Lost access to digital banking mid-trade. What should I do?

I have had offers open to buy Bitcoin for a while and someone recently accepted an offer and tried to sell a small amount to me. However when I tried to pay, I discovered I have lost access to my online bank account. I visited my bank branch yesterday and was told it is going to take a few days to sort.

I’m really concerned about the taker/seller, and want them to know that I am trying my best to get the payment through. I am afraid I will not manage this within the 4 day deadline though. So firstly, is there any way I can send some kind of notice to say that I am trying to service the request, and secondly, is there some way to request a time extension?

I’m happy to lose the deposit if necessary. I really want people to have a good experience with Bitsquare; I think it’s extremely important that this kind of service gets traction for a whole range of reasons. So can anyone suggest how I rescue the situation?


Edit: I meant to add that this is a National Bank transfer for GBP.

1 Like

Thanks for the nice words even though you’re in a tough spot.

I’d say chances are good that this will be resolved in a good way. The Bitsquare trading community is still small, nice and understanding.

If you get the chance to transfer the money within the time window, you should make sure to use faster payments, if possible, to get the money instantly to your trading peer.

Otherwise, you’ll have to wait for the trade to time-out and the arbitrator will sort it out.

Generally speaking you’re at fault. There’s no way to communicate with your trading peer. This is because communication would introduce additional risks.

I hope you can fix this quickly and save the trade.

Ooops, I didn’t really address your questions:

No and no. Your trading peer might find this thread though.

You could send the money from another account, or even someone elses, but you’d be breaking the contract and would be depending on the other traders goodwill. (not recommended)

I’d say it’d be best to try everything to transfer the money and otherwise let the trade time-out and lose-out on the security deposit eventually.

Thanks very much marc. Well I did just end up waiting. I had to get a new card, and then had to wait another day for the PIN to be posted (my god I can’t wait until we no longer need this archaic nonsense). I immediately made the payment (with 18 hours left on the timeout clock).

I read somewhere that the intention is that the payment should really be made before the halfway point on the countdown. So I wonder if I am still technically in the wrong here, even though I got the payment through several hours before the end of the deadline?

The seller hasn’t confirmed yet. Of course, they’re possibly not at a computer right now. But I see on the statements page on my online account that the transaction is highlighted in an unusual way, which might mean it really hasn’t been sent yet!!! :frowning: 3 hours left…

I can’t be sure but I think everything will be fine.

You’ll have to prove you made the payment and your peer will have to prove he didn’t receive anything. Additionally, the arbitrator can give the trade a reasonable amount of extra time.

Additionally, the arbitrator can give the trade a reasonable amount of extra time.

That’s something I had been wondering. Glad to hear you say that!

I suspect that this particular payment will not actually go through until midnight. From some reading around, even UK “faster payments” might only clear at/around midnight (which would put it at about 3 hours past the deadline).

So the trading period ended without the seller confirming receipt of payment :(. I now have an “Open Dispute” button. I’m tempted to not click this, since I’m hoping the seller might still be able to confirm that the payment went through and do so rather than starting a dispute. Is this appropriate? Or do I need to click it even to be kept in the loop about any arbitration action? I’m thinking of only opening a dispute myself at some point tomorrow or the day after if there’s still no change.

The seller can’t confirm it anymore. A dispute will have to be opened in order to release the funds. Of course, you can choose to wait for the dispute to be opened by the seller.

I’d open it and explain the situation. Say you made the payment late and go on from there.

Thanks again marc, exactly what I needed to know! I’ve started the dispute as you suggested. Also, as far as I can tell, my payment has certainly gone through now, but I’ll have to learn how to prove this.

Probably just as well I’m learning how to do this now anyway (with a fairly small amount in the transaction) so I’ll be able to recommend Bitsquare with a bit more confidence to people in future! I hope the seller feels the same way.

No, thank you for your patience and understanding throughout this ‘ordeal’.

Once you get around it, it’s really quick and easy. I’m afraid it’s still a steep learning curve for newcomers. Usability has to be improved, that’s for sure. We just don’t have the resources at the moment.

Manfred’s in the process of improving the situation (in his holidays). That’s why response times are slower than usual and a lot of things can’t be addressed atm.

Thought I should update the thread with how this played out in the end!

I explained the situation to the arbitrator and he was happy to give it some extra time for my trading partner to confirm receipt, which he did about a day later. So other than the delay, everything worked out in the end, and the arbitrator even returned his fee in full to both of us! :slight_smile:

1 Like

I thought it is just a simple multi-sig that holds the btc. Wouldn’t that mean that it just needs for two of them to confirm it and that is it? Does software limit you to not be able to confirm after time limit?

It is, but the UI doesn’t allow it.

Exactly, it is a 2-3 multi-sig, so only two signatures are needed to move the coins. In case of a dispute, one sig comes from the aritrator and the other one from the honest peer ho receives the coins.

Yes, the arbitrator has the possibility to decide on that.

What are the benefits of software limitation (of perhaps beneficial feature) in an open source project? Shouldn’t someone just be able to fork a more powerful client? Is this limit for some kind of user protection, if so what are the benefits?

The Bitsquare protocol provides for a high degree of security. Limitations are there to prevent scams and fraud.

Everyone is free to fork within license regulations. Undermining the Bitsquare protocol will result in less security, and therefore won’t be successful.

That aside, Bitsquare is more than 20,000 lines of code and as such not exactly trivial to wrap your head around. I wouldn’t touch a fork with a ten foot pole.

The fact that the software limits you, prevents fraud depending on the payment method. Additionally the time limits make sure trades are completed within a reasonable time frame.

If you decide not to follow the protocol rules, you risk your funds.

If you decide to set up or accept an offer, you agree to following the protocol.

Thanks for answering my questions :slight_smile:
I think it would be useful to add overriding the time limit while the funds are still in multi-sig if user really wants to. It would give users an idea that this could still be done by the other party as is the realty. It can also be useful in some cases, like this one.
As I understood there is still just one arbitrator, so time delay between opening a dispute and arbitrator getting involved can probably still be significant enough for someone to finalize a trade if he is late.
PS: If there really is just 1 arbitrator it can rise fees significantly due to monopoly and not fair competition. This money incentive could be enough for someone to fork, even if these small software limitations might not be. I think it is best for the project to stay without any forks as long as it is possible and there is no disputes.

You’re very welcome! Critcal thinking gives us a chance to improve.

I understand, and you might be right in that case, but we have to make safe decisions. A safe approach would be to adjust the time window in that a payment can be made. We have to find a good balance between speed and security. I guess I have to think about the implications of your proposal some more.

Finding the right payment methods is a real pain. Each one is different and mistakes can end badly. The worst is that payment providers often don’t stick to their words. Then it’s learning carefully by doing.

People completed 2347 trades with Bitsquare, and not a single coin or $ was lost. I think we’re on the right track.

Yes, it’s just a single arbitrator, mostly due to technical reasons. There’s no need to worry, though because the arbitrator is a trusted person who has no incentives to harm the project.

The arbitrator situation will change in the future. There are simply not enough dev ressources to speed up development atm.

I agree with your stance on forks but I give eventual forks a very low chance of success due to several reasons.

1 Like

The buyer could still confirm before anyone has started to open a dispute. Only as soon one trader has opened a dispute the normal activities from the trade protocol (confirm payment, confirm receipt) are deactivated.

Ok, thanks. That’s what I suspected but I couldn’t be sure as I only had a single dispute in 9 months of Bitsquare trading :slight_smile:

1 Like