I lost £104,000 to a crypto scam but kept it secret for years out of shame: SALLY SORTS IT
Proper news from Britain - News from Britain you won’t find anywhere else. Not the tosh the big media force-feed you every day!
In January 2022, I was tricked into a cryptocurrency investment promoted by a broker called WorldTradeCenter.
I only realised the promotion was fake after handing over £104,000. My Barclays bank account was drained.
I cashed in a Stocks and Shares ISA meant for my retirement, and took out loans to meet the requests of fraudsters who asked me to open an account with Revolut to buy crypto from legitimate brokers.
When I realised the con, I was embarrassed and became so depressed I couldn’t tell friends and family.
It’s only now that I can. Is there any way to recoup some of my losses?
Anon.
Sally Hamilton replies: For me to ask Barclays and Revolut to investigate, I needed to know the sequence of events.
You told me how an article had caught your eye in what you believed was Vogue magazine online, which described WorldTradeCenter and the experience of a client who used his investment to buy a yacht.
You think there must have been a link, which you clicked. This triggered communications via WhatsApp, mainly from a man calling himself Jonathan Miles.
The temptation was huge. As a self-employed single parent, you were struggling to keep your finances afloat.
Your daughter wanted to attend university abroad for a year. You were suffering from depression and on medication. You were an easy target.
The conmen encouraged you to test the water by committing just £10, to buy cryptocurrency from a broker, using cards linked to a Revolut account that you were persuaded to set up. When that quickly returned £82, this gave you confidence to invest more.
But they never let you take money out, always finding an excuse. There was pressure to add more to the Revolut account.
Over the months, you transferred £104,000. When you insisted you wanted to withdraw $71,400 on May 9, 2022, this was denied.
I believe this was when they decided they had gone as far as they could. In a last attempt to squeeze you dry, they told you the market had crashed and the business had collapsed.
Its ‘finance department’ contacted you to say it needed to return all the client money so it could operate again, but this required you to make more payments. In desperation, you paid up. Despite promises, your money was never returned.
The frightening realisation then dawned that you had been horribly cheated. There were days when you were so distressed you couldn’t concentrate on work, home, or your daughter.
You do not recall whether Barclays, with whom you have banked since your teenage years, intervened to question transactions.
You found a note you had taken following a call from Barclays one evening in June 2022 – soon after the scam concluded – from someone claiming to be from the fraud department.
Your nerves were in tatters and you weren’t sure the call was genuine. You brushed the caller off. You do not recall interactions with Revolut.
You spent three years trying to recover mentally and financially. When you felt confident enough to reveal all to me, you feared it was too late.
Under Financial Ombudsman Service rules, complaints can be considered within six years of an incident, so I knew Barclays and Revolut would be able to check records to see if they had done all they could to protect you.
I was not surprised to find the Cyprus-based WorldTradeCenter on the Financial Conduct Authority’s warning list of unauthorised firms. The regulator states ‘you should avoid dealing with this firm and beware of scams’.
Following my intervention, Barclays spent several weeks investigating. It maintains interventions were made. But last week, you received the news that it would be reimbursing £52,000, half your losses. You were elated.
Barclays says: ‘We are extremely sorry that our customer fell victim to a sophisticated investment scam, and recognise it has had a profound impact on their life.
‘After careful consideration, we have made a payment as a gesture of goodwill. As the funds were ultimately transferred to the scammer from the account with another bank, we have recommended they reach out to them for any further support.’
Revolut told me it was unable to trace the onward movements of funds sent to the crypto sites and there would be no reimbursement.
It said you were twice sent targeted warnings regarding impersonation scams and each time the payment was put on hold until you confirmed you wanted to proceed. You do not recall these warnings.
It says: ‘Revolut works hard and invests heavily to protect our customers as best we can through our fraud prevention technologies, and we prevented over £600 m in potential fraud in 2024.
‘Investment scams pose a real risk, with often life-changing sums being stolen. We urge customers to avoid so-called investment opportunities on social media platforms and ensure they undertake extensive due diligence prior to making investment decisions.
‘If it looks too good to be true, it probably is.’
Ombudsman rules on Revolut safe account fraud
I featured a case in April last year where a small business was swindled out of £85,000 by a crook posing as a member of Revolut’s fraud department.
The target moved funds in digital card transactions. Despite my plea that this was clearly a sophisticated fraud and it should have done more, Revolut, which offers banking-style services and at the time did not have a UK banking licence, declined to reimburse the firm. It said it issued warnings and steps in its authentication process were passed.
I encouraged the firm to seek the Financial Ombudsman’s view. It ruled Revolut should reimburse 75 per cent of losses, plus 8 per cent interest, which it has received.
- Write to Sally Hamilton at Sally Sorts It, Money Mail, Northcliffe House, 2 Derry Street, London W8 5TT or email sally@dailymail.co.uk — include phone number, address and a note addressed to the offending organisation giving them permission to talk to Sally Hamilton. Please do not send original documents as we cannot take responsibility for them. No legal responsibility can be accepted by the Daily Mail for answers given.
