A Massachusetts appeals court delivered a brutal reality check to a crypto scam victim seeking to pin his losses on Santander Bank. In a decision that might make crypto investors everywhere cringe, the court dismissed Lourenco Garcia’s lawsuit attempting to recover $751,000 lost to the fraudulent cryptocurrency platform CoinEgg.
The ruling, handed down on April 18, 2025, effectively told Garcia what many crypto skeptics have been saying all along – you’re on your own when it comes to crypto investments. Between December 2021 and January 2022, Garcia made two debit card purchases and seven wire transfers, sending funds through Metropolitan Commercial Bank of New York to acquire cryptocurrency on Crypto.com and the now-exposed scam platform CoinEgg. The two-year legal battle highlighted the challenges of pursuing banks for cryptocurrency losses.
Here’s the kicker: Garcia authorized every single transaction himself. The court wasn’t buying his argument that Santander should have somehow known better and stopped him. Garcia filed an amended complaint on January 6, 2023, but it did little to strengthen his case. Turns out, the bank’s customer agreement specifically stated they “may” decline suspicious transactions – but aren’t required to play cryptocurrency babysitter.
Banks may flag suspicious activity, but they’re not your personal cryptocurrency guardian when you authorize the transactions.
Massachusetts law couldn’t have been clearer on this one. Banks don’t have to interrogate customers about their withdrawals when they’re the ones making them. Unless the bank has actual knowledge that someone’s stealing your money, they’re not responsible for your financial decisions. Even if those decisions end up being spectacularly bad ones.
Garcia tried arguing that Santander’s website promised to contact customers about questionable activity. Nice try. The court swatted that down as mere marketing fluff, not a binding contract. He also claimed the bank should have recognized these as high-risk transactions and stepped in. The court’s response? Not their problem.
The ruling sends a crystal-clear message to cryptocurrency investors: banks aren’t your safety net when crypto deals go south. This case sets a precedent that will likely influence similar lawsuits across the country. For anyone thinking of blaming their bank for crypto losses – good luck with that.
