Don't want to trade it yourself?
Our desk runs DEX portfolios on profit share.
Currencies38693
Market Cap$ 2.76T+6.51%
24h Spot Volume$ 73.33B+3.91%
DominanceBTC56.70%-1.75%ETH10.99%+0.25%
ETH Gas0.11 Gwei
Editor’s PickTradingEditor’s ChoiceCentralized Exchanges (CEX)Cryptocurrency Exchange News
Aug 21, 2026
6min read
byMohammad Shahid
forBeInCrypto
On August 13 a long-time Crypto.com user received a “Successful Login” email but could not access his Exchange account and had funds frozen; as of August 21 the account remained inaccessible with no deadline or route for release. Crypto.com gave conflicting support responses (calling the account “rejected” then saying it did not exist) and issued a vague statement citing regulatory review without case-specific details, underscoring custodial risk, weak customer support and wider trust implications for centralized crypto exchanges.
See what traders are focused on
In Brief
- A Crypto.com user lost access to his account and funds without warning.
- Customer support called the account “rejected,” then said it did not exist.
- Crypto.com cited regulatory reviews but gave no case-specific explanation or timeline.
The crypto exchange you trust with your hard-earned money can suddenly delete your account and freeze all the funds without any warning. That’s what happened to a user on Crypto.com last week. Alarmingly, its customer support initially denied that the user account even existed. On August 13, the user “Bradley Peak” received a reassuring email with the subject line: “Crypto.com Exchange – Successful Login.” His credentials had been accepted. Similar to what anyone would receive when trying to access their account.
While the email claimed a successful login, he couldn’t actually access the exchange. Peak was pushed back toward Crypto.com’s main app or its UK login flow. When he inspected the browser traffic, he said a request to an Exchange endpoint returned “401 Unauthorized.”
So, basically, Crypto.com was showing that the user doesn’t have an account. Yet his money was locked inside.
Note: It has been 8-days since the incident, and Crypto.com are yet to resolve the issue. After BeInCrypto’s probe, the exchange did ask the user for an external wallet address to send his funds. However, that hasn’t happened yet, at the time of writing. Peak is a journalist at BeInCrypto. He took no part in reporting or writing this article. BeInCrypto independently reviewed the screenshots and correspondence he supplied, then gave Crypto.com a detailed right of reply.
A Successful Login to Nowhere
Peak says he had used the Crypto.com Exchange account normally for several years. He sent funds to the same established deposit setup he had used before. Access disappeared afterwards.
There was no suspension email. The login page showed no account-status warning and didn’t request any documents.
Customer support was a bigger problem. Crypto.com could not give Peak a consistent description of his account.
In one chat, a support specialist told him, “After checking, I can see that your exchange account is rejected.” The agent did not define “rejected” or say when that status had been applied. The case was escalated, followed by a familiar line: “I can’t give you an exact timeframe.”
Crypto.com support called Peak’s Exchange account “rejected,” escalated the case and gave no resolution timeframe. Screenshot supplied by Bradley Peak.
“Rejected” Became “There Is No Account”
A different support agent gave a weirder answer. After asking Peak for the email address he used to log in, the specialist replied: “Apologies, but there’s no Exchange account under that specific email.”
A second support specialist said there was no Exchange account under Peak’s email. BeInCrypto redacted the address before publication. Screenshot supplied by Bradley Peak.
Peak responded with Crypto.com Exchange messages tied to that address, including successful login notifications and an earlier email stating that he already had an Exchange account. The screenshots reviewed by BeInCrypto show no explanation for the contradiction.
The exchanges then settled into a loop. Support said the case was “still in progress,” that another team had it, and that no timeframe was available.
Peak asked for updates across two chats for weeks. His funds remained inaccessible.
After escalation, support said it was waiting for another team and could provide no timeframe. Screenshot supplied by Bradley Peak.
Crypto.com Answered With a Vague Compliance Statement
BeInCrypto sent Crypto.com 12 questions. They covered the account’s status, the meaning of “rejected,” the location of the funds, and the steps required to withdraw them.
Crypto.com asked for extra time and then issued a very vague on-record statement:
“Crypto.com follows strict regulatory protocols and as such we do not comment on individual customer accounts. As a registered MLR firm, we are required to comply with applicable legal and regulatory obligations, including the monitoring and review of customer activity. We may place restrictions on accounts while such reviews are ongoing. Crypto.com Customer Support will continue to engage with the user in question as appropriate.”
The statement identifies a reason why the exchange may restrict an account during review. It does not confirm that Peak’s account is under such a review or state whether it currently exists.
The company gave no status for the funds and no route or deadline for release.
Crypto.com’s reference to its regulatory status also needs context. Foris DAX UK is registered by the Financial Conduct Authority for certain cryptoasset activities. The current registration sits under the UK’s money-laundering rules.
The FCA says the wider authorization regime is expected to begin in October 2027 and MLR registration does not guarantee authorization under it.
An FCA notice naming Foris DAX UK also says customers do not have access to the Financial Ombudsman Service or Financial Services Compensation Scheme for these services.
Cases involving inaccessible exchange accounts therefore raise a practical custody issue.
Other Users Found the Same Maze
Peak’s complaint is not the only 2026 account-access claim visible in Crypto.com’s public forum. The accounts below are anonymous and BeInCrypto could not independently verify them. Their details echo parts of his experience.
Earlier this year, a Canadian user said withdrawals and Exchange access were blocked after a “routine review”. The user later reported that a formal complaint led to access being restored within days, without an explanation for the original restriction.
Reddit User Complaining About a Similar Issue in 2026
Another long-time customer reported an account lock, an unauthorized error, and repeated referrals to a support queue. A Crypto.com community representative offered to escalate the case manually. In a separate thread, a user said a phone-number change triggered a four-day lockout; other commenters described similar loops.
The anecdotes do not establish how common the problem is. They show the same failure mode: access stops, the chat escalates the case, and a public complaint opens another escalation route.
Earlier in March, Crypto.com also cut about 12% of its workforce, roughly 180 roles, as it integrated AI across the business. The company has not said customer support was affected. The evidence reviewed by BeInCrypto does not link the cuts to Peak’s case.
The Account Still Has No Name
Centralized exchanges can have legal reasons to pause transactions, and financial-crime reviews can limit what they disclose. That power makes an accurate account status and a working escalation path essential.
Peak is one of the several users who remain caught between Crypto.com’s systems. One accepted his login, while another denied authorization. Support called the account “rejected” and later said it did not exist. The press office described restrictions that may occur during reviews, while declining to say whether that explanation applied here.
As of August 21, Peak still had no access to the funds, no deadline, and no account-specific explanation. Crypto.com says support will continue to engage with him. For now, that engagement ends where the story began: in a chat window asking him to wait.
Source: cryptorank.io