records, later amendments, notices and support correspondence can help establish the relationship and explain the provider’s stated position.
A restriction requires a factual explanation
A restriction notice may concern identity verification, security, compliance, a contractual dispute or another stated ground. The assessment should record that explanation accurately and compare it with the requested documents and the history of the account. A legitimate provider should not be conflated with a clone using a similar name.
Provider contact should use independently confirmed channels. The proposed legal work can evaluate the appropriate complaint route and the information needed, while avoiding disclosure of credentials or private keys. Any request for records should be proportionate and directed to the correct legal entity.
Dispute routes and remedies
The review may need to consider the agreement’s choice of law, forum or arbitration provisions, the identity of the claimant and the nature of the requested relief. It should also examine whether a balance is an asset claim, a contractual entitlement or a contested accounting entry.
Unlocking an account, obtaining information, reversing a disputed entry and obtaining a judgment are different objectives. Each should be defined clearly in the engagement. Litigation or correspondence cannot be described as an automatic solution to every operational restriction.
What the engagement may produce
The work product depends on the agreed instructions. Possible deliverables include: a chronology of requests and responses, an account and terms review, a document request schedule and, where agreed, a consolidated complaint or written advice.
The proposal should identify the actual deliverable, assumptions, exclusions and charges. Technical analysis, local counsel and proceedings are separately considered where needed. Understand scope and fees.
The decision at the end of a stage
The practical decision is which route addresses the actual issue. An account restriction may require a documented complaint and response before more extensive legal work is considered. Independent tracing is commissioned only where it answers a defined question.
A stage review should explain what has been established, which gaps remain and what authority is needed for any next instruction. It may support further work, a narrower route or a decision not to proceed.