Author: Joe L. White, Jr.
Date: July 01, 2025
Reference: Conciliation Request – Nexo AG, Canton of Zug
Purpose
This annex outlines the long-term risk exposure Nexo AG faces if its structural, procedural, and regulatory deficiencies are left unaddressed. It argues that the recurrence of client harm is not speculative but systemic and predictable. The annex supports an early resolution strategy by identifying cascading risks of litigation, regulatory scrutiny, and reputational erosion especially during Nexo’s expansion into HNWI and institutional markets.
Factual Background
Across multiple jurisdictions and independent client experiences, a pattern has emerged:
- Delayed or denied FADP responses,
- Opaque platform mechanics regarding leverage and liquidation,
- Unlicensed banking allegations and enforcement inquiries,
- Absence of platform safety features like stop-loss orders or real-time LTV tracking,
- Misalignment with FinSA, UCA, and CO obligations.
If these patterns are not corrected, new clients, particularly in the HNWI and institutional channels, face similar risks. Given that these client segments demand heightened compliance, transparency, and data governance, recurrence would not only impact individual clients but potentially cascade into broader institutional reputational harm.
Claimant Perspective
I am one of many investors who entrusted substantial funds to Nexo in good faith, based on representations that it was a secure, professionally managed platform regulated under Swiss law. My loss was not a fluke but a consequence of platform architecture, inadequate disclosures, and systemic process failure. Nexo’s refusal to produce timely FADP documentation over two years only compounds this harm.
If no corrective action is taken, recurrence is not a risk, it is a certainty.
Supporting Evidence or Reasoning
- Repeat Client Patterns: Evidence of similar complaints across investor forums and legal filings.
- Public Enforcement History: Nexo’s historical run-ins with U.S. and EU regulators set a precedent for future enforcement.
- Swiss Case Law: The obligation of financial intermediaries to prevent repeat harm (e.g., BGE 133 III 97).
- Risk Amplification: Expansion into high-profile client segments (e.g., HNWI) magnifies the impact of a single failure.
- Institutional Scrutiny: Wealth managers, onboarding banks, and insurance partners are acutely sensitive to risk recurrence signals.
- Litigation Risk: Class action risk grows with recurrence, especially across U.S., U.K., and EU legal regimes.
Statement of Intent
This annex is submitted in support of a good-faith civil conciliation request under ZPO Art. 202–204. The claimant asserts that the conduct described herein warrants regulatory attention and damages due to misrepresentation and unsupervised financial intermediation. No proprietary platform information is disclosed, and all references are based on claimant usage, public materials, and industry guidelines.
Disclaimer
This document is submitted in good faith, based solely on the claimant’s personal experience and publicly available facts. No confidential or privileged information has been disclosed. All statements reflect the claimant’s beliefs or recollections unless otherwise indicated. Names of third parties are anonymized or redacted where not publicly implicated. The purpose of this release is transparency, accountability, and resolution not defamation or harm.
Legal Context Note
This annex was authored solely by the claimant as part of a lawful civil conciliation filing under Articles 202–204 of the Swiss Civil Procedure Code (ZPO). It does not contain any confidential statements made during the conciliation hearing, nor does it disclose settlement terms or other protected materials governed by ZPO Art. 205.
The annex is based exclusively on:
- Personal experience,
- Publicly available information, or
- Facts the claimant is legally entitled to share.
Its purpose is to document the legal and factual basis for the claimant’s grievance, promote transparency, and serve the public interest where legal oversight may be insufficient.
The annex adheres to Swiss privacy and defamation standards under ZGB Art. 28, the Data Protection Act (DSG), and applicable banking/professional secrecy provisions (BankG, StGB Art. 321).
It is not an official court document, and no information disclosed herein was obtained through the hearing process.