Binance-affiliated entities filed suit against the three co-founders of RedotPay in Hong Kong this week, alleging the stablecoin card company diverted more than 470,000 users away from Binance's own payment products in what the filing calls a fraudulent scheme, and seeking $472.8 million in damages.
The petition, filed by Nest Trading, DistributedTechnologies, and Chaintecs Consulting Singapore against RedotPay co-founders Gao Zhangpeng, Chan Wa Choi, and Yao Chao, centers on a narrow but consequential technical claim: that RedotPay let users top up RedotPay cards directly with Binance Pay funds, without segregating that money, contrary to the terms both companies had agreed to. Binance says it discovered the practice after March 2026 and cut the channel off entirely on April 3, putting the total value that moved through it at roughly $304 million. The damages figure is built on a claimed lifetime value of $925 per diverted user. A related suit filed by Chaintecs against RedotPay affiliates in Singapore has a hearing scheduled for Friday.
RedotPay has rejected the allegations. "We are confident in our legal position, and are vigorously defending all claims," the company said in a statement, adding that the proceedings have no impact on its day-to-day operations.
According to Bloomberg's review of the underlying agreements, this is the second time the same top-up mechanism has caused a breakdown between the two companies. RedotPay's first Binance partnership began in November 2023 and collapsed within six months over the identical issue. A replacement deal signed in March 2025 was supposed to keep the money separate this time. Bloomberg also reported that RedotPay's own 2024 Series A pitch materials named the Binance tie-up as a way to accelerate user adoption and flagged direct deposits from Binance Pay to RedotPay Card as a feature — the same practice Binance's petition now calls prohibited. RedotPay's public announcement of that funding round never mentioned Binance.
Binance's complaint lands at a specific moment in RedotPay's growth. The company signed its March 2025 replacement deal with Binance the same month it announced a $40 million round led by Lightspeed and reported more than 3 million users. Blockhead covered the next leg of that growth in December, when RedotPay closed a $107 million Series B led by Goodwater Capital , pushing its user base past 6 million and its annualized payment volume above $10 billion. Binance's math implies that roughly one in six of the users RedotPay added in that window came through the Binance channel it now says was improperly run — a detail that matters well beyond the courtroom, since RedotPay is currently pursuing a US listing that could value the company above $4 billion, with JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs, and Jefferies reportedly engaged. Blockhead has tracked RedotPay's rise through each funding round, from its unicorn-status $47 million raise led by Coinbase Ventures last September to its earlier Visa-powered card partnership with StraitsX — and this lawsuit is now the first serious question mark attached to that trajectory.
The dispute leaves RedotPay's prospective underwriters with a specific problem: how much of the growth story they're being asked to price was actually RedotPay's to begin with. RedotPay announced a SOC 2 Type II audit in July, though its scope isn't public and can't directly answer Binance's claim. The company's own user and revenue figures, meanwhile, still come from RedotPay itself rather than from any independent filing. None of that resolves the underlying question the Hong Kong and Singapore courts will now spend months on — whether RedotPay's rapid rise reflects an independent product succeeding, or one exchange's user base being pulled out from under it.