Three Binance-affiliated entities have filed proceedings in Hong Kong against the co-founders of RedotPay, alleging they steered more than 470,000 users onto a rival payment card. The damages claim lands just under $473M. RedotPay rejects the allegations outright and says it will contest every claim.
Key Takeaways
- Binance puts its loss at $472.8M across 470,000 diverted users
- The petition names three RedotPay co-founders in Hong Kong, with a second action running in Singapore
- RedotPay is contesting the case and says day-to-day operations are unaffected
Filings Land in Hong Kong, Then a Second Front in Singapore
Nest Trading Ltd., DistributedTechnologies Ltd. and Chaintecs Consulting Singapore Pte, all tied to Binance, brought the petition in Hong Kong. Named in it are RedotPay co-founders Gao Zhangpeng, Chan Wa Choi and Yao Chao. The core allegation is narrow enough to state in a line: that the three orchestrated a mass migration of Binance customers onto a competing product.
The number attached to it is not rounded. Binance puts the harm at $472.8M across 470,000 users who moved from its card to RedotPay’s. Divide one by the other and each lost account is being valued at slightly over a thousand dollars, which is a useful read on what an active cardholder is worth inside an exchange’s economics.
Chaintecs has opened a second action in Singapore, with a hearing set for Friday. Running two jurisdictions in parallel is a deliberate choice. It closes off escape routes and makes a quiet settlement considerably harder to negotiate. Binance has been on the receiving end of jurisdictional pressure itself, most visibly when Binance France missed its MiCA deadline on July 1.
Binance itself is saying almost nothing. The exchange confirmed it does not comment on live litigation, while making clear it will use courts and other forums where it sees the need. That is consistent with how it has handled unilateral calls before, including the decision to shut its NFT marketplace and give holders one month to withdraw.
Binance Pay Balances Sit at the Center of the Claim
The technical accusation goes further than poaching customers. Binance argues that RedotPay drew on funds moving through Binance Pay to top up its own prepaid cards, against the terms both sides had signed. Put plainly, one company’s payment rail is alleged to have bankrolled the other company’s competing product.
The timeline explains how the relationship soured. A first commercial agreement was struck in November 2023 and collapsed inside six months after what Binance describes as misuse of funds. A second deal followed in March 2025, this time carrying an explicit requirement to keep funds segregated. That added clause says everything about how much trust was left.
In April 2026 Binance terminated the arrangement and switched off Binance Pay functionality on RedotPay. The court filing therefore arrives four months after the commercial break, which reads less like a reflex and more like a case built and priced over several months. Whether the segregation obligation was honored is the question the judges will end up answering.
The dispute also exposes how exposed stablecoin card issuers are to rails they do not own. That gap widened when US regulators missed the GENIUS Act deadline on stablecoin rules and left commercial contracts to do the work legislation had not. Meanwhile the underlying product keeps scaling, as shown by the Japanese logistics firm paying 2,300 drivers in stablecoin.
Also on Cryptonomic:
- Robinhood Chain Tops $70M in Tokenized Stocks
- Strategy Sells 1,638 BTC to Fund Its Preferred Dividends
- Crypto Capital Rotation Sends Money to AI and Real Estate
A Legal Fight Arriving Right Before RedotPay’s Listing
Timing is what makes this expensive for RedotPay. The Hong Kong company, which issues stablecoin-backed payment cards, is preparing a US listing above one billion dollars at a possible $4B valuation at pricing. A nine-figure claim sitting on the liability side is exactly the line item that weighs on a prospectus. The 470,000 disputed accounts also need scaling against what the company claims for itself, more than 8 million users and monthly payment volume above one billion dollars, figures published in July in its own announcement on the global fintech rankings.
RedotPay’s response is written for that audience. The company rejects what it calls unfounded allegations, says it is vigorously defending all claims, and declines further comment while the matter sits before the court. It added that the proceedings have no bearing on day-to-day operations.
Rather than argue the substance, the company pointed to its own trading metrics: a record month for on-chain spending by its users, and the top position among crypto card programs tracked by Paymentscan. The play is to move attention from the courtroom to the growth curve.
Near term, the pressure point is the listing window rather than the balance sheet. Institutional buyers price unprovisioned legal risk badly, and a Singapore hearing this week puts the file under a spotlight at the worst possible moment for an issuer heading toward a placement.
Further out, the case forces an unresolved question into the open: who owns a user when two companies share one payment rail. Whatever comes out of Hong Kong will shape the next generation of distribution contracts, in a market already reshaped by rulebooks that left 10 million EU users without a compliant platform.
Follow the story on Cryptonomic.
