What Is the FCA Alleging Against Hunter Jones?
The UK Financial Conduct Authority has begun High Court proceedings against Osborne Baldwin Limited, which trades as Hunter Jones and Hunter Jones Group, alleging that the property investment business carried out regulated financial services activity without authorisation.
The FCA is asking the court to stop Hunter Jones from conducting regulated activity and require money to be returned to investors. The proceedings remain at an early stage, no trial date has been set and the High Court has not determined the regulator’s allegations.
The case puts renewed scrutiny on a business that says it has raised more than £300 million for property investments and built an investor network spanning more than 60 countries. Those figures are company claims and have not been independently verified.
Osborne Baldwin was incorporated in October 2013 and is controlled by founder Reece Mennie. The company remains active and filed accounts covering 2024 earlier this year.
The dispute centers on a recurring issue in the UK’s market for property-backed loan notes: issuing a loan note is not necessarily a regulated activity, but arranging investments or communicating certain financial promotions can fall inside the FCA’s perimeter depending on how the activity is conducted and which exemptions apply.
The FCA has previously warned investors about high-risk mini-bonds and unlisted loan notes, particularly where products are promoted through exemptions aimed at high-net-worth or sophisticated investors.
Why Does Hunter Jones’ Former FCA Relationship Matter?
Hunter Jones previously operated inside the regulated system. Osborne Baldwin was an appointed representative of Equity for Growth (Securities) Limited, or EFG, between May 2018 and April 2020.
That structure allowed Hunter Jones to carry out specified regulated activities under the responsibility of EFG, which was directly authorised by the FCA.
EFG later became the subject of substantial investor complaints involving products promoted by its appointed representatives. The FCA petitioned to wind the firm up in October 2024 after concluding that it was insolvent and lacked sufficient resources to meet potential compensation liabilities. The High Court ordered EFG into liquidation on March 25, 2026.
The Financial Services Compensation Scheme subsequently declared EFG in default and began assessing claims connected to investments arranged through EFG and its appointed representatives.
EFG has also faced regulatory scrutiny over the way high-risk investments were promoted. The FCA previously found problems involving undisclosed commissions connected to minibond promotions, reinforcing the regulator’s focus on how authorised principals supervise businesses operating under their permissions.
Investor Takeaway
The High Court case is not simply about whether Hunter Jones sold loan notes. The central issue is whether activities surrounding those investments crossed into regulated arranging or promotion without the permissions required by UK law.
What Did the Financial Ombudsman Previously Find?
Hunter Jones also appeared in a Financial Ombudsman decision involving Dolphin, a German property investment business that later collapsed.
The complaint concerned an investor identified as Ms R, who invested £20,000 in Dolphin loan notes in January 2019 before reinvesting another £10,000 plus previous returns the following month. The investments later became worthless.
The Ombudsman concluded that Hunter Jones had carried out the regulated activity of arranging investments and identified problems with the way the Dolphin products had been promoted.
It also found that Hunter Jones should have carried out adequate due diligence before promoting and arranging the investments. Concerns later identified around Dolphin included missing published financial statements, questions over the use of investor funds and instances where advertised land charges had not been established.
The ruling related to an individual complaint and does not establish wrongdoing concerning Hunter Jones’ current activities.
What Happens Next for Hunter Jones and Its Investors?
The High Court proceedings follow an FCA warning issued against Osborne Baldwin, Hunter Jones Group and HJ Collection in November 2025. The regulator said at the time that the businesses might be providing or promoting financial services without permission.
That warning was later withdrawn after the firms challenged it. Hunter Jones has previously said it only marketed investments to investors qualifying as sophisticated or high-net-worth and that its business had changed considerably since its period as EFG’s appointed representative.
The distinction is important because UK rules allow some high-risk investments to be promoted to limited categories of investors even where mass retail marketing is prohibited. The FCA has progressively tightened those rules, including restrictions on the marketing of speculative mini-bonds to ordinary retail investors.
The FCA has not yet disclosed which Hunter Jones products or transactions form the basis of the new claim, how much investor money it wants returned or how many customers may be affected.
Those details will determine the scale of the case. For now, the regulator has moved beyond issuing consumer warnings and is asking the High Court to stop the alleged activity and order investor money to be repaid. The allegations remain unproven unless and until the court rules on them.
