The world of alternative investments is rarely straightforward. Reputations are built slowly and can be damaged quickly, and the line between legitimate concern and manufactured panic is not always easy to identify. This investigation began as routine due diligence into New Capital Link (NCL), a London-based investment introducer operating in the alternative investment space. What emerged was considerably more revealing than anticipated.
NCL, it turns out, is not the problem. NCL is the target.
A recovery room operation had been systematically posting false negative content about the firm online. The strategy was calculated: damage the reputation of a legitimate company, create anxiety among its investor base, and then approach those worried investors with fraudulent “recovery” services. This report documents that discovery in full, examines the broader threat of disinformation-based investment fraud, and provides practical guidance for investors navigating this increasingly complex landscape.
Part one: Who is New Capital Link?
The business model
New Capital Link operates as an investment introducer, positioning itself as a conduit between investors seeking higher returns and non-traditional investment opportunities that fall outside conventional stock market products. Its focus includes property bonds, asset-backed securities, and private equity deals — instruments that typically offer returns above standard savings rates in exchange for accepting greater risk and reduced liquidity.
It is important to understand what an introducer does and does not do. NCL does not provide personalised financial advice, manage portfolios, or hold client funds. Its role is to present investment opportunities and facilitate connections. This distinction has regulatory implications that are discussed later in this report.
Leadership
The firm is led by Rachel Ann Buscall, whose professional background spans entrepreneurship and business development. Company materials describe her as having gained “an invaluable, practical education that goes far beyond a balance sheet” through running her own ventures before moving into the alternative investment sector. Whether or not one places great weight on that framing, her tenure at NCL has coincided with a period of growth and a largely positive client record.
NCL has received several industry awards, including recognition as Best Boutique Alternative Investment Introducer Firm 2023 from Wealth & Finance International, and a 2024 win at the Private Equity and Venture Capital Awards. These are worth noting, though it is also worth noting that many such awards in financial services involve nomination fees rather than independent vetting. They contribute to profile rather than constitute a regulatory endorsement.
The NCL team includes relationship managers such as Alex Santos and James, both of whom appear by name in positive client testimonials across review platforms.
New Capital Link
Part two: What the client evidence actually shows
A predominantly positive record
Third-party review platforms offer the clearest independent picture of client experience. On Trustpilot, where NCL operates under the associated name Rigby Rose, the firm holds a 4.4-star rating from 65 reviews. That figure is significant — it reflects sustained client satisfaction over time rather than a short-term spike.
The reviews themselves are specific and detailed in the way that genuine feedback tends to be. One investor described a smooth exit from a social housing investment: “My social housing investment has matured today and I’m impressed with the outcome and how smooth the process was.” Another detailed a three-year journey with quarterly returns before reinvesting: “Just exited and fully paid out on my 3 year quarterly bonus with Acorn. Very pleased with prompt payments each quarter and have re-invested with confidence.”
Communication quality features prominently in positive reviews. One first-time investor noted being kept informed throughout: “Professional experience, great info, always on hand to answer all of my questions.” Another described a multi-year relationship built on trust: “I have been investing with James and New Capital Link since August 2020. During this time I’ve had two Gold Bonds at 10% returns and one Property Bond at 15% return. All investments have run exactly to maturity dates.”
The minority of critical voices
A small number of reviews reflect frustration, and these deserve honest acknowledgement. One investor reported ongoing difficulty making contact regarding a £5,100 investment awaiting IPO, writing that repeated emails and messages had gone unanswered. Another criticised the firm’s marketing emails as potentially misleading. A third labelled the company as “serial spammers,” though NCL’s response noted they could find no record of this individual in their system.
These negative reviews point to genuine operational challenges — particularly around communication during the illiquid phases of long-term investments — rather than evidence of fraudulent activity. They are the kind of friction that appears across all firms managing alternative investment products, where updates may be infrequent and client anxiety is naturally higher.
The overall pattern is consistent with a legitimate operation: strong satisfaction among the majority of clients who have seen investments through to completion, with isolated frustrations from those experiencing delays or communication gaps.
Part three: The recovery room targeting NCL
An unexpected discovery
During the course of this investigation, allegations surfaced linking NCL to recovery room activity. Examined closely, however, the evidence pointed firmly in the opposite direction. New Capital Link had not been operating as a recovery room. It had been targeted by one.
At least one fraudulent operation had been deliberately publishing negative articles about NCL online. This was not a matter of competitive criticism or mistaken identity. It was a coordinated disinformation campaign, designed to achieve a specific outcome: create a pool of anxious investors who could then be approached with fraudulent offers to “protect” or “recover” their funds.
How this new model works
The traditional recovery room waits for investments to fail, then approaches genuine victims with promises of recovering their losses — extracting upfront fees before vanishing. The model targeting NCL represents a more sophisticated evolution.
Rather than waiting for problems to occur, these operators manufacture the perception of a problem. They identify a legitimate firm with an established client base, post negative content designed to create alarm, and then position themselves as saviours to investors who were never actually at risk in the first place. The result is that people are defrauded not because their investment failed, but because they were convinced it might.
This is a particularly insidious development. It turns the reputation of legitimate firms into a weapon against their own clients.
Why NCL made an attractive target
Several characteristics made New Capital Link a logical choice for this kind of attack. It has an established client base with capital in longer-term, illiquid products — exactly the scenario where natural anxiety about locked-in funds can be exploited. Its visible online presence and predominantly positive reviews created a platform that could be undermined by introducing doubt. And the alternative investment sector’s inherent complexity means that investors may lack the contextual knowledge to immediately dismiss alarming-sounding allegations.
Paradoxically, targeting legitimate firms with genuinely satisfied clients may be more lucrative than targeting actual frauds. Real victims know something has gone wrong. Manufactured victims can be panicked into paying for help they don’t need.
Part four: Understanding recovery room fraud
The basic mechanics
Recovery room fraud is among the most psychologically damaging forms of financial crime, not least because it targets people who are already worried about money. The Financial Conduct Authority has documented the typical pattern clearly: fraudsters approach investors who have experienced losses — or who believe they might — offering help in recovering funds, but requiring an upfront fee before any service is provided. That fee is extracted, and no recovery ever follows.
The government’s own Insolvency Service has been unequivocal on this point: it will never ask for an upfront fee to recover lost investment money. Any contact purporting to offer such a service — whether from an organisation claiming to act on behalf of the government or any other body — is a scam. That is not a warning or a risk assessment. It is a categorical statement.
The disinformation playbook
The campaign targeting NCL followed a recognisable pattern. Negative articles were written and placed online, crafted to create anxiety without making specific provable false claims — staying just short of defamation whilst generating maximum concern. These articles used careful language around “questions” and “scrutiny,” creating an atmosphere of doubt rather than making falsifiable allegations.
The timing of such content matters too. Posting during the illiquid phase of investments — when clients cannot exit and may not be receiving frequent updates — maximises the psychological impact. Search engine optimisation ensures the content appears prominently when worried investors look for reassurance.
Once concern has been seeded, the next stage is approach. Recovery operators identify clients of the targeted firm, contact them with references to the alarming content they’ve already found, and offer to help before the situation gets worse. The investor, already anxious, encounters what appears to be an expert with a solution.
Part five: Protecting yourself
Recognising a manufactured crisis
The most important skill an investor can develop is the ability to distinguish between a legitimate concern about an investment and a manufactured panic. These require very different responses.
Legitimate red flags include extended periods of complete communication failure, refusal to provide documentation, changes to investment terms without notice, or actual regulatory action from the FCA. These warrant direct contact with the firm and potentially independent professional advice.
Manufactured crises, by contrast, tend to arrive through negative articles from unverifiable sources, vague allegations unsupported by specific evidence, or unsolicited contact from third parties referencing those articles and offering help. The tell-tale sign is the combination of alarming information and a ready solution — particularly one that requires upfront payment.
Practical steps
If you encounter concerning information about a firm you have invested with, the first step is to contact the firm directly using contact details you already hold — not those provided in any article or by anyone who has approached you. Ask specific questions. Request documentation. A legitimate firm will engage with genuine concerns.
Before engaging with any organisation offering to help recover or protect investments, verify their credentials through the FCA’s Firm Checker at www.fca.org.uk. Confirm their authorisation for claims management activity. Search their name alongside terms like “scam” and “complaints.” Be deeply sceptical of any pressure to act quickly, pay upfront, or keep the approach confidential.
If you believe you’ve been contacted by a recovery room operation — whether or not you’ve paid anything — report it to Action Fraud on 0300 123 2040 or via www.actionfraud.police.uk, and notify the FCA at 0800 111 6768. Preserve all evidence: emails, screenshots, any written communications.
Understanding the actual risks of alternative investments
Investors in alternative products through introducers like NCL should hold a clear-eyed understanding of the genuine risks involved, which are distinct from fraud indicators.
Capital is typically locked in for multi-year periods with limited or no early exit. Returns of 10–15% reflect genuine risk, and total loss of capital is a realistic possibility for any speculative investment. Reporting and transparency standards differ from regulated funds. These are not signs that something is wrong — they are the known characteristics of the asset class. Investors should only commit capital they could afford to lose, and should seek independent professional advice before doing so.
Part six: The bigger picture
What this case reveals about modern investment fraud
The NCL case is instructive precisely because the firm is legitimate. Recovery room operators have identified that they do not need to wait for genuine failures — they can create the perception of failure, manufacture the victim, and extract payment for solving a problem they invented.
This evolution demands a corresponding shift in how investors think about risk. The question is no longer only “is this investment legitimate?” It has become “is this information about my investment legitimate?” Both questions now require active, critical engagement.
For regulators, the challenge is significant. The FCA can issue warnings about specific fraudulent firms, but coordinating a response to distributed disinformation campaigns — often originating from overseas — requires broader powers and international cooperation that do not yet fully exist.
For legitimate firms operating in the alternative investment sector, the implication is clear: proactive, regular communication with clients during illiquid periods is not just good practice. It is a form of fraud prevention. Investors who feel informed and connected are far harder to panic.
Conclusion
The investigation into New Capital Link set out to answer a straightforward question and arrived at a more complicated answer. Is NCL a legitimate investment introducer? The evidence — client testimonials, successful investment outcomes across multiple years, a 4.4-star Trustpilot rating — supports a clear yes. The operational challenges reflected in a small number of negative reviews are real, and the firm should address them. But they do not indicate fraud.
The more significant finding is what was done to NCL, not by it. A recovery room operation deliberately targeted a legitimate firm, posting disinformation designed to create worried investors who could then be approached and defrauded. The firm’s clients were the intended victims. Many may never have known the threat existed.
The principle to take away is simple and absolute: any unsolicited contact offering to recover or protect investment funds, and requiring upfront payment to do so, is a scam. This holds regardless of what negative content you may have read about your investment. It holds regardless of how professional the approach appears. End contact immediately and report it.
Investor protection has always depended on investor awareness. That awareness must now extend beyond evaluating investments to evaluating the information environment surrounding those investments. Disinformation is a financial threat. Recognising it is the first line of defence.
The above information does not constitute any form of advice or recommendation by London Loves Business and is not intended to be relied upon by users in making (or refraining from making) any finance decisions. Appropriate independent advice should be obtained before making any such decision. London Loves Business bears no responsibility for any gains or losses.
