How the scam operates.
当該プラットフォームは、専門性を印象づけるよう構成された名称を掲げています。これは、欧州市場での信頼性を演出しようとする業者によく見られる、ラテン語由来およびフランス語風のブランディング手法を組み合わせたものです。この種の業者による典型的なマーケティングは金融市場へのアクセスを約束し、その提案を限定的、あるいは専門家による助言付きの取引サービスとして提示することが少なくありません。表面的な見せ方は、出資を検討する者のデューデリジェンス意識を低下させるよう設計されています。
利用者が資金を入金すると、この業者は通常、利益やポジションが増加しているように見えるダッシュボード画面を提供します。アカウントマネージャーやサポート担当者からの連絡は入金段階で活発になり、報告される運用実績を根拠にさらなる投資を促します。しかし実際の資金は、規制対象の、あるいは検証可能な取引環境に投じられているわけではありません。表示される利益は、プラットフォーム自身の画面の中にのみ存在します。
破綻は通常、利用者が資金の出金を試みた時点で訪れます。その段階で、プラットフォームは障壁を設けます。税金、コンプライアンス費用、あるいは本人確認の要件などと称して追加の手数料を要求するのです。問い合わせは応答されないか、無期限に先送りされます。最終的には業者との連絡が完全に途絶え、利用者は、プラットフォーム自身の手続きを通じては資金を取り戻せないことに気づくことになります。
Red flags we documented.
- 01No Regulatory Authorisation on RecordBrokersView lists Primostratique without any corresponding regulatory licence. Legitimate brokers operating in any recognised jurisdiction are required to hold authorisation from a financial conduct authority. The absence of any documented registration is the most fundamental signal of an illegitimate operation.
- 02Unverifiable Corporate IdentityOperators of this type routinely present a professional-sounding name without registering a traceable legal entity. No verifiable company registration, physical address, or ownership structure has been documented for this platform. This opacity makes accountability impossible and is a consistent feature of fraudulent operations.
- 03Deposit-Pressure Communication PatternA hallmark of investment fraud platforms is the use of persistent account managers who focus communication on encouraging deposits rather than providing transparent information about trading conditions or regulatory standing. Victims typically report active contact during the onboarding phase and silence once withdrawal is attempted.
- 04Withdrawal ObstructionPlatforms of this type commonly impose escalating barriers to withdrawal once a user attempts to recover funds. These barriers are presented as legitimate compliance requirements but function as mechanisms to retain deposited capital indefinitely. The pattern is well-documented across unregulated online trading operations.
- 05No Transparency Regarding Fund CustodyThere is no publicly documented information about where user funds are held, under what legal arrangement, or which institution has custody. Regulated brokers are required to maintain segregated client accounts and disclose custody arrangements. The absence of this information is a material risk indicator.
What you can do now.
Open a free 24-hour case assessment with CryptoLeek +
Tell us what happened. A senior analyst reads your file within 24 hours and replies with an honest yes/no/conditional on recovery. The assessment is free. If we cannot recover the funds we say so plainly, including which (free) regulator channel you should use instead. If we accept the case, we open a numbered case file and issue a written quote for a flat investigation retainer before any work begins, scoped to case complexity, the jurisdictions involved, and the on-chain trail.
Trace your funds on-chain with our analysts +
We trace stolen crypto across BTC, ETH, EVM L2s, Solana, Tron, and major stablecoins using the same toolchain as regulators and tier-1 exchange compliance teams. The output is a forensic report anchored to specific transaction hashes and block heights, the evidence that exchanges, payment processors, and counsel actually act on. Recovery starts here.
Recover with counsel where civil action makes sense +
Where the trace lands in a jurisdiction with cooperative banks and courts, we coordinate with bar-licensed counsel in our 40+ jurisdiction network for civil action and asset-freezing orders (Mareva-style). Counsel bill you directly; the CryptoLeek investigation retainer is independent of counsel fees. The outcome is funds released back to your nominated wallet or bank account.