The Financial Markets Authority (AMF) has recorded a sharp increase in disputes initiated by savers

With their promises of rapid and colossal returns, communication – particularly on social networks – relating to financial investments in cryptoassets is the source of a growing number of disputes.

According to the definition of the Bank of France, a cryptoasset is “a digital asset, created through the use of cryptography technologies. They are so named because they are similar to financial assets, and are created and used via encryption technologies”.

These cryptoassets constitute virtual capital stored on an electronic medium allowing a community of users who accept them as payment to carry out transactions without having to resort to a legal currency such as the euro. They are therefore hyperspeculative financial vehicles that can experience significant variations, both upwards and downwards.

This is why the Financial Markets Authority (AMF) is closely monitoring this sector, which is a playground for scammers looking for naive investors, or those who are unfamiliar with these mechanisms that combine finance and technology.

The AMF publishes on its website the white list of entities approved by its services to market these digital financial products. There were 28 in 2021, 59 in 2022 and 106 at the end of 2023. It is difficult to obtain the support of the AMF in the event of a dispute, if you have contracted with a service provider not referenced by the French Authority.

This is indeed a predictable phenomenon: the more people join a highly speculative market, where there are more and more players and money at stake, the more disputes are likely to increase. Thus in 2023 – these are the latest figures available with the AMF annual report published this summer – the French Authority handled 88 mediation cases. There were only 54 in 2022. And 44 in 2021. Of these 88 cases, 25 concerned suspicions of fraud.

Investment candidates should be aware that the AMF may refuse to examine their litigation file, particularly if they have contracted with an unapproved service provider. This explains why, out of the 88 files submitted to it, only 27 were ultimately formally admissible.

On the usefulness of choosing your financial intermediary carefully, only from the AMF white list. And to only consider these investments after having fully understood the operating methods and the risks of loss linked to these financial models.