BIT2145233272
2026-06-25
Platform Fraud
Today, I have to step forward and make public an extremely absurd customer service experience that I encountered at Bitget, which severely violates the principles of financial fairness. I hope that through my real experience, all crypto traders on the internet, especially new friends who are preparing to participate in platform activities, can see the true face of this leading exchange when it cannot afford to lose. 1. Cause of the Incident: System Concealment and Coupon Recycling As a new user, I participated in Bitget's new customer activity and received a 50 USDT contract trading compensation experience voucher according to the rules. Subsequently, I used this voucher for normal trading, and after bearing the risk of market fluctuations, I successfully achieved a personal trading profit of 20 USDT. However, during the profit settlement and transfer, Bitget's underlying system, without any clear, strong pop-up warning or risk prompt, directly forcefully cleared and recycled the remaining 50 USDT activity experience voucher in my account in the background. Please note the actual state of my account assets at this time: 50 USDT activity coupon (platform performance principal) + 20 USDT (my personal trading profit earned by taking risks) = 70 USDT total assets. 2. Official Customer Service Divine Reply: After discovering that the system vulnerability led to the clearing of assets, I immediately submitted a ticket to the platform for a good-faith appeal. Since the system prompt indicated serious concealment and defects, the platform should have "returned the original\" 50 USDT experience voucher principal that was deducted. However, after a so-called \"final review\", the final conclusion given by Bitget's official supervisor shocked me (see attached image image.png). In the reply, the customer service wrote in black and white: \"If you use a 50 USDT experience voucher to open a position and incur a 20 USDT loss, the loss will be offset by the experience voucher according to the rules, and the user does not need to bear it with their own funds. In such cases, we will reissue a 50 USDT experience voucher. After the final review, we confirm that the current processing plan is the final decision (only reissue a 30 USDT experience voucher)...\" This passage directly shows Bitget's internal arrogance and black-box attitude towards users. May I ask the senior management of the platform, were your basic financial concepts and financial logic taught by a gym teacher? There are two serious logical paradoxes here: 1. The absurd double standard of \"deducting principal for profit, but fully compensating for loss": According to your logic, if I unfortunately lost 20U using this voucher, the platform would generously reissue the full 50U to me. But I, based on my own technical analysis and judgment, bearing the market risk that could lead to liquidation or zeroing at any time, worked hard to earn a 20U profit. Instead, the platform, with a big mouth, forcibly deducts my hard-earned 20U profit from the 50U activity principal that I should have enjoyed, and finally only gives me 30U as charity. Is this reasonable?
Expand
今天,我不得不站出来,把我在 Bitget 遭遇的一起极其荒谬、严重违背金融公平原则的客诉经历公之于众。我希望通过我的真实遭遇,让全网的加密货币交易者、尤其是准备参与平台活动的新手朋友们,看清这家头部交易所玩不起的真实吃相。 一、 事件起因:系统瞒报与卡券回收 作为新用户,我参与了 Bitget 的新客活动,并按规则获得了一张 50 USDT 的合约交易包赔体验券。随后,我使用该券进行正常交易,并在承担了市场波动的风险后,成功实现了 20 USDT 的个人交易利润。 然而,在利润结算划转时,Bitget 的底层系统在没有任何明确、强烈的弹窗预警或风险提示的情况下,直接在后台将我账户中剩余的 50 USDT 活动体验券全额强制清空并回收。 请大家注意此时我账户的真实资产状态: 50 USDT 活动卡券(平台履约本金) + 20 USDT(我个人凭本事承担风险赚取的交易利润) = 70 USDT 总资产。 二、 官方客服神回复: 在发现系统漏洞导致资产被清空后,我第一时间向平台提交了工单进行良性申诉。由于系统提示存在严重的瞒报和瑕疵,平台理应“原物退还”我被扣除的 50 USDT 体验券本金。 然而,经过所谓的“最终复核”,Bitget 官方主管给出的最终结论却让我大跌眼镜(见附图 ⁠image.png⁠)。客服在回复中白纸黑字地写道: “若使用 50 USDT 体验券开仓后产生 20 USDT 亏损,该亏损会由体验券按规则抵扣,用户无需使用自有资金承担。在此类情况下,我们会为您补发 50 USDT 体验券。 经过最终复核,我们确认目前的处理方案已为最终决定(只补发 30 USDT 体验券)……” 这段话直接把 Bitget 内部对用户的黑箱傲慢展现得淋漓尽致。请问贵平台高管,你们的基础财务概念和金融逻辑难道是体育老师教的吗?这里面存在两个严重的逻辑悖论: 1. “盈利倒扣本金,亏损反倒全补”的奇葩双标: 按照你们的逻辑,如果我用这张券不幸亏损了 20U,平台会大方地把 50U 全额补发给我。但我凭着自己的技术和行情分析,承担了随时可能爆仓、归零的市场风险,辛辛苦苦赚了 20U 利润,平台反而要大嘴一张,把我赚来的 20U 利润从我本该享有的 50U 活动本金里强行扣除,最后只施舍给我30u.这合理吗?
Malaysia
Report
Next
Bitget TradFi system logic flaw leads to illegal seizure of user funds Complaint subject: Bitget Exchange (TradFi trading section) Amount involved: 1,500 USDT Core dispute: "Frontend confirms success, backend holds funds, liquidation takes the opportunity to intercept\" I. Event facts (timeline) 1. Liquidation and exit: On the trading day, I closed all orders under the TradFi account (precious metals trading). At this time, the account had zero positions, zero risk, and a balance of 2,160 USDT. 2. Asset isolation instruction: I immediately initiated a fund transfer of 1,500 USDT from the TradFi account to the spot account. 3. System feedback: After clicking confirm, the Bitget interface clearly displayed the \"Transfer Successful (Success)\" prompt. Based on this definite system feedback, I determined that the 1,500 USDT had entered a safe zone. 4. Trading again: 10 seconds after the transfer instruction was issued, I reopened positions using the remaining 660 USDT in the TradFi account. 5. Illegal seizure: Subsequently, market fluctuations caused the new position to trigger a forced liquidation. Shockingly, the Bitget system did not only settle the balance within the TradFi account, but instead took advantage of the lagging status of the previous transfer instruction showing \"Processing\" in the background, and forcibly intercepted and deducted the 1,500 USDT that had already been prompted as successful. II. Core rights arguments (Key Arguments) - Contract invalidation: The moment the system displayed \"Transfer Successful\", the funds had legally and logically left the TradFi risk pool. The delay in updating the Bitget backend ledger (showing \"Processing\") is a platform technical failure and should not be borne by the user. - Asset isolation principle: Spot account assets have absolute independence. When Bitget knew the user had issued an isolation instruction, it still used the \"in-transit funds\" as margin for liquidation, which is an illegal encroachment on user assets. - Customer service prevarication: I have provided evidence for over 4 days, but Bitget customer service has always delayed by citing \"verification" and refused to admit the asynchronous settlement bug between the TradFi section and the spot section. III. Demands (Demands) 1. Full refund: Immediately return the illegally deducted 1,500 USDT to my spot account. 2. Technical apology: Provide an explanation for the major bug where the transfer feedback of the TradFi system is out of sync with actual receipt, and fix this logic hole to prevent more users from being harmed.
Bitget
Domestic Regulation
5-10 years
8.04