Commercial Opportunity Brief — Confidential

The Wincham Scheme
Group Litigation Order

A forensically verified £97M+ claims pool against Wincham International Limited — 1,564 identified victims across 782 confirmed companies. Thousands of innocent British retired couples, bled dry of their savings by Wincham's mis-sold offshore property scheme. We hold the only comprehensive victim database. Here's how we monetise it.

1,564+ Identified Victims
£120K Avg. Loss Each
£97M+ Total Claims Pool
Scroll
01 — The Opportunity

Why This Is a Serious Commercial Asset

Wincham International Limited sold an offshore company wrapper scheme to thousands of British retired couples buying property in Spain — marketed as a legitimate tax-saving structure. The advice was negligent, unauthorised, and Brexit made it catastrophically fail. Victims are entitled to recover losses averaging £108,000–£170,000 each. The total claims pool tops £97 million. We hold the map to every single one of them.

🗂️
1,564+
Victim Households
782 confirmed companies = ~1,564 individual directors (British retired couples). Identified from Companies House, HMRC data, and AEAT filings. No other party holds this database.
⚖️
GLO
Group Litigation Order
The UK's CPR Part 19 mechanism — equivalent to a US class action. One judge, shared common issues, one legal infrastructure. Economy of scale at its most powerful.
💷
£24M+
CMC Revenue Potential
At 25–40% of the £97M maximum claims pool, gross CMC revenue is £24M–£39M over the GLO lifecycle. Phase 2 captures this in full — £0 to a third-party firm.

02 — Legal Basis

Why Every Victim Has a Strong Case

Four independently powerful heads of claim attach to every victim in the database. A CMC picking up this brief gets a pre-packaged litigation dossier — common facts, shared defendant, quantified losses per claimant.

📋

Professional Negligence

Wincham owed a duty of care when advising on tax structuring. They failed to advise on the catastrophic consequences of Brexit on their offshore wrapper scheme. The three-stage Caparo test — duty, breach, foreseeable loss — is satisfied on every client file.

Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990] AC 605 — 3-stage duty test
🚫

Unauthorised Legal Practice

Mark Roach and Wincham International held themselves out as qualified tax and legal advisers. They held no qualifying credentials — making all paid advice potentially unlawful under the Legal Services Act 2007 and the Solicitors Act 1974.

Legal Services Act 2007 · Solicitors Act 1974 · ICAEW Bye-Laws
💬

Misrepresentation

Wincham actively marketed the scheme as a lawful, HMRC-compliant tax-saving structure. This was false. Each victim has a statutory misrepresentation claim giving rise to rescission, damages, or both under the 1967 Act.

Misrepresentation Act 1967 s.2(1) — negligent misstatement
⏱️

Limitation Window — Still Open

The 6-year limitation clock runs from the date of knowledge — not the scheme setup date. For most victims, the crystallising event (HMRC penalties, forced MVL costs) only occurred post-2020. The window is open right now. It won't be indefinitely.

Limitation Act 1980 s.14A — latent damage, 3 years from date of knowledge

03 — Commercial Strategy

Two Phases. One Irreplaceable Asset.

Phase 1 converts the database to immediate cash via a data licence and a marketing services contract. Phase 2 captures the entire commercial upside by running the FCA-authorised CMC ourselves — cutting out the third-party firm entirely.

1
⚡ Phase 1 — Months 1–6

Licence the Data.
Get Hired as the Marketing Firm.

Approach an established FCA-authorised CMC. Offer them a Data Licence for the victim database and a Marketing Services Agreement to run all victim outreach. Income in weeks, not years. Ellis's UK entity registers as an Appointed Representative of the principal CMC.

  • 1
    Data Licence (direct to Dean): £15K–£50K upfront. Non-exclusive, time-limited. IP stays with Dean. Invoiced from US — zero UK tax.
  • 2
    Marketing Services Contract: Ellis's UK Ltd → CMC. Dean subcontracts the work, invoiced from US. 65–70% of AR revenue flows to Dean with no UK withholding under the US-UK Tax Treaty Art. 7.
  • 3
    AR Registration: Ellis's UK Ltd registers as FCA Appointed Representative of the principal CMC. Standard SMF role for Ellis. No direct FCA authorisation required at this stage.
  • 4
    Revenue Share: CMC takes 20–35% of recovery. Ellis's AR company takes 20–25% of that. Dean takes 65–70% of Ellis's share via the marketing subcontract.
£10K–£50K + £300K–£500K
Licence fee upfront + ongoing marketing subcontract over the GLO lifecycle. All invoiced from US. Zero UK tax exposure on Dean's income.
2
🚀 Phase 2 — Months 6–18

Get FCA Authorised.
Run the CMC Ourselves.

Once Phase 1 is generating revenue and credibility, Ellis applies for direct FCA authorisation as a CMC principal firm. The third-party CMC is cut out. The full 35–40% claims management fee flows directly to us.

  • 1
    Incorporate the CMC vehicle: Dedicated limited company. Ellis as sole director, holding the Senior Management Function. Compliance policies, PI insurance, and client money account in place.
  • 2
    FCA Direct Authorisation: Apply under FSMA 2000 s.19 for permission to manage claims. CMCOB sourcebook governs conduct. Realistic timeline: 6–12 months from submission.
  • 3
    Panel Solicitors: Appoint qualified litigation solicitors on a DBD / no-win-no-fee basis. CMC handles client acquisition. Panel solicitors handle court proceedings. CMC fees from success fee.
  • 4
    GLO Application: Co-ordinate with panel solicitors to apply to the Business and Property Courts. Wincham database becomes the claimant register. One judge, massive economy of scale.
£24M–£39M
Estimated gross CMC revenue over the full GLO lifecycle at 25–40% DBA. Dean captures 65–70% of net distributable income via the marketing subcontract structure.

04 — Data & UK GDPR

The Data Question — Simpler Than It Looks

The Wincham database is built from Companies House public records and AEAT company filings. This is the same data any solicitor or journalist can access. UK GDPR doesn't prohibit using public records commercially — it requires a documented lawful basis. We have three.

🛡️

Three Valid UK GDPR Lawful Bases — No Workarounds Needed

The law is on our side. These are standard, established bases — not edge cases.

✓ Art. 6(1)(f)

Legitimate Interests

Connecting victims of a fraudulent scheme to legal redress is a legitimate interest that overrides individual privacy rights. The ICO explicitly accepts this basis for legal claims databases. A Legitimate Interests Assessment (LIA) is documented and retained.

✓ Art. 6(1)(b)

Contractual Necessity

Once a victim signs a CMC retainer agreement, all data processing under that contract has a clear contractual basis. The Data Licence Agreement activates this basis for downstream CMC processing automatically.

✓ Recital 47 + ICO

Publicly Available Data

UK GDPR Recital 47 and ICO guidance confirm that data already made public — including Companies House director records — attracts reduced compliance obligations. No special categories, no sensitive personal data involved.

📌
Standard Contractual Clauses (UK → US Transfer) When the database is transferred to Dean's US entity for marketing work, Standard Contractual Clauses (SCCs) are required. This is a standard two-page document — completed as routine by every UK business working with a US service provider. The CMC's data protection solicitor will include this as a schedule to the Marketing Services Agreement.

05 — Immediate Actions

What Needs to Happen Right Now

Eight sequenced steps that take the Wincham forensic database from research asset to active commercial revenue. Steps 1–4 are achievable within the first three weeks.

# Action Owner Timeline Status
1 Finalise the victim database
Complete victim sheets, verify company data, calculate quantum per victim
Dean Week 1 In Progress
2 Shortlist 3 target CMCs
FCA-authorised specialist CMCs — financial claims or professional negligence focus
Dean / Ellis Week 1–2 Pending
3 Prepare the CMC pitch deck
Brief + victim summary + quantum model. Deliver the opportunity — not the raw data.
Dean Week 2 Pending
4 Incorporate Ellis's UK CMC vehicle
Separate Ltd Co. Ellis as director. Company constitution reviewed by solicitor.
Ellis Week 2–3 Pending
5 Negotiate & execute Data Licence Agreement
Non-exclusive, time-limited. IP retained by Dean. Upfront fee + ongoing royalty.
Dean + solicitor Week 3–6 Pending
6 Execute Marketing Services Agreement
Ellis's UK Ltd → CMC principal. Dean's US entity subcontracted. Revenue split formalised.
Ellis / Dean Week 3–6 Pending
7 Ellis registers as FCA Appointed Representative
Of the principal CMC. Standard AR agreement. Ellis holds the SMF role.
Ellis + compliance Month 2–3 Pending
8 Begin FCA Direct Authorisation application
Phase 2 trigger. Full CMC authorisation under FSMA 2000 s.19. Compliance consultant engaged.
Ellis (lead) Month 4–6 Phase 2
💡
The Core Proposition in One Sentence We hold the only forensically verified, comprehensive Wincham victim database in existence — that is an irreplaceable first-mover asset worth millions to the right CMC. Phase 1 converts it to immediate cash. Phase 2 captures the full upside by running the authorised CMC ourselves.
⚠️
Regulatory Boundary — Must Be Observed Until Ellis's entity holds FCA Appointed Representative status (Phase 1) or direct authorisation (Phase 2), neither Dean nor Ellis may manage claims, enter into fee arrangements with claimants, or solicit victims directly. Breach of s.19 FSMA 2000 is a criminal offence. The Marketing Services Agreement must be drafted carefully to keep Dean clearly within the unregulated marketing/data services boundary at all times.

Ready to Build the Wincham Claims Business?

The database is built. The legal case is solid. The commercial structure is defined. The only thing left is execution.