- Thomas Braziel, ordered by a Delaware court to repay $1.9 million after falsifying records, is recruiting Coldcard hack victims for legal action against the wallet maker.
- Galaxy Research confirms 1,596 BTC worth over $100 million has been stolen from roughly 7,300 Coldcard addresses since July 30.
- Coinkite‘s terms of sale limit liability to the device purchase price and mandate arbitration in Ontario, complicating potential lawsuits.
- Braziel asserted his Fifth Amendment privilege over 500 times in depositions but paid restitution and faced no criminal charges.
Thousands of victims of the Coldcard Bitcoin wallet hack have been approached to join a legal action against the device’s maker by Thomas Braziel, a claims broker who reportedly FTX-claims-broker-thomas-braziel-stole-1-9-million-from-a-receivership-for-personal-gain-court-says-d3375130″>stole $1.9 million from another corporate receivership.
According to Galaxy Research, 1,596 BTC has been stolen from roughly 7,300 Coldcard addresses since July 30, with the haul already exceeding $100 million and a suspected fourth wave potentially pushing it past $130 million.
Braziel, who now runs distressed claims company 117 Partners, posted an appeal on social media asking affected victims to DM him and later published a legal update touting plans for a legal action with 10-30 claimants while steering victims into a private Telegram channel.
However, Braziel’s background raises concerns, as a Delaware court determined in 2024 that he manufactured falsified account statements and bank records for Fund.com, a company he was appointed receiver of in 2016.
The court removed Braziel as receiver and ordered him to repay $1,945,063, with his own lawyers acknowledging he accepted the findings and agreed to reimburse the company’s investigation expenses.
Braziel asserted his Fifth Amendment privilege more than 500 times in deposition, though no criminal charges were filed and he paid his restitution.
Meanwhile, Coldcard manufacturer Coinkite routes disputes into arbitration under Ontario’s Arbitration Act of 1991, with attorney Ariel Givner observing that the terms heavily disclaim warranties, limit liability to the device purchase price, and exclude consequential damages.
✅ Follow BITNEWSBOT on Telegram, Facebook, LinkedIn, X.com, and Google News for instant updates.
