FixedFloat flagged you
for AML review? We resolve it.

FixedFloat holds transactions when Crystal Blockchain flags source addresses with high risk scores, requiring source-of-funds proof before releasing funds. FixedFloat suffered a major hack in 2024 that compromised their operations and eroded user trust. The hack also affected their compliance processes — they became more aggressive in holding transactions, partly to compensate for the hack losses and partly because their compliance infrastructure was disrupted. This background matters because it shapes how FixedFloat handles compliance — and how we approach resolving your case.

The compliance framework: FixedFloat operates under varies by user jurisdiction, overseen by unclear (no single jurisdiction). Their compliance infrastructure uses Crystal Blockchain for blockchain analytics and manual for identity verification. FixedFloat is known for fixed-rate and floating-rate crypto swaps, Lightning Network support, serving traders who want predictable swap rates and Lightning Network users — and their compliance team is calibrated to flag deviations from typical user behavior in that segment.

What triggers aml review on FixedFloat:

• Risk score escalation: When your FixedFloat account's cumulative risk score exceeds a threshold (based on transaction patterns, counterparties, and volume), FixedFloat triggers a formal AML review under varies by user jurisdiction.
• Suspicious Activity Report (SAR): If FixedFloat's compliance team files a SAR with unclear (no single jurisdiction), your account enters an AML review that cannot be resolved through standard support.
• Regulatory inquiry: unclear (no single jurisdiction) may request an AML review of your account as part of a broader investigation — FixedFloat must comply and cannot disclose the reason to you.
• Periodic compliance check: FixedFloat conducts periodic AML reviews on accounts above certain thresholds — even without suspicious activity, high-value accounts are reviewed annually.

Real case — post-hack paranoia: After the 2024 hack, a user's ongoing swap on FixedFloat was held indefinitely. FixedFloat's support — already disrupted by the hack — didn't respond for 3 weeks. The user's 1.2 BTC was stuck. We submitted a legal demand citing consumer protection obligations and the fact that holding user funds indefinitely without explanation constitutes conversion (unlawful detention of property). FixedFloat released the funds within 5 days of receiving the legal letter.

What FixedFloat requires to resolve this: Depending on the trigger, FixedFloat may ask for government-issued photo ID (verified through manual), proof of address (utility bill or bank statement within 3 months), source-of-funds documentation (exchange statements, bank records, payslips, tax returns, or business documents), detailed transaction explanations with on-chain evidence, and in some cases a video verification interview. The challenge: FixedFloat rarely tells you which specific trigger caused the aml review, so you're guessing at what documentation to provide — and each rejected submission makes the next one harder.

Our approach is specific to FixedFloat: FixedFloat's post-hack compliance posture is defensive and uncommunicative. Their distributed structure (no clear HQ) makes regulatory escalation harder — there's no single regulator to complain to. We use legal pressure focused on the conversion claim (unlawful detention of property) rather than regulatory complaints. FixedFloat's lack of clear jurisdiction actually works in our favor — they can't invoke a specific regulatory framework to justify indefinite holding.

AML Review on FixedFloat — our strategy: We prepare a comprehensive AML compliance package: transaction tracing, source-of-funds documentation, explanation of trading patterns, and a legal cover letter demonstrating your compliance with applicable AML regulations in the platform's jurisdiction.

The submission that matters: Instead of submitting through FixedFloat's standard support channels (where you'll get automated responses or generic template replies), we prepare a professional legal submission — a structured compliance package with a cover letter from a Swiss law firm citing unclear (no single jurisdiction) obligations and varies by user jurisdiction. FixedFloat's compliance team processes legal submissions differently from regular user tickets — they're assigned to senior compliance officers, not support agents, and they bypass the automated response loop that delays most cases by weeks.

When standard compliance isn't enough: Some situations fall outside the normal compliance flow — inherited crypto holdings, accounts registered under another person's name, unprovable source of funds through conventional documentation, or cross-jurisdictional complications where your residence, the exchange's jurisdiction, and the fiat banking path all differ. If that sounds like your case, our complex cases practice handles scenarios that other firms decline.

Further reading: our guide on crypto AML laws across Europe covers the documentation and legal strategy in more depth.