Considering that Rollbit sent the coins after collapse, and after FTX/its subsidiaries become defunct, you should be able to get them back quite easily.
This will actually serve as a great test for the parties that are in control of FTX. If they do not give ineedhelpplease's money back, then the thievery is still continuing.
It would be dumbfounding if they turn around and say that they no longer have access to the wallets. If they have a large array of wallets, someone with blockchain knowledge a part of the party in control can export the private key quite easily.
There are not many reasons why you would be rejected. I would not be surprised if it takes a long time to even get a response from them though.
Good luck, please keep us posted.
Not many, true, but there are stil good few reasons it being rejected or, at the very least, facing a good difficulties. One is as I mentioned above your post: that the address belongs to an NFT marketplace [company, according to OP] and not OP's.
It will be understandable if FTX or whatever they're named these days, refuse to just let the fund go without proper authentification and statement from the company that bestow the control and the content of the fund on said address to OP.
The other [and significantly less dire, if OP interpret the article he read correctly] is the deadline.
This is a damn stupid industry practice. You are telling me that every casino will just fling funds to places despite not knowing where it's going, and that regulations render casinos incapable of asking a user "do you control this address?" before sending a refund? Please. That is a very poor industry practice and all casinos who do that are asking for complaints, and deserve to be scrutinized for this.
I am not in the mood to get involved in more drama, however if you want to prevent complaints in the future, communicate better and don't be idiots. I say don't be idiots because this "internal policy" that is apparently "standard industry practice" is idiotic. You know how the blockchain works and you know that confirming address validity to ensure it's not a service-address is essential for any kind of refund. This process that ineedhelpplease now has to follow is 100% Rollbit's fault and was very simply to preventable...If I were him I'd be pushing for compensation for the time and potential loss that you've caused for him at the minimum and probably scrutinizing until the "internal policy" is publicly changed as well, so that others don't face these problems.
Are we 100% sure this opinion is not biased? That it's 100% Rollbit's [or other casino who implement the same policy] fault? Because, OTOH, if OP submit the KYC right away when asked, this whole mess can also be avoided. I can partially understand OP's decision of emergency cash [though I can suggest way more secure methods if the aim is simply to lock fund for emergency cash] but, like it or not, he shared portion of responsibility on this case too. He refused to perform KYC right away because he wanted to reverse the withdrawal request, he can achieve the same result by doing KYC and re-depositing it to Rollbit.
If I may repeat my question [which was a response to your own invitation to discuss this matter, but then you ignored],
[...]
If I may reverse the situation though, do you disagree that it'll be risky for a platform and probably expose themselves in abetting money laundering [and thus jeopardizing their license] because they go lenient with user by removing the second layer of AML policy and allow user to withdraw their fund to a different wallet, with consideration to the point I raised in #37?
[Sorry OP, I have no intention to pour salt to your wound, but some things need to be straigthened]
