Access to $500,000 at Bybit restored in 48 hours
The account was frozen following an AML/KYC review, and standard support stopped providing substantive updates. We assembled a package for the compliance team, after which access to the funds was restored.
An anonymized case. A similar situation does not mean the same timeline or outcome.
What the client reported
Client statementAccording to the client, Bybit froze the account without warning because of an AML/KYC concern. About $500,000 was held in the account and could not be withdrawn.
Standard support repeatedly replied that the matter was awaiting review. Several days passed without a substantive update.
What was documented
Documented factPlatform and amount
A Bybit account with about $500,000 subject to an AML/KYC restriction.
Support responses
For several days, standard support sent template responses without substantive progress.
Case materials
The available materials included the transaction history and source-of-funds documents, including statements and tax records to the extent available.
Steps toward resolution
Our analysis- 01
Identified the restriction trigger
We reviewed the transaction history and identified the pattern that appeared to have triggered Bybit's AML system.
- 02
Assembled Proof of Funds
We prepared a package covering the source of funds, statements, and tax records, using terminology suitable for compliance review.
- 03
Submitted the materials to compliance
Instead of sending further generic complaints, we prepared a structured submission with a technical explanation for the specialist channel.
- 04
Escalated the matter for priority review
The ticket reached the team responsible for reviewing the supporting package. The final decision still depended on the exchange and the quality of the materials.
How the case concluded
After the package was reviewed, the restriction was lifted and the client regained access to the funds. The period from submission to the decision was about 48 hours.
Access to the funds was restored after the supporting materials were reviewed.
Factors that influenced the outcome
Our analysis- A specific explanation of the restriction trigger rather than a general assertion that the activity was legitimate.
- Documents tailored to the compliance requirements rather than further correspondence with standard support.
- Submission through a channel that reviews supporting packages rather than template requests.
Important limitations
- This outcome does not guarantee the same result or timeline in another case.
- The exchange's decision, the completeness of the evidence, and the circumstances all matter.
- The client and personal data are not disclosed.