DO NOT USE THIS COMPANY!!!!
DO NOT USE THIS COMPANY
Since my original review, I am adding further factual details for transparency. Based on the documented experience below, I cannot recommend this platform. One star is too many.
• A full withdrawal of funds was requested. After 11 days, only 0.61% of the total amount was received. The withdrawal request remains unfulfilled.
• There was prolonged back-and-forth email communication that did not directly resolve the withdrawal request.
• Requirements changed during the process, including a later demand for photo ID that was not initially stated.
• I was provided with unofficial and unverified documents referring to “apparent” or “pending” funds, rather than standard, independently verifiable transfer documentation.
• A Zelle payment I made earlier was not received, and this issue was never addressed or explained in subsequent correspondence.
• The language and tone of communication were inconsistent with what one would expect from a professional financial or crowdfunding service.
• There has been a significant delay since the original withdrawal request, and the funds have still not been released.
• being informed by a South Korean card issuer that the merchant was suspected of fraud.
• Crowdfunding.org falsely claimed that I “failed to complete legally required identity verification.” This is untrue. I never refused to provide ID and explicitly stated I would do so through proper channels.
• In a final email, Crowdfunding.org stated that “multiple donor chargebacks were filed against the campaign.” This statement is incorrect. The chargeback was initiated by me, the campaign organizer, after the platform failed to release the raised funds or provide a clear resolution despite repeated follow-ups. Presenting this as donor-initiated action misrepresents the facts and shifts attention away from the platform’s failure to release funds.
• Crowdfunding.org abruptly closed my campaign and account without prior notice or justification while funds and refunds were still unresolved. This action immediately cut off my access to refund information and transaction records, leaving me unable to track or verify the status of funds. The sudden loss of access caused significant stress and uncertainty and is, in my experience, wholly unprofessional and unwarranted for a platform handling financial transactions.
Based on my documented experience, including abrupt termination, lack of reconciliation, narrative control, and action only after chargebacks — These actions occurred without prior notice or a clear justification, and based on my experience, the operation did not appear to be professionally managed or well governed.
I am sharing this information so others can make an informed decision based on a fully documented experience.
UPDATE – Response to Crowdfund’s Reply
Crowdfund’s reply contains several characterizations that I believe are inaccurate or misleading, and I am adding this update for clarity.
Characterizing my actions as “chargeback abuse” or “potential fraud” is unfounded. I did not receive any campaign funds, did not seek personal gain, and acted only to ensure donors were able to recover their own money after confidence in the platform’s process had broken down. Exercising lawful consumer protection mechanisms in good faith does not constitute fraud.
The statement that funds were “frozen to protect donors” raises an important point of clarification. I never received funds and did not pose a risk to donors. Any protection provided was from uncertainty in the platform’s own withdrawal and verification process, not from my actions.
Crowdfund’s reply also states that the campaign was closed following communication. This is incorrect. The campaign had already been closed at the time I received the email, and the message did not provide prior notice or an opportunity to respond before closure.
The claim that I refused identity verification is misleading. I did not refuse to verify my identity. I declined to send government-issued identification via email due to legitimate security concerns and requested a more secure, official verification method. Declining one method of transmission is not a refusal to verify identity.
Finally, the reply repeatedly references “fraud indicators” without identifying any fraudulent conduct. I did advise donors to pursue chargebacks after I lost confidence in the platform’s process and wanted donor funds protected. I was the campaign organizer solely for the purpose of passing funds to the stated beneficiary, and no funds were ever disbursed to me. Donors acted independently, often based on advice from their banks. I did not misrepresent facts or deceive anyone.
Antwoord van Crowdfund
Response from Crowdfund.org
We appreciate the opportunity to provide documented facts regarding this review.
First, note a critical admission in this review:
The reviewer states: "The chargeback was initiated by me, the campaign organizer."
This is a significant admission. The reviewer—the campaign organizer—filed chargebacks against donations to his own campaign. Filing chargebacks against your own fundraising campaign is chargeback abuse and potentially fraudulent. This admission contradicts his claim that we acted improperly; the facts are systematically laid out below as they pertain to each respective claim.
POINT-BY-POINT FACTS:
❌ CLAIM: "Requirements changed during the process, including a later demand for photo ID."
✅ FACT: Identity verification for withdrawals is required by federal law (Bank Secrecy Act, FinCEN regulations). This is standard across ALL crowdfunding platforms including GoFundMe and Kickstarter. Verification occurs at withdrawal, not campaign creation. This is industry standard.
❌ CLAIM: "I never refused to provide ID."
✅ FACT: We have documented emails where the reviewer explicitly refused to submit ID, stating he would "not send government-issued ID via email" despite our use of encrypted ProtonMail. He created multiple objections at each verification attempt. His emails are preserved.
❌ CLAIM: "The chargeback was initiated by me, the campaign organizer" and "multiple donor chargebacks" is incorrect.
✅ FACT: The reviewer admits he filed chargebacks against his own campaign. Additionally, THREE separate donors filed chargebacks claiming "product not received"—these are documented with different names, amounts, and dates. The reviewer's admission that he ALSO filed chargebacks only adds to the fraud indicators.
❌ CLAIM: "A Zelle payment I made earlier was not received and never addressed."
✅ FACT: This was addressed in writing. The reviewer himself requested we use international wire transfer instead of Zelle. We have his email explicitly stating this preference. We complied with HIS request.
❌ CLAIM: "Abruptly closed my campaign without prior notice."
✅ FACT: The reviewer received written notice stating the reasons for closure: multiple chargebacks and failure to complete identity verification. This is documented.
❌ CLAIM: "A donor's bank advised that the matter is being treated as suspected fraud."
✅ FACT: If a bank suspects fraud, they are investigating the recipient of funds—not the platform that detected fraud and protected donors.
WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED:
1. We detected multiple fraud indicators
2. We requested legally-required identity verification
3. The reviewer refused all verification attempts
4. Multiple chargebacks were filed (by donors AND by the reviewer himself, per his admission)
5. We froze funds to protect donors
6. We refunded ALL donors
7. The reviewer received $0 because he refused to verify his identity
OUTCOME:
• All donors: Fully refunded
• Reason: Refusal to complete legal verification + chargeback abuse
Our fraud detection systems worked exactly as intended. We protected donors from a situation involving multiple chargebacks and identity verification refusal.
We stand by our actions and our legal compliance.
Crowdfund.org
