08/10/2026
A customer’s tick-box declaration does not replace the wallet verification required under the Travel Rule.
In VI v Foris DAX MT Limited, Malta’s Arbiter for Financial Services examined the connection between inadequate wallet verification and losses arising from an investment scam. The provider was ordered to pay 40% of the complainant’s losses, following an assessment of both its verification failure and the complainant’s own contribution.
Our latest article examines the distinction between collecting a customer’s declaration and verifying ownership or control of a self-hosted wallet, the evidence needed to demonstrate compliance, and the implications for consumer claims.
The decision reinforces the importance of effective, documented verification. Liability remains dependent on the evidence and circumstances of each case.
https://gtg.com.mt/travel-rule-compliance-casp-wallet-verification/
Travel Rule compliance requires more than a tick box. A Maltese ruling examines CASP wallet verification failures and liability for consumer losses.