Imagine this: you use a Ledger wallet to protect your savings. You decide to rebalance your portfolio and swap one cryptocurrency for another. You trust the Ledger wallet system, so you proceed. You notice a strange simulation, but since there is no clear warning or explanation, you go ahead with the transaction.
You send your funds and receive back just 0.0001%. To use round numbers: you send €100,000 and receive €0.10. How could this happen? Is it your fault?
First of all, this can happen because many platforms use complex swap systems. During these operations, intermediate conversions may occur, and if something goes wrong, value can be lost. A common example is routing through multiple liquidity pools and eventually hitting one with insufficient liquidity. When that happens, your tokens may pay an extremely high price to obtain a negligible amount of the target token.
Sometimes the responsibility may lie with the user, and sometimes it may not. Each case depends on how the transaction was executed and through which provider. It is also essential to determine whether the provider can be held liable and whether a claim is realistically enforceable. For example, pursuing claims against providers based in certain Caribbean jurisdictions can be particularly challenging.
Traditionally, legal frameworks have been flexible enough to adapt to these situations. Today, regulations such as the European MiCA Regulation or the U.S. GENIUS Act provide consumers with stronger protections and, therefore, better chances of recovery.
If you have experienced a similar situation, you are not necessarily responsible for the loss. The system may have malfunctioned, and you were not properly informed. From a legal standpoint, you are considered a consumer, a position supported by extensive case law.
That said, challenging these platforms requires a very specific legal strategy—one capable of dismantling the alleged “infallibility” of computer code when it conflicts with fundamental user rights.
The “Price Impact”: The Key to Negligence
The critical issue in these cases is not only the lack of liquidity, but the failure to provide adequate information. In traditional finance, if a bank offers a product that would instantly wipe out 99% of your capital, it is legally required to stop the transaction or force you to acknowledge high-risk warnings.
In the crypto environment, interfaces such as Ledger or its exchange partners (including Changelly, Paraswap, 1inch, among others) act as facilitators. If the user interface did not clearly and prominently warn you—ideally in red—about a 99% “Price Impact” or “Slippage,” your consent may be legally flawed.
You agreed to a transaction based on a false assumption: believing you were exchanging value for value, not value for almost nothing.
If you have suffered a similar loss or have doubts about the legality of a transaction, it is essential to assess your case with a specialized legal strategy. At Navas&Cusí, we handle these claims by combining legal analysis with a technical review of how the platforms operate. Our team of fintech-specialist lawyers can help determine liability and realistic recovery options. Acting quickly can make all the difference when failures of information and consent are involved.
