binance is criminal offshore!! i lost last year total 80k$ due to their technical glitches. take care

I had been a verified, profitable, and lively consumer of the Binance platform since 2017. This dispute is a system failure directed towards a long-term, refined consumer.

I publish this report because inner channels are exhausted, and Binance refuses to offer a transparent, written authorized clarification about repeated system failures that instantly harmed my account.

Two separate incidents - one in March and one on October, 2025 - show the same practical failure pattern. Despite acknowledging system issues in chat, Binance insists prior settlements and NDAs remain binding and won't problem a contractual clarification. That contradiction prevents accountability.

This can be a document of details and not a demand-for-money submit**.** I publish to unbiased reviewers, regulators, journalists and affected users can decide the pattern and the response.

Binance knows that pursuing this by means of legal channels is extremely expensive for the typical consumer. They know most people can't afford arbitration or worldwide litigation. They know redirecting to “exterior legal channels” effectively kills 99% of consumer claims. They usually depend on exactly that.

I am describing a sample - a pattern Binance itself created, repeated, and refused to make clear.

They remain detached till they understand a danger. I would like this materials to be public information so that you understand that no one takes duty till a danger is posed to them. The primary example clearly demonstrates this: until VARA turned concerned in the process, there was no point out of an NDA or compensation. Moreover, this NDA was signed unjustly - underneath deception, coercion, and in violation of inner procedures.

Binance attempts to deflect accountability by hiding behind most of the people notion that "futures buying and selling is inherently dangerous." This convenient narrative serves as a defend, permitting them to avoid creating a precedent where they compensate customers for inner rule violations and system failures. Nevertheless, the details show this was not a market danger problem; it was a system failure that violated their very own inner policies and calculations (e.g., the 100%+ charge anomaly). The get together that violated the principles should bear the duty.

i did not lose as a result of dangerous trades, however because of the change, I used to be trusting for years. ... which one doesn't admit its full fault

their shit NDA:

https://preview.redd.it/p5ws5rue3cdg1.png?985&format=png&auto=webp&s=5554354dba6425d105b81d8619d4b23b25235370

...