Skip to content
CASE FILE · ICT-2026-0405 · Clone of a Regulated Firm

A “Regulated” Wealth Manager Borrowing a Real Firm’s Licence Number

An Edinburgh business owner moved £127,000 to Caldwell Mercer Capital, reassured by its FCA registration number and a convincing website. The number was genuine — it belonged to an unrelated, legitimate firm being impersonated. Acting fast on two fronts brought most of it back.

Recovery Report
Vector
Clone of a Regulated Firm
Instrument
Bank transfer converted to BTC
Reported loss
£127,000
Case opened
March 2026
Funds recovered
84% (£106,700)
Claimant
Business owner, Edinburgh UK

Illustrative case study. The scenario is a dramatized composite of real recovery casework; the broker and client names are fictional. Figures show typical outcomes, not a guarantee of results.

01How the clone was convincing

The claimant was researching bond and digital-asset funds and received a follow-up from “Caldwell Mercer Capital” after downloading a comparison guide. Their website was clean and corporate, listed a Mayfair address, and prominently displayed an FCA Firm Reference Number. He checked the number on the FCA register and it returned an authorised firm — so he proceeded.

What he could not see was that the FRN belonged to a real, unrelated company. This is a clone firm: fraudsters copy a genuine firm’s registration details and contact victims under a near-identical name, relying on the victim to verify the number but not the phone, email, and website against the register’s official contacts.

02Where it broke

He was instructed to transfer funds by bank to an account for “onboarding,” after which the firm would “allocate” his capital into a digital-asset bond. Two transfers totalling £127,000 left his account. The money was promptly converted to BTC and moved off the receiving institution.

When his “portfolio statements” stopped matching anything and his account manager stopped answering, he contacted us and his bank the same week. Two things made this case recoverable: he reported quickly under the UK’s APP (Authorised Push Payment) reimbursement framework, and the on-chain conversion left a clear, traceable path.

I checked the FCA number. It was real. Nobody had told me that checking the number is not the same as checking that the firm contacting you is the one who owns it.

03How we recovered most of it

  1. 01
    Triggered the APP reimbursement claim. We helped him file an Authorised Push Payment fraud claim with his bank immediately, within the reporting window that the reimbursement rules depend on.
  2. 02
    Proved the clone. We documented the mismatch between the cloned firm’s contact details and the genuine firm on the FCA register, and reported the clone to the FCA and Action Fraud.
  3. 03
    Traced the on-chain conversion. The bank-to-BTC conversion routed through a receiving exchange. We mapped the deposit addresses and the onward transfer and flagged them with the platform.
  4. 04
    Coordinated the two tracks. The bank’s reimbursement assessment and the exchange freeze ran in parallel, each reinforcing the other with the same evidence pack.
  5. 05
    Closed the claim. The bank reimbursed the larger share under the APP rules; the exchange returned a frozen remainder. A small residue had already dispersed and was written off.
Funds recovered84%

£106,700 of £127,000 returned through a combination of APP reimbursement and a partial exchange freeze. Fast reporting on both the banking and on-chain sides is what made this outcome possible.

04Threat indicators

  • A firm that displays an FCA number but whose phone, email, and website do not match the register’s official contacts.
  • A name that is almost — but not exactly — that of a well-known authorised firm.
  • Onboarding that asks you to bank-transfer to a personal or “holding” account before any product exists.
  • Funds converted to crypto immediately after they arrive.
  • Portfolio statements that never quite reconcile and an account manager who goes quiet under pressure.

Transferred funds to a “regulated” firm you now doubt?

If the payment was recent, the banking and on-chain windows may both still be open. We can verify the firm against the register and map where the money actually went.

Submit a Case →