The 79th Group: When Law Meets Accountability- Why Creditors Deserve Their Day in Court

The story of The 79th Group is no longer just about a failed investment scheme. It is about what happens to ordinary people when the system that should protect them instead pushes them to the margins. Behind every claim is someone who trusted, someone who saved, someone now facing the consequences of a collapse they did not cause.

In October 2025, Insolvency & Law Ltd filed a High Court application challenging Kroll Advisory Ltd’s rejection of creditor claims submitted on behalf of investors. We were compelled to act because the message was clear: victims of a suspected fraud were being shut out. Not by evidence, but by a rigid and misguided interpretation of the law.

Our stance is simple and human: people who have already lost their money should not be made to lose their voice as well.

The Legal Issue

Kroll Advisory, led by Robert Goodhew and Andrew Stoneman, rejected our proof of debts on a technicality. They argued that the 79th loan notes were “non-transferable without issuer consent.” On paper, it sounds authoritative. In reality, it collapses under the weight of the law itself.

Under section 136 of the Law of Property Act 1925, once a company defaults, its repayment obligations crystallise into accrued debts. These accrued debts can be freely assigned. You don’t need a failing company’s permission to collect what you are owed. Debt is debt.

And in this case, the issuers are insolvent, inactive, and under criminal investigation. They are in no position to grant or refuse anything. Yet the Administrators have leaned on this clause to exclude genuine creditors from the very process designed to protect them.

The Bigger Picture

This is not an isolated problem. It is part of a wider ecosystem-one where the same names, the same firms, and the same online “watchdogs” surface again and again across multiple collapsed schemes.

Our evidence, including the Connections Flowchart, reveals a web of relationships. It links insolvency practitioners, law firms, and online commentators: Kroll Advisory (through Robert Goodhew and Andrew Stoneman), Quantuma, Crowell & Moring (including Paul Muscatt), and platforms such as Safe Or Scam and Bond Review. The overlap is not subtle; it is structural.

When the same cluster of actors repeatedly appears around high-profile failures, questions about independence and impartiality are not only reasonable. They are unavoidable. Who is scrutinising whom? Who is protecting whom? And where does that leave the creditors the system is supposedly built to serve?

These relationships cast a long shadow over how appointments are made and how decisions are justified. They also affect how creditor claims, including those from victims of suspected fraud, are filtered or dismissed.

The Fraud Context

The allegations surrounding the 79th Group are now stark. On 31 October 2025, TheBusinessDesk.com reported that the High Court imposed a worldwide freezing order on the directors. Moreover, this was after claims they diverted around £200 million of investor funds.

Administrators’ reports confirm the core truth: none of the money was ever invested in the promised property developments. Instead, it was channelled into commissions, behaviour consistent with a Ponzi-style operation.

Yet despite this backdrop of suspected fraud and court intervention, Kroll has chosen to challenge the validity of the creditor claims assigned to Insolvency & Law. In doing so, they have blocked victims from even proving in the administration. This is a technical roadblock placed in front of people who have already lost far too much.

Our Purpose

We act for ordinary investors, retirees, families, and professionals, who placed their trust in a system they believed would protect them. Instead, they were left with silence, confusion, and devastating losses. They deserve recognition, repayment, and full transparency.

The hearing on 12 January 2026 is not just about one insolvency. It is a test of what fairness in this system should look like. It is an opportunity to acknowledge the human cost behind the paperwork. Moreover, it aims to restore confidence in a process that feels remote to the very people it is meant to serve.

If the law is to have meaning, it must protect those who lost everything to suspected fraud. It must give them the right to stand as creditors, to be heard, and to finally begin the process of rebuilding.

If you were impacted and want to understand your rights or join the action, contact us today at investigations@insolvencyandlaw.co.uk

Disclaimer: Insolvency & Law Ltd does not act as a firm of solicitors or as licensed insolvency practitioners. We do not carry out any regulated activities as defined under the Legal Services Act 2007 or the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. All information and commentary concerning The 79th Group, including that published via our blogs and podcasts, is made available free of charge for informational and educational purposes only. It should not be regarded as legal or investment advice.

In suitable circumstances, I&L may take legal assignment of loan notes issued by 79th Group companies. It may act in its own name and at its own cost and risk to pursue enforcement and recovery. Loan note holders assigning claims to I&L are not exposed to the cost of such action.