Banking and Finance Law Daily Wrap Up, ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS—California recovers over $4.8 million for scam victims of major crypto ATM company CoinFlip, (Nov 5, 2026)

By Donielle Tigay Stutland, J.D.

CoinFlip, one of the California’s largest cryptocurrency ATM companies, was ordered to pay over $4.8 million to California victims after failing to adequately protect them from financial fraud.

The California Commissioner of Financial Protection and Innovation (DFPI) has entered into a Consent Order with GPD Holdings LLC dba CoinFlip (CoinFlip) under which CoinFlip agreed to pay over $4.8 million to California victims after failing to adequately protect them from financial fraud. Additionally, California ordered CoinFlip to pay DFPI over $350,000 in excessive fees it illegally charged California consumers and to immediately cease all unlawful, unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices. CoinFlip touts itself as the “world’s largest network of cryptocurrency ATMs by transaction volume” and operates roughly 500 kiosks across California. The DFPI investigation found that CoinFlip failed to maintain an effective anti-money laundering (AML) program and breached California's Digital Financial Assets Law (DFAL) and California Consumer Financial Protection Law (CCFPL).

“California is focused on making sure technology actually helps people, rather than driving up prices or opening the doors to fraud. With no federal consumer protection, California is stepping up to hold accountable companies that leverage technology to harm hardworking families,” said California Business and Consumer Services Secretary Rohit Chopra.

“Today’s order is a win for Californians and a notice for the crypto industry that protecting consumers is not optional. Crypto companies must be held accountable for enabling—and profiting off—scams and fraud,”said DFPI Commissioner KC Mohseni.“Robust anti-fraud and consumer-protection practices are a requirement of doing business in California, not a suggestion. We will continue to crack down on bad actors who put consumers at risk.”

Consent Order. CoinFlip has operated digital financial asset transaction kiosks (Bitcoin ATMs) and an online trade desk in California since 2020. The company is regulated as an “operator” of kiosks under the Digital Financial Assets Law (DFAL) and as a “covered person” offering consumer financial products or services under the California Consumer Financial Protection Law (CCFPL). As a money services business, CoinFlip is subject to the Bank Secrecy Act anti-money laundering (BSA/AML) requirements.

The DFPI’s investigation found:

• Since Jan.1, 2024, on multiple occasions, CoinFlip kiosks in California accepted more than $1,000 from a customer on the same day in violation of Financial Code section 3902.

• Since Jan. 1, 2025, CoinFlip processed multiple transactions in which it charged customers more than the allowable fees and charges, in violation of Financial Code 3904.

• Since Jan. 1, 2025, CoinFlip processed multiple transactions in which it did not provide customers a pre-transaction disclosure containing the elements specified in Financial Code section 3905(a).

• Since Jan. 1, 2024, CoinFlip kiosks in California printed transaction receipts without including elements specified by Financial Code sections 3905(b).

• Since at least Jan. 1, 2021, CoinFlip was, and is, an MSB offering kiosk and trade desk services to California consumers, for which it was, and is, required to develop, implement, and maintain an effective anti-money laundering program.

• CoinFlip engaged in unlawful, unfair, abusive, or deceptive acts or practices with respect to consumer financial products or services in violation of Financial Code sections 90003(a) (1) and (a)(2).

The DFPI concluded that CoinFlip’s actions violate California’s DFAL and CCCFPL, and federal anti-money laundering laws. CoinFlip neither admitted nor denied the DFPI’s findings and conclusions.

CoinFlip and its managers, officers, directors, agents, owners, and employees agreed to stop engaging in the prohibited practices, including violations of DFAL §§ 3902, 3904, 3905(a)–(b) and BSA/AML requirements. CoinFlip agreed to pay disgorgement of $351,530 to DFPI (representing excess fees under § 3904) and CoinFlip agreed to pay $4,811,483 in restitution to 20 specific California consumers identified by the DFPI.

Companies: GPD Holdings LLC dba CoinFlip

MainStory: TopStory CaliforniaNews ConsumerCredit EnforcementActions FinTech UDAAP