Binance RedotPay lawsuit proceedings have begun in Hong Kong, with Binance-affiliated companies seeking $472.8 million from RedotPay’s founders over allegations that more than 470,000 Binance Card users were diverted to RedotPay’s competing payment platform. RedotPay has rejected the allegations and said it will defend itself vigorously.
Binance Companies File Hong Kong Case
The lawsuit was reportedly brought by three companies connected to Binance: Nest Trading Ltd., DistributedTechnologies Ltd., and Chaintecs Consulting Singapore Pte.
The plaintiffs are seeking nearly $473 million in damages from RedotPay co-founders Gao Zhangpeng, Chan Wa Choi and Yao Chao. Binance-affiliated entities claim the founders breached the terms of a commercial agreement designed to govern the relationship between the two companies.
According to reports based on the Hong Kong court filing, the agreement was intended to define how RedotPay could work with Binance users and handle transactions linked to Binance’s payment services.
Binance alleges that RedotPay used the partnership to attract customers to its competing crypto card product. The plaintiffs say more than 470,000 Binance Card users were directed toward RedotPay during the disputed period.
Dispute Focuses on Card Top-Ups
The main issue involves the use of Binance Pay funds to top up RedotPay cards. Binance-linked companies claim RedotPay allowed users to move money from Binance accounts into RedotPay’s stablecoin cards outside the limits of their agreement.
The plaintiffs reportedly argue that RedotPay benefited from Binance’s customer base and payment network while promoting its own competing service. The lawsuit claims that roughly $304 million passed through the disputed funding channel.
Binance is said to have become aware of the issue in early 2026. The company reportedly cut off the payment channel on April 3, 2026. Binance also claims that a replacement agreement signed in March 2025 required the companies to keep their funds and payment activities separate.
RedotPay had previously presented direct Binance Pay deposits as a way to increase user adoption, according to reported investor materials. Binance now argues that the same feature was not permitted under the final commercial arrangement. Even as legal disputes emerge between industry participants, institutional demand for digital assets continues to grow, a trend highlighted in Institutional Crypto Trading Hits Record High.
How the $472.8M Claim Was Calculated
The damages figure is reportedly based on Binance’s estimate of the long-term value of each affected customer. The company values each user at approximately $925.
Based on more than 470,000 users, that calculation produces a claim of about $472.8 million. The amount does not necessarily represent money directly taken from Binance. Instead, it appears to reflect estimated future revenue from users, including transaction fees, payment activity, and other services.
This calculation could become a major point of debate during the case. RedotPay may challenge the number of users involved, whether those customers were actually diverted, and whether the estimated lifetime value can be treated as a recoverable legal loss.
The court will also need to examine the wording of the agreements and determine whether the disputed top-ups violated the companies’ contractual obligations.
RedotPay Plans to Defend the Case
RedotPay has said that the lawsuit will not affect its daily operations. The company expressed confidence in its legal position and stated that it is vigorously defending all claims. The dispute also serves as a reminder that trust and operational transparency remain critical for digital asset businesses, especially when managing customer funds, as discussed in Crypto Custody Solutions.
Because the matter is now before the court, RedotPay has reportedly chosen not to comment in detail on the allegations or ongoing legal proceedings. The company’s full response is likely to appear through future court filings and hearings.
A related case has also reportedly been filed in Singapore by Chaintecs Consulting Singapore against RedotPay-related parties. A hearing is scheduled as the broader dispute continues.
Possible Impact on RedotPay’s IPO Plans
The legal case comes as RedotPay continues to develop its crypto payment business. The company has attracted attention for its stablecoin card services and expanding customer base.
RedotPay has reportedly been linked to plans for a potential public listing at a valuation of more than $4 billion. It has also been associated with major financial institutions that could advise on the proposed offering.
The lawsuit may lead investors to ask tougher questions about RedotPay’s agreements, internal controls, payment systems, and customer acquisition methods. However, the existence of a lawsuit does not establish that RedotPay or its founders are liable.
What the Dispute Means for Crypto Payments
The case shows how valuable customer relationships have become in the crypto payments industry. Exchanges and fintech companies are competing not only in trading but also in stablecoin cards, digital wallets, merchant payments, and cross-border transfers. As payment products continue to evolve, understanding how these services work is becoming increasingly important, as explained in Crypto Debit Cards Explained.
Partnerships between these businesses often involve shared users, connected payment systems, and multiple revenue streams. As a result, disagreements can emerge over who owns the customer relationship and which company should benefit from future transactions.
The Binance-RedotPay dispute may encourage crypto companies to create clearer rules for customer referrals, card top-ups, data access, marketing, revenue sharing, and competing products.
Final Thoughts
The Binance RedotPay lawsuit is still developing, and no final judgment has been reported. Binance-linked companies accuse RedotPay of diverting users and violating its agreements, while RedotPay rejects the claims and plans to defend itself.
The case will likely focus on the terms of the partnership, the disputed $304 million in transactions, the number of users involved, and the method used to calculate $472.8 million in damages. Its outcome could influence how crypto companies structure partnerships and calculate losses when customer relationships move between competing platforms.
