Bitcoin ATMs
Vaughan v. Athena Bitcoin Inc.
Date: Nov. 6, 2025
Issue: Whether Athena Bitcoin Inc. violated Florida’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (FDUTPA) by failing to disclose excessive fees.
Case Summary: A proposed consumer class sued Athena Bitcoin, one of the largest bitcoin ATM operators, in the Southern District of Florida, alleging it violated the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act by using inflated exchange rates, undisclosed surcharges, and additional processing fees.
Athena is one of the country’s largest bitcoin Automated Teller Machine (BTM) operators, maintaining nearly 3,600 machines nationwide. BTMs allow consumers to purchase cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin using cash, and operators typically charge a small percentage fee or exchange spread that is disclosed before a transaction is confirmed.
According to Plaintiffs, Athena systematically imposed excessive and undisclosed fees on BTM users. Plaintiffs claimed that rather than provide clear and transparent disclosures, Athena pocketed hundreds of thousands of dollars in hidden charges, sometimes up to 26% per transaction. Plaintiffs noted that, alternatively, bitcoin can be purchased online for fees ranging from 0.24% to 3%. Plaintiffs also alleged Athena misrepresented its refund policy by enforcing a strict no-refunds rule in its terms of service while arbitrarily capping refunds when consumers demanded them.
In its complaint, Plaintiffs allege that Athena violated FDUTPA by engaging in a range of unfair and deceptive practices, including failing to disclose its true transaction fees, using unconscionable contract terms, and denying consumers meaningful opportunities to recover excessive BTM Fees. As described by Plaintiffs, Athena deceived consumers about both the existence and the size of its hidden fees and created a confusing, burdensome process for anyone seeking a refund. Moreover, Athena compounded this misconduct by operating BTMs without proper licensing, oversight, or consumer-protection safeguards, allowing the company to impose undisclosed fees without constraint. These practices misrepresent key transaction information, violate industry transparency norms, and constitute unlawful conduct under the FDUTPA, according to Plaintiffs.
Bottom Line: Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief, restitution, damages, civil penalties, and all other appropriate relief to ensure that Athena fully discloses its fee structure, implements transparent pricing mechanisms, and provides an adequate refund process for consumers.
Document: Complaint
