Have you purchased The 79th Group loan note?

A Sudden Move Raises New Concerns
T&T Trustees, the appointed security trustee for several 79th Group companies, has unilaterally appointed administrators over 79th Luxury Living Six Limited, without any prior consultation with investors. This unexpected step has sparked serious concerns over whether the trustees are acting in the best interests of loan note holders.

Who Are the Administrators?
Stephen Arthur Cave and Gareth William Latimer of Grant Thornton Advisors Northern Ireland Limited were appointed via an out-of-court process under T&T Trustees' powers as a Qualifying Floating Charge Holder (QFCH).
This came as a surprise given the trustees’ previous insistence that they could not act without instructions from a Lender Majority Group.

Why Was the Lender Majority Group Ignored?
A Lender Majority Group (LMG) is meant to represent the collective will of loan note holders. Trustees typically defer to this group before making major decisions.
T&T Trustees had repeatedly claimed they were unable to act in earlier situations such as investigating missing assets -due to the absence of an LMG. So why have they now taken a significant enforcement step without first forming or consulting one?

This inconsistency has led to fears that the LMG was previously used to delay action, avoid accountability, or protect the scheme operator rather than the investors.

Lack of Disclosure and Transparency
T&T Trustees have provided no updates or public disclosures on:

• The value of loan notes in circulation
• The value or status of the secured assets
• Whether the appointment of administrators benefits investors-or protects the scheme from scrutiny

Without full transparency, these actions raise the possibility of mismanagement or a breach of trustee duty.

Are Trustees Fulfilling Their Legal Responsibilities?
Under UK trust law, trustees are required to:

• Act in good faith and in the best interests of the beneficiaries (the investors)
• Enforce security transparently and impartially
• Provide timely, material disclosures
• Avoid conflicts of interest

Any failure to meet these obligations could expose trustees to legal claims for breach of fiduciary duty or negligence.

Is the Trust Structure Even Working?
Investors did not appoint T&T Trustees, scheme operators did. Yet these trustees are the sole gatekeepers of investor security.
The current trust arrangement may offer the appearance of investor protection without actual enforceability. Many now believe the security trustee was used to delay redemptions and shield the scheme from accountability.

What Should Investors Do Now?
Insolvency & Law urges investors, especially those exposed to 79th Luxury Living Six Limited,to:

• Demand full disclosure from T&T Trustees, including total loan note liabilities and independent asset valuations
• Insist on an explanation for acting without consultation of a Lender Majority Group
• Withhold recognition of the trustee's legitimacy unless transparency is delivered

Join our coordinated group action to hold the appropriate parties accountable

Bank reimbursement schemes may offer some investors a way to recover funds, but strict conditions apply. Here’s what you need to know.

What Is a Bank Refund?

Some UK banks offer reimbursement for victims of Authorised Push Payment (APP) fraud-cases where a customer was tricked into sending money to a fraudster. This is governed by the Contingent Reimbursement Model (CRM) Code (voluntary, from May 2019) and the new Mandatory Reimbursement rules (effective October 2024).

The 3 Conditions You Must Meet

To qualify for a bank refund under these schemes, all the following conditions must typically apply:

1. You sent the funds from a UK bank account to another UK bank account.
   • Payments from overseas accounts or to non-UK accounts are not eligible.
2. The payment was made after one of these dates:
   • 28 May 2019 (under the voluntary CRM Code), or
   • 7 October 2024 (when mandatory rules come into force).
3. The bank recognises the transaction as fraud, not a civil dispute.
   • If your bank classifies the matter as a contractual or investment dispute, it may deny your claim.

Other Limitations to Be Aware Of

• Recovery is capped at £85,000 per bank, no matter how much you invested.
• Generic fraud warnings shown at the time of payment may be used to reject your claim.
• Even in strong cases, banks may refuse reimbursement, requiring you to escalate the matter to the Financial Ombudsman Service, which can take 6 to 12 months to reach a decision.

Key Takeaway

While bank refunds can help in limited situations, they are not designed for full recovery, accountability, or complex investment losses. They do not investigate wrongdoing or pursue directors or third parties involved in the scheme. For more comprehensive recovery options, legal action may be more effective.

The 79th Group is now under formal investigation by the City of London Police in relation to suspected widespread fraud. Since this development the company has stopped all interest and redemption payments to loan note holders -leaving many investors in the UK and abroad deeply concerned about the safety of their funds.

Arrests Confirm the Seriousness of the Investigation

Four individuals connected to The 79th Group have been arrested and released on bail as part of the ongoing investigation. While no formal charges have been announced, these arrests signal that authorities are taking the allegations extremely seriously.

Why Have Interest and Redemption Payments Been Suspended?

The 79th Group has publicly cited "significant financial risks" as the reason for suspending investor payments. However, it's widely believed that these financial risks stem directly from the ongoing fraud investigation.

The company’s inability to meet basic obligations -such as regular interest payments and redemption of matured investments -raises questions about its financial health, liquidity, and the true backing behind its loan note products.

The Risk Going Forward

Investors are now facing the real possibility that funds are unlikely to be recovered in full ,or at all, if the group’s financial position is worse than initially presented. The freeze on payments and growing legal scrutiny point to a high-risk situation with signs of possible misrepresentation, mismanagement, or fraud.

“The Police Are Investigating -So I’ll Get My Money Back, Right?”

It’s a common belief, but unfortunately, it’s also a misunderstanding that could delay or even derail your ability to recover your investment.

Here’s why:

There are two separate processes at play in the case of The 79th Group:

1. The criminal investigation by the City of London Police into suspected fraud involving individuals connected to the company.
2. The civil recovery process, where investors take legal action against the corporate entities that issued the loan notes.

While both stem from the same situation, these processes operate in entirely different legal arenas, with different goals, timeframes, and outcomes.

The police investigation aims to establish criminal wrongdoing and hold individuals accountable. It does not guarantee compensation for investors, and any restitution -if it occurs -may come much later, if at all.

The civil process, on the other hand, is where you as an investor can take direct legal steps to pursue recovery. Waiting for a criminal case to conclude could mean missing the window to act strategically through insolvency or civil litigation.

Understanding this distinction is critical. Mistaking a criminal investigation for a route to recovery is more than a legal error -it’s a strategic one that could cost you valuable time and money.

Insolvency & Law is actively challenging the recent appointment of administrators over 79th Luxury Living Six Limited -a move made unilaterally by T&T Trustees Limited without consultation with loan note holders or a Lenders Majority Group.

What Happened?

On 16 April 2025, T&T Trustees Limited filed a Notice of Appointment of Administrators at the High Court, appointing Stephen Arthur Cave and Gareth William Latimer of Grant Thornton Advisors (NI) LLP. This action was taken under powers claimed through a floating charge granted in June 2024.

Critically, the appointment was made one day after Insolvency & Law filed a creditor’s winding-up petition. Without any consultation with investors or their representatives.

Why We're Challenging It

Insolvency & Law has filed a formal application with the High Court under Schedule B1, Paragraphs 74 and/or 88 of the Insolvency Act 1986, seeking to:

• Set aside or terminate the administrator appointment, or
• Replace the current administrators with an independent insolvency practitioner nominated by Insolvency & Law.

The grounds for the challenge include:

• The floating charge is invalid or a sham, offering no real protection to investors
• The appointment was made in bad faith to pre-empt our winding-up petition
• T&T Trustees acted without investor consultation, despite previously insisting they required direction from a Lenders Majority Group
• No transparency has been provided on secured assets, valuations, or loan note liabilities
• A clear conflict of interest exists between the trustee and investor interests

Why This Matters to Investors

This legal action is about more than just technical process -it goes to the heart of the concerns loan note holders have raised from the beginning:

• Was the trust structure genuine, or built to shield the company from scrutiny?
• Are T&T Trustees acting in the best interests of investors -or protecting The 79th Group?
• Can the administration process be trusted if it was triggered under questionable circumstances?

By pursuing this challenge, Insolvency & Law is taking decisive action to ensure proper independent oversight of the administration and to protect the interests of loan note holders as creditors.

Next Steps

Our application is currently before the High Court, and we are continuing to push for:

• Disclosure of all trust and security documents
• Full transparency on secured assets and liabilities
• A properly appointed, independent insolvency practitioner who will act exclusively in the interests of creditors

Investors deserve a process they can trust. We will continue to update loan note holders as the court proceedings develop.