Access Soft is recorded on the SARFund database as a reported clone-of-a-real-exchange front. The case is currently in under forensic review and has been assigned for coordination with the recovery counsel handling this matter.

The reports cluster around three operational signatures: the platform promised guaranteed returns, demanded “tax” or “verification” fees before withdrawal, and blocked withdrawal requests. SARFund treats this combination as sufficient grounds to maintain an active case file pending recovery action.

Reports have surfaced via TrustPilot complaints and Facebook group reports, with corroborating threads on Quora question threads. Victim accounts converge on identical timelines and identical withdrawal-blockade tactics.

What evidence helps most

Transaction hashes (the on-chain proof of your deposit), screenshots of the broker dashboard, KYC documents you submitted, and full conversation history with any account manager. These four pieces let the partner build a defensible chain of custody.

Why the recovery partner is masked

Listing the partner publicly creates two problems: it tips off perpetrators, who then accelerate fund-laundering, and it invites recovery-scam impersonators to clone the partner brand. Both happen often enough that masking is the only defensible default.

If you deposited with Access Soft, your case may already be on file. Submit your evidence to be matched and connected privately with the recovery team handling this matter.

SARFund does not guarantee recovery. All recovery actions are conducted by independent partners. Submission is free. SARFund is an intermediary case registry, not a recovery firm.