Imagine losing your life savings to a scam that could have been stopped. That’s exactly what happened to countless investors in a £170 million diamond scheme, despite a whistleblower sounding the alarm nearly a year before it all came crashing down. But here’s where it gets controversial: the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) decided not to investigate, even after receiving detailed evidence of fraud. How did this happen? Let’s dive in.
BBC Panorama uncovered that the SFO failed to act on a report from John Ames, the former chief technology officer of Vashi Dominguez’s diamond retail business, known simply as ‘Vashi.’ Ames provided documents showing he warned the SFO in May 2022 that the company was defrauding investors and falsifying accounts. Shockingly, the SFO closed his complaint just one day after receiving it, allowing the scheme to continue until the company collapsed in April 2023 with debts of £170 million.
And this is the part most people miss: Investors were told their money was secured by a stock of diamonds supposedly worth £157 million. After the firm went bust, those diamonds were sold for a mere £158,000. Yes, you read that right. Meanwhile, Vashi Dominguez fled to Dubai the day the company went into liquidation and has not been heard from since.
Ames first grew suspicious in late 2021 when he noticed discrepancies between the financial claims in marketing materials and the company’s internal reports. For instance, while Vashi claimed sales of £53.6 million in 2020, internal records showed actual sales were just £5.5 million. Similarly, marketing materials boasted monthly sales of £8.5 million up to August 2021, but internal records revealed total sales for the entire year were only £5.5 million.
After raising concerns with management and planning to leave the company, Ames’s contract was terminated at the end of his probation period. Undeterred, he contacted the SFO in May 2022, urging them to investigate. In his report, he wrote, ‘I discovered [Vashi] to be defrauding their investors… they are also likely to be misstating information on their statutory reporting.’ Despite acknowledging Ames as a credible whistleblower, the SFO closed his case without further action, claiming it didn’t meet their criteria for investigation.
Here’s where it gets even more baffling: The SFO referred the case to Action Fraud, the UK’s national fraud reporting center, but Action Fraud told Panorama they never received the referral. The SFO later admitted they didn’t actually pass it on. Meanwhile, Ames also reported Vashi to the Insolvency Service, which declined to investigate at the time, only opening a probe after the company collapsed in 2023.
Investors like advertising executive Michael Moszynski, who lost tens of thousands of pounds, are left wondering why no one acted sooner. ‘Had the SFO done their job, I wouldn’t have lost my money,’ he told the BBC. Ames himself contacted the SFO again in September 2023, following Panorama’s investigation, only to be told the delay in his initial case was due to an ‘administrative error.’ But Ames pointed out he reported the fraud in 2022—two years before the alleged platform update.
The SFO defends its actions by stating it investigates only the most complex economic crimes, typically around 35 cases at any given time. ‘Fraud, bribery, and corruption have a devastating impact on lives and livelihoods,’ they said, ‘and we are committed to tackling these crimes.’ Yet, this case raises questions about their prioritization and responsiveness.
Here’s the burning question: If a whistleblower provides clear evidence of fraud, why wouldn’t the SFO act? Is it a matter of resources, oversight, or something else entirely? Let us know your thoughts in the comments. This story isn’t just about diamonds—it’s about trust, accountability, and whether our systems are truly designed to protect us.