r client is a 57-year-old man from West Yorkshire who coaches grassroots football in his spare time. He had banked with First Direct for over 17 years — an unremarkable, disciplined customer with no history of international payments and no experience of cryptocurrency.
In late 2024 he had just received a released pension lump sum. That single fact — a newly liquid saver in his late fifties — is a well-documented target profile for organised investment fraud.
The scammers knew exactly how to reach him. They cold-called him about his own pension, cited details that felt personal, and introduced themselves as “Frank” from a firm called “Fiatvisions”. None of it was real.
Double Victimisation
After the initial scam, a third fraudster contacted him posing as a “fund recovery service” — a common secondary attack on already-defrauded victims. He avoided the trap and came to a regulated firm instead.
Inside the “Fiatvisions” Pension Scam
- The Cold Call
‘Frank’ from ‘Fiatvisions’ calls out of the blue — but references the client’s own pension. Personalised details manufacture instant credibility. - The Fake Platform
The victim is walked through a slick ‘trading platform’ showing live positions, dashboards and support chat — every screen a fabrication. - The Legitimising Return
About £900 is paid back to the victim’s bank account, dressed up as ‘first profits’ — enough to justify the next, much larger transfer. - The structured drain
Six transfers over eleven weeks — two sized under £8,000 and £10,000 thresholds on the same day — drain £29,117 to Critto Technologies, a Luxembourg on-ramp. Then silence.
The Money Trail
Six transfers. One drained account.
All funds were converted GBP→EUR and sent to Critto Technologies, a payment institution in Luxembourg operating as a cryptocurrency on-ramp. From there, funds moved into criminal-controlled wallets.
Why this case sat outside the mandatory APP scheme
The PSR’s mandatory reimbursement regime covers UK Faster Payments only. These were cross-border GBP→EUR transfers to Luxembourg, and 18 months had elapsed — putting the case beyond the scheme. We rebuilt the claim on the bank’s own common-law and regulatory duties instead.