ID
PARTS iD, Inc.
stock NYSEAMERICAN

Always leave your passport at the hotel and take a color photocopy with you and your physical ID

Hi, we’re sorry to hear about your experience, especially given the urgency around the withdrawal and the circumstances you’ve shared. We understand how concerning it would be when funds needed for an important payment are delayed.
We’d like to review what happened, and understand where we fell short. If you’ve already raised this with us, please share your Ticket ID here so we can check the details and get back to you.
If you haven’t raised a ticket yet, please write to us at [support@groww.in](mailto:support@groww.in) regarding the concern. Once done, kindly share the Ticket ID here so we can look into it.
We appreciate you sharing this feedback with us.

Its for the COT report, anyone having a larre tradee ID reports opositions... at tuesday. Do you have a large trader id?

What country are you from? In France I had to input my national ID and take a selfie. That was all!

Large Trader ID

I knew FICO was crashing at $985/share. I warned a lot of people here. I even saw a user named u/Quantatitve (Indian guy) and u/RayteoAI post multiple Substack and AI-generated reports here mentioning that it was a buy at those prices. They were trying to pump the price. I called them out, and now I don't see their post on Reddit anymore. I think they deleted their user ID or changed it.
As for Nike, I would have also stayed out too, but the prices looked reasonably good. I bought this at earnings so I guess this was a bad move. I was highly criticizing Nike, but for some reason I bought this to speculate thinking they might turnaround. Nike messed up big time by removing their products from the shelf. I think Nike seems a good stock for a long-term hold, though. However, I'm not sure if I should add or hold on to it now... I don't know wtf is the CEO doing at this point. 😂🥲

Your example is SSO, not passkeys, right? When a site uses SSO they just ask a trusted provider (e.g. google) for the user's email address, and accept that ID as authoritative without maintaining a password for the site.

Looking primarily for 1gram bars. Must have Mint Mark ID on back. Assay or no assay…
Venmo or zelle

Hello is it possible to bypass this with support? I can show my ID or something

Note you can open an account online ; I did years ago and never needed to mail them anything
This usually means something went wrong and they cannot verify your ID or something. You can mail the forms to them or stop by an office and hand delver them if one is near you
Or call them and see if there is some sort of special email you should send them to

Honestly, it seems like the ultimate goal *is* to crash the world economy and usher in a new age of technofascism once all the pieces have been placed (widespread interlinked and centralized digital ID, consumers priced out of home and personal computer ownership, hyperscale datacenters integrated with an even stronger Palantir and Oracle, CBDC's and a cashless society, squeezing what little cash is left from the middle class to complete the wealth transfer, I could go on...)
These people don't care about money anymore, they need the control. They have their assets, their island bunkers, their industry. After a while, we're just going to be a drain on their resources. These people only need the 5% to survive now. The rest of us can probably look forward to eventually getting predator drone'd.

Das Werk in Emden, das auf VWs Abschlussliste steht, schiebt als einziges deutsches Werk gerade Sonderschichten. Da dort die teuren Elektroautos wie der ID.4 und der ID.7 gebaut werden, dürfte ein Streik schon wehtun.
Der ID. Tiguan wird auch dort gebaut werden und gerade zum Serienanlauf kann das Schwierigkeiten verursachen.

Sounds like you are confusing tax residency with physical residency. You are saying you aren’t in the US (foreign address) and don’t pay taxes to the US (W-8) but hey here’s my US taxpayer ID number that says I should pay taxes to the US. See the confusion?
I just googled Fidelity residency certificate and it showed their “Reasonable Written Explanation Checklist” where there is a checkbox for students. Read over that and reach out to Fidelity directly for instructions on their form.

Didn’t know this is a thing. If it asks for my ID, I too would never login again.

I've read your post, have you raised this as a dispute or fraud? Chargebacks would only be available if you have authorised the payment. So your statement to revolute that you did not make the payment would mean that the claim is ineligible for a dispute chargeback under scheme rules. Dispute claims aren't governed by local laws but rules set vi visa/MC/Amex.
100% impartial opinion based only on the details provided:
On the fraud side of it(previously advisor in fraud, aml and consumer disputes), from reading the information. From the banks side of an investigation they would see biometric log in verifying your identity as the user(face ID). Funds passed though Apple pay (assume it was your pre authorised Apple pay account?) Once its gone, they have no sight of it. Unfortunately, stating that you didnt make the payment, doesn't mean they will refund straight away ot accept the loss as fraud, specifically when their systems show a biometric log in before your money was moved. If they hold evidence which suggests it was authorised by the account holder & was not fraud then the claim would generally be declined. This is the distinction between authorised and unauthorised that is used and applied to fraud claims though the bank.
At present honestly, there isnt really much they could investigate on their side to show or suggest it was unauthorised. They can't access somes account and claim the funds back under any western law im(im UK based) aware of. Yes the Apple pay walled does complicate the matter as they cannot, even if they could, be certain the funds received back are your funds removed from the account if that makes sense?
As banks are empowered to make the decision on whats consider an unauthorised transaction and authorised within the evidence frame work and evidence they can see, the 2 declined points which suggests to them its not fraud would be face ID log in (can suggest you logged in) as well as funds have been removed over a 2 month period which A) whichisnt typical for fraud & B) making a judgement of how the movement was not seen by the account holder over a long period of time especially if you're logging in yourself. The fact that your ex had your phone isnt something they can quantify or establish.
Honest opinion 1) if raised as a dispute, recontact and raise a direct fraud claim (might be unsuccessful due to the above though).
2) Assuming law enforcement aren't going to fully investigate due to the value, unsure of US guidelines for fraud investigations via law enforcement, I would take this up as part of your divorce process, especially if you can evidence the movement of funds if possible.

Small snippet of information I saw on a presentation on synthetic identify fraud: Threat attackers have been observed using some sort of AI-assisted attack that will successfully bypass live video-based ID verification, the type where you hold up and ID and move it around on screen. It's some sort of poisoning attack, I couldn't get a good idea in the short time the presenter talked about this. In general, AI-assisted digital verification bypass attacks are a hot topic right now as AI models get better and better at simulating video.
How might that materially affect the value proposition of the various digital identity services offered by this company?

We went through exactly this running multiple strategies on one account early on, and the real lesson was that raw position count isn't trustworthy ground truth on its own. We had a case where one strategy's position got silently stopped out, but the account's blended position for that symbol stayed positive the whole time because a completely different strategy also held shares in the same ticker — so just checking "is the broker position still positive" said everything was fine when it wasn't. What actually worked was checking whether our own specific resting stop order (scoped to our own client ID) was still live, not the raw position number, since that's the one thing that's actually ours regardless of what else the account is holding.
For disconnects specifically — had a real one just a couple of days ago where a stop fill happened during a brief connection drop, got missed in real time, and only got picked up on the next reconnect by comparing against the broker's own realized PnL for that symbol rather than trusting local state. That's the core pattern that's worked for us: always treat the broker's own numbers as truth and reconcile against them regularly, not just at startup, never trust your own local state as the source of truth.
Eventually we moved to one broker account per strategy specifically to get rid of this whole class of bug at the root rather than keep patching around it — cross-contamination between accounts just isn't possible anymore once they're actually separate. Worth it if you can swing it.
No real experience with the reversal/opposite-sides scenario though, since everything here is long-only — can't speak to that one.

Having a very unfortunate and frustrating experience with Revolut right now.
I divorced my ex partner after I found out that he had transferred about $3000 out of 2 of my bank accounts using a complex scheme (it’s very clever but cruel at the same time).
Step 1: Takes my phone off the bedside charger while I’m sleeping, proceeds to use my sleeping face to break thru Face ID. Copies a bunch of personal information off of the phone thru AirDrop, then enters my BOA mobile app.
Step 2: Transfers roughly $3000 in multiple transactions over 2 months from BOA to Revolut via Apple Pay, then from Revolut via Apple Pay to his account.
I’m convinced he knows that Apple Pay/Apple Cash is extremely difficult to report fraud about and thus there is a very low chance of him having the money he took taken away from him.
Step 3: After 2 months, he disappears. His family and friends don’t know where he is and may have filed a police missing persons report. He is obviously using the stolen funds to live off.
I never authorized any of these transfers, nor did he take my card etc. From reading other posts on this site, it appears this dispute has fallen into this grey area because it involves Apple transfer methods. I have seen some people saying that “this isn’t Revolut’s business/liability” but I would like to absolutely dispute that when it comes to US accounts and US law.
I have filed a police report and an FTC fraud affidavit, and divorce papers.
I reported the fraud to Revolut first, because the money moved from one of my accounts to another is basically still in my accounts but the money exited my possession when he Apple Cashed it to himself.
The claim was denied in less than a day, with no review or investigation. I have spoken to over 5 agents, who say that this is “final” and are quoting European regulations and do not understand that, as a registered financial institution in the US, Regulation E rules supercede whatever jumble of internal “policies” they are quoting.
For context, Regulation E rules basically are what secures US bank consumers and defines what is an “authorized” or “unauthorized” transfer - the rules clearly state that this was “unauthorized” since this is basically both “burglary/robbery” and fraud, similar to what happens in Latin America when people are drugged and their phones are taken and drained.
(§1005.2(m)) is the particular piece of this which governs “authorized” and “unauthorized” transactions.
Revolut are acting like they have no responsibility for this because of their network rules/internal policies, but the CFPB (banking federal regulator) have said that Revolut’s duty to us does not depend on their network rules or whether a chargeback is possible - our money is still supposed to be insured and thus they would owe us the money back.
None of these 5 agents would provide any documentation whatsoever regarding their denial, which is illegal under 12 CFR 1005.11(d)(1). Banks must provide this documentation.
The screenshot above is the actual denial from a “senior representative” who kept repeating himself and refused to provide the documents I’m legally entitled to.
He also admits that Revolut did not follow their own supposed internal policies on dispute.
I am not a lawyer, nor a banker. I am a regular person that just got out of a 4 year DV relationship that ended with a huge negative “bang”.
By contrast, BOA has refunded the money that was taken directly from that account within 2 days. They, as a “real bank”, do not subject customers to this kind of rediculous treatment.
It appears Revolut staff have absolutely no training on US banking regulations despite operating in the country. They say no US support is available and it’s very obvious that they are getting confused between European and US rules.
I no longer feel like my money is safe with Revolut, nor that they act like a real, authorized bank. I do not recommend them to anyone else since they continue to pick and choose which rules they follow while flagrantly violating US laws.
I have already filed a CFPB complaint and am taking this to the regulators. I don’t know what else to do.

I’m surprised they haven’t changed the Nike ID thing to some type of AI collab where you can describe the shoe you want it’ll create an actual product you can buy

I live how they found the HIKACKERS ID just laying on the sidewalk. Who tf would believe that