Russian Woman Loses Over 1 Million Rubles in Fake Crypto Investments

cryptonews.ruPublished on 2026-08-18Last updated on 2026-08-18

Abstract

A Russian woman lost over 1 million rubles (approximately 750,000 rubles of which was a bank loan) to a cryptocurrency investment scam. The victim saw an online advertisement in early June, registered on a purported crypto exchange website, and was contacted by a fake broker. Convinced by initial fake profits shown in her account, she transferred more savings and even took out a loan over two months. When she attempted to withdraw funds, the platform demanded additional verification fees. After she refused, her account was blocked and the "broker" disappeared. The woman reported the crime to police in Ulyanovsk, and a criminal case for fraud has been initiated. This follows a similar incident where a 47-year-old woman from Salekhard lost 9.4 million rubles after engaging with fake crypto "experts" on Telegram.

On June 3, the woman saw an online advertisement about an opportunity to earn money through investments on a cryptocurrency trading exchange. The Russian woman clicked the link and registered on the website, after which she received a call from an unknown person who introduced himself as a broker.

The interlocutor explained how to make money on cryptocurrencies and suggested making an initial deposit. Soon after transferring a small amount, the figures in the Ulyanovsk resident's personal account showed a profit. This prompted her to continue investing money.

The fake broker persuaded her to transfer her remaining savings and then take out a bank loan. Over two months, the woman transferred 1.046 million rubles. Of this sum, 750,000 rubles were borrowed as a loan.

The "cryptocurrency investment specialist" remained in contact, gave instructions, and insisted on new investments until his client decided to withdraw money from the platform. The Russian woman was met on the website with a notice demanding additional verification and payment of a transfer fee. After the woman refused to comply with these conditions, her account was blocked, and the fake broker stopped answering calls and messages.

Realizing she had become a victim of fraudsters, the woman contacted the police. The Investigative Department for the Leninsky District of Ulyanovsk initiated a criminal case under Article 159 of the Russian Criminal Code, "Fraud."

Previously, a 47-year-old resident of Salekhard lost 9.4 million rubles after communicating in Telegram with unknown persons who introduced themselves as cryptocurrency investment experts. The fraudsters promised rapid capital growth, high returns, and no risk.

end-content

Related Questions

QWhat was the initial scam that the Russian woman fell for?

AShe saw an online advertisement about earning money through a cryptocurrency exchange and was contacted by a person posing as a broker.

QHow did the fake broker convince the woman to keep investing more money?

AAfter she made a small initial deposit, the numbers in her account showed a fake profit, which motivated her to continue investing.

QWhat was the total amount the woman lost, and how much of it was borrowed?

AShe lost a total of 1,046 million rubles, of which 750,000 rubles was borrowed as a bank loan.

QWhat happened when the woman tried to withdraw money from the platform?

AThe website displayed a message requiring additional verification and a transfer commission fee. After she refused, her account was blocked and the fake broker stopped all communication.

QWhat legal action was taken after the woman realized she was scammed?

AShe reported the crime to the police, and the Investigative Department for the Leninsky District of Ulyanovsk opened a criminal case under Article 159 of the Russian Criminal Code for 'Fraud'.

Related Reads

AI Redefines What Makes a Good Teacher

AI is redefining the role of the good teacher. While AI adoption in Chinese K-12 education is widespread—reducing new teachers' lesson prep time by over 60%—it has not replaced teachers. Instead, it amplifies the need for their human judgment and presence. Research highlights a critical shift: AI excels at elevating a student's initial 30-point idea to a 70-point answer, but it risks eliminating the crucial 20-point journey of deep, personal learning from 70 to 90. A study from the University of Pennsylvania showed students using an unfettered AI as a "crutch" performed worse on subsequent tests than those using a teacher-guided "guardrailed" AI or a control group. AI efficiently handles standardized tasks like lesson planning, grading, and personalized assignments, making differentiated instruction scalable. However, it cannot replicate the "collective teacher efficacy"—the shared belief among educators that they can impact students—which research identifies as the top factor influencing student achievement. The new benchmark for teachers involves three levels of AI literacy: verifying AI output, directing AI to complete tasks, and, most critically, redesigning courses and pedagogy with AI. Currently, most training stops at the second level. The gap is widening between "super teachers," who use saved time for deeper student engagement, and those who risk "metacognitive laziness" by over-relying on AI without critical oversight. Ultimately, AI makes affordable, one-on-one tutoring possible, fulfilling a long-standing educational challenge. Yet, the Penn study underscores that access alone is insufficient. Effective learning still requires a teacher to guide when to intervene and when to step back, ensuring students earn the final, transformative 20 points of their intellectual growth.

marsbit6m ago

AI Redefines What Makes a Good Teacher

marsbit6m ago

Kotlin 'J God' Two-Hour Controversial Interview: I'd Rather Lose 80% of Job Opportunities Than Use AI for Programming

Jake Wharton, a prominent Android and Kotlin developer known as "J God," has taken a strong stance against using AI for programming. He publicly stated that he will not join AI companies, work on AI-centric products, or accept roles that mandate AI tool usage, a condition he estimates eliminates 80% of potential job opportunities for him. Wharton values stable cash compensation and the freedom to choose his employer over the potentially higher, riskier rewards of trending tech sectors like AI and cryptocurrency, which he views critically. In a recent two-hour interview, Wharton explained his skepticism. He argues that the push for AI in software development is often driven top-down by management, bypassing engineering judgment, unlike the traditional bottom-up adoption of new tools by developers. He has never used an AI agent to write code, believing the most irresponsible use is generating code beyond a developer's understanding, which can lead to unmaintainable software and erode an engineer's core skills and bargaining power. While he acknowledges AI as a potentially useful tool in the toolbox, he firmly opposes making it the foundation of the engineering process. Wharton also discussed Kotlin's evolution, describing it as "what Java wanted to be 10 years later." He highlighted its advantages, such as built-in null safety, and its success in becoming a default for Android development. However, he noted that merely knowing Kotlin is no longer a distinct career advantage due to its widespread adoption. He expressed admiration for languages like Swift and Rust, particularly Rust's approach to ownership and error handling. Having left large companies like Google and Cash App, Wharton now prefers working in small, focused teams. He recently joined Skylight, a company that aligns with his values of open-source contribution and restrained, non-core use of AI. Wharton remains unconvinced that AI will replace programmers, emphasizing that software creation and maintenance require human understanding and that AI-generated code still needs expert review and debugging.

marsbit9m ago

Kotlin 'J God' Two-Hour Controversial Interview: I'd Rather Lose 80% of Job Opportunities Than Use AI for Programming

marsbit9m ago

Trading

Spot
活动图片