[Question] Canada — has anyone got a straight answer on escrow
The title is the whole question — Canada — has anyone got a straight answer on escrow — but here is why I am asking.
A token symbol identifies an asset, not a network. The same symbol commonly exists on several chains with incompatible address formats, and sending across that boundary is generally unrecoverable.
What is and is not the supplier’s fault, since this board generates unfair complaints.
Not theirs: the network fee, chain congestion, confirmation time, the rate moving between quote and send, and a payment sent on the wrong chain. Theirs: which networks they accept, how quickly they credit a confirmed payment, and whether the address they gave you was correct and communicated clearly.
Keeping those columns separate makes the reports here far more useful. A thread titled "supplier took my payment" that turns out to describe forty minutes of unconfirmed transaction helps nobody and follows people around for years.
The one mistake that cannot be undone, and why it keeps happening.
The same token symbol exists on multiple chains. The wallet interface shows you the symbol prominently and the network in small type. Sending on the wrong chain to an address that looks perfectly valid usually means the funds are unrecoverable by either party.
The protection is procedural rather than technical: confirm the network in writing with the recipient before sending, verify the address format matches that network, and send a small test first. None of that requires understanding the chain — it requires treating the network field as the most important thing on the screen, which the interface design does not encourage.
If somebody has the same thing measured a different way, post it next to mine and we will see whether they agree.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Rate quotes expire because the underlying rate moves. A short expiry is ordinary; urgency about your decision is a separate signal and should be read separately.
Left up. It has a hash, a chain and a timeline, which is what a payment report needs.
ask which networks they actually accept before you order
fees vary by chain and by hour, not by supplier
Sent a test amount first on a large order. Cost me a fraction of a percent and I have done it every time since.
Right, and confirmations are the status. "Sent" means nothing until the chain agrees.
Sent a test amount first on a large order.
Agreed — and the hash is the receipt. Nothing else is.
Small fix — that is the network fee, not a supplier charge. The distinction matters for the complaint you are making.
Agreed — and the hash is the receipt.
Disagreeing here: that is a network fee at a busy hour and it is not the supplier’s doing.
Disagreeing here: that is a network fee at a busy hour and it is not the supplier’s doing.
This is the check that prevents the only genuinely unrecoverable mistake in this thread.
Correction: that address format is not the chain you named. Worth checking before anybody follows this.
Careful, that address format belongs to a different chain and sending to it would not end well.
Did you send a test amount first?
keep the hash, it is the only receipt that exists
keep the hash, it is the only receipt that exists
Adding the cheap insurance — test amount first on anything large.
nobody legitimate needs the payment in the next ten minutes
network and address, checked twice, before anything else
Yes — the same token symbol on two chains catches people constantly and it is unrecoverable.
- 1Sent a test amount first on a large order. Cost me a fraction of a percent…8 comments in this branch · started by u/cesar_teixeira
- 2Careful, that address format belongs to a different chain and sending to it…6 comments in this branch · started by u/jonas_eriksen