Print this article
Wilson, scourge of sophisticated HNW investors, gets seven years' prison
Chris Hamblin
Clearview Publishing
19 February 2014
Wilson of
Bournemouth in Dorset has been sentenced to seven years at Southwark
Crown Court defrauding investors of over £21m. Sources close to the
case say that some of these were 'sophisticated investors' (as
defined in the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000) and
high-profile people in the investment industry into the bargain.
The sentence included
seven years for fraud, 18 months for not being authorised by the
Financial Conduct Authority and two and four years for counts of
forgery, with all the terms to run concurrently. This is the longest
sentence for anyone prosecuted by the Financial Conduct Authority
(FCA) and the second longest for either the FCA or its predecessor,
the Financial Services Authority (FSA). Sentencing Wilson,
Judge Grieve said: "It was an utterly shameless confidence
fraud. The purpose was to give a lifestyle of untold
lavishness and luxury." Unauthorised
investments Wilson pled guilty in
December 2013 after it was found that the unauthorised investment
firm he ran, SureInvestment, was a sham that had cost investors
millions. More than 300 investors trusted Wilson with £21.8 million.
When the FSA closed the scam down, £17.54 million was owed to
investors and it is estimated that £5.39 million in total will be
recovered. Our source added: "He
continued to get money out of these sophisticated HNW investors even
after the FSA froze his business, which I think happened in October
2010 but don't quote me on that. Don't quote me on anything."
The FSA did, indeed, obtain a court order to freeze assets and
restrain the unauthorised activity at that date. When the scale of
Wilson's dishonesty became clear, the FSA began a criminal
investigation. He was arrested and his house and offices searched in
a joint operation with Dorset Police. Wilson nevertheless ignored the
FSA High Court injunction and kept going. Wilson set up
SureInvestment in 2003 when he was 24 years old. Within a few months
the FSA was telling him that he had to be authorised to continue to
trade or had to close down. Wilson later lied to the FSA, claiming
that he had wound up the firm and repaid his investors. To verify
this the FSA contacted investors but uncovered nothing because Wilson
had persuaded them to tell it that he had returned their money,
whereas in fact he had persuaded them to invest in a separate
‘overseas’ fund. Actually, Wilson had
placed the money in his personal SureInvestment UK bank account. Only
20% of all monies that investors gave him between 2003 and 2010 was
ever traded and when Wilson did trade, despite his claims to be a
'maestro', he invariably lost money. During the lifetime of the
scheme, Wilson took £21.8 million from investors. Of that, only £4.2
million was ever traded, with Wilson losing £2.25 million. The money
that came in from credulous new investors paid those who wished to
withdraw their funds, Ponzi-style. Lessons to be learnt The lesson that the
average wealth advisor must draw from this escapade is that it is
vital to ask the regulator about every investment scheme that the HNW
is considering. The FSA would undoubtedly have told investors after
October 2010 that it had frozen SureInvestments' resources and indeed
the civil court order would have been public and therefore detectable
to the assiduous wealth advisor/manager. However, Wilson was crafty
enough to persuade investors to tell the FSA that they had been
repaid and this must have been something of a bar to successful 'due
diligence' at the time. He also spent large
sums creating the impression that his firm was modish and successful.
£4.8 million went on an exclusive office in Poole, complete with
bar, massage room, games area and life coach. It was also filled with
‘traders’ who were merely doing simulated computer trading. Many
felt lucky to have a job and to be learning from a trader of
purported genius like Wilson, so much so that many persuaded their
family and friends to invest. HNWs are vulnerable to such shows of
prestige. Another lesson that
wealth advisors might ponder is that even 'sophisticated investors'
are gullible when somebody plausible offers them staggering gains.
This happens for the same reason that '419' fraudsters (who offer
large sums to anybody who will help them indulge in some
money-laundering, but then defraud their subscribers of some
relatively small handling fees and disappear) often target HNWs –
because many of them are entrepreneurial and therefore willing to
take a chance themselves.