In February 2026, Market Financial Solutions — a Mayfair bridging lender sitting on a £2.4 billion loan book — went into administration. Court documents allege its assets were pledged to multiple lenders at once, leaving a £1.3 billion hole. The firm had been at the centre of an international money-laundering investigation involving a Bangladeshi politician before it ever collapsed. Its founder is alleged to have fled to Dubai. The full story is still coming out.
What we know so far, pieced together from court filings, Companies House records, and published reports. Updated as we learn more.
Market Financial Solutions was a specialist property lender operating out of Mayfair. Their pitch: bridging loans and buy-to-let mortgages for property investors who didn't fit neatly into high-street bank criteria. Founder and CEO Paresh Raja built the firm steadily over more than a decade. By the end of 2024 it had 149 staff and was reporting annual revenue of £71 million. Its loan book stood at £2.4 billion. Its net assets: a somewhat startling £15.9 million.
Two creditors — Amber Bridging Limited and Zircon Bridging Limited — went to court first, citing "real and serious concerns about the mismanagement of the company." MFS then applied for administration protection itself. Chief Insolvency Judge Nicholas Briggs approved the order on around 20 February 2026. AlixPartners were brought in as administrators. Who Amber Bridging and Zircon Bridging actually are — and what they knew before they filed — remains one of the more interesting unanswered questions here.
This is the part that sent bank stocks sliding. Administrators told the court that for a portion of MFS's borrowing — loans totalling £1.16 billion — there was only £230 million of genuine collateral available. The rest, allegedly, had been pledged to multiple lenders at once. If that's accurate, it's not a mismanagement story. It's potentially fraud on a significant scale. We say "if" because the administration is still early and MFS disputes the characterisation.
Publicly confirmed so far: Barclays (~£600m), Atlas SP Partners — an Apollo affiliate — (~£400m), Santander (£200–300m), Elliott Investment Management (~£200m), SMBC (~£100m), Jefferies, Wells Fargo, and Macquarie (under £50m). Atlas had already put two loans into default before administration was filed. Court documents also reference further unnamed "major international financial institutions." We're still trying to establish the full list. If you know who else is in there, please get in touch.
Before the administration, MFS and Paresh Raja were already being named in a major international money laundering investigation. Saifuzzaman Chowdhury — former Bangladeshi land minister and close ally of ousted PM Sheikh Hasina — built a £295 million UK property portfolio, much of it financed through MFS. Bloomberg reported that Raja was CEO or director of eight financial services firms that lent money on more than 175 of Chowdhury’s properties. An Al Jazeera undercover investigation named him as someone “who made hundreds of loans through his company Market Financial Solutions and his other businesses.” The Guardian, FT, and Observer all published related investigations. Transparency International found that 291 out of 495 financial charges on Chowdhury’s UK properties came from MFS-related entities.
The UK’s National Crime Agency froze £170 million of Chowdhury’s UK assets in June 2025 — eight months before the MFS administration filing. After Hasina’s government fell in August 2024, the MFS-linked mortgages on Chowdhury’s properties were reportedly repaid in full. MFS maintained it conducted thorough AML checks on all loans. The connection between the NCA freeze, Barclays beginning to block MFS transactions in late 2025, and the administration in February 2026 is one of the central threads of this investigation.
Before MFS collapsed, it was already under scrutiny. Bloomberg, Al Jazeera, the Guardian/Observer (with Transparency International) and the Financial Times had all published investigations identifying MFS and Paresh Raja as central to financing a £295 million global property portfolio built by Saifuzzaman Chowdhury — Bangladesh's former Land Minister — while he was in office and earning a declared salary of around $13,000 a year. Bangladesh's constitution requires politicians to declare foreign assets; his were not declared. Raja, according to Bloomberg's analysis, was CEO or director of eight financial services firms that made loans on more than 175 of Chowdhury's properties. MFS told Al Jazeera it had carried out robust anti-money laundering checks on Chowdhury.
After the Hasina government fell in August 2024, something significant happened: 259 of 352 MFS-linked Chowdhury loans were rapidly repaid — within weeks. Bangladesh's ACC froze Chowdhury's accounts. The NCA began investigating. Whether the rapid exit of those loans from MFS's balance sheet played any role in the subsequent collateral shortfall is one of the questions we most want answered.
When the story broke on 27 February, Jefferies dropped 10.7%. Barclays fell 4.2%. Santander shed nearly 5%. The S&P 500 bank index lost roughly 4% in a day. Commentators reached for the "cockroach theory" — that where one blowup appears, others are usually hiding. Comparisons were made to First Brands and Tricolor, two US cases that also involved assets being pledged multiple times. Whether MFS is an isolated failure or a symptom of something wider in the private credit market is a question that's only beginning to be asked.
Our best reconstruction of the sequence of events. Some dates are approximate; some details are still disputed. If something here is wrong, or if you can fill in the gaps, please tell us.
Market Financial Solutions launches in London as a specialist bridging and buy-to-let lender. The firm's pitch is clear: fast, flexible property finance for people the high street won't touch. Raja builds the business steadily, developing relationships with brokers and positioning MFS as a reliable niche player in a competitive space.
The loan book grows fast. MFS lines up warehouse funding from Barclays, Jefferies, Santander, Wells Fargo and Atlas SP — over £2 billion in total. Revenue hits £71 million. By any external measure, the firm looks like a success. Whether anything was already wrong during this period is one of the questions we're trying to answer.
MFS's accounts as of 31 December 2024 show 149 employees, revenue of £71 million — and net assets of just £15.9 million. That's a razor-thin equity cushion for a firm of this size. At the time, nobody seems to have made much of it publicly. Nobody made much of it publicly at the time. They probably should have.
Atlas SP Partners, citing a breach of contractual terms by MFS, proactively places two warehouse loans into default. The firm says it is "pursuing all legal avenues to maximize recoveries." Creditors Amber Bridging and Zircon Bridging also begin to detect irregularities in payments due to their accounts.
Court documents dated February 24 show two creditor firms separately filing for administration orders against MFS, citing "real and serious concerns about the mismanagement of the company" and entities across the wider MFS Group. They allege irregularities in payments and apply for independent administrators to be appointed.
Chief Insolvency and Companies Court Judge Nicholas Briggs approves the administration at the London High Court. Insolvency practitioners from AlixPartners are appointed as administrators, with stated support from "major international financial institutions and/or their legal counsel" (names redacted). MFS had also independently applied for administration protection.
Al Jazeera's investigative unit publishes a documentary naming Paresh Raja as a central figure in financing Saifuzzaman Chowdhury's £295m UK property portfolio. Bloomberg, the Guardian, FT, and Observer publish related investigations. Transparency International finds 291 of 495 financial charges on Chowdhury's UK properties came from MFS-related entities. MFS says it conducted thorough AML checks on all loans.
The National Crime Agency obtains a freeze order on £170m of Chowdhury's UK assets. Bangladesh's own Anti-Corruption Commission is also investigating. The NCA action doesn't publicly name MFS, but Chowdhury's portfolio is substantially MFS-financed. Shortly afterwards, the MFS-linked mortgages on Chowdhury's properties are reportedly repaid in full. The timing relative to Barclays subsequently freezing MFS accounts is a significant open question.
Companies House records show Hewes and Hicks appointed in March 2025. Read against the external scrutiny MFS was under, this looks like an attempt to strengthen governance under pressure. Within ten to eleven months, both had left. By the administration filing, Paresh Raja was the sole remaining director.
Barclays begins restricting certain MFS transactions in late 2025, then freezes all related accounts in early January 2026. Castlelake's intensified due diligence on MFS's loan book — prompted by the First Brands and Tricolor failures in the US — is cited as surfacing the collateral irregularities. This sequence is key to understanding why everything collapsed when it did.
Sharon Hewes resigns in January 2026. Companies House shows TM01 filings for both Stuart Hicks and Paresh Raja's wife on 20 February — the same day as the administration application. By the time it went to court, Raja was the only director on record. The departure of all independently-appointed directors immediately before the collapse is not easily explained as coincidence.
Judge Nicholas Briggs approves the administration order, citing "very serious" allegations of fraud requiring investigation. AlixPartners appointed. In court, counsel for Zircon and Amber allege that Raja had "fled to Dubai" — reported by 9fin. Raja has not publicly responded to this. His whereabouts remain unconfirmed.
Administrators file court documents warning of a £930m shortfall and possible double-pledging. Markets react sharply. Over the following days Elliott Management (~£200m via Chetwood Bank), SMBC (~£100m), Macquarie (under £50m), TPG (£44m) and Santander (£200–300m) are all named. Total reported exposure rises above £2.5 billion.
Stephen Katz (Begbies Traynor) and Nimish Patel (Coots & Boots) appointed as administrators for several undisclosed MFS-connected companies — a second parallel insolvency track. Creditor Mukesh Patel (no relation) convenes a meeting of private investors collectively owed around £169m, exploring joint legal action. The FCA says fighting financial crime is a priority but hasn't confirmed any formal MFS investigation.
AlixPartners obtains a worldwide freezing order against Paresh Raja, granted by courts in both London and Dubai. Raja is now legally prevented from moving or dissipating assets anywhere in the world. The dual-jurisdiction order signals administrators believe assets may have already been moved or are at risk. This is the most significant legal escalation since the administration filing.
CS Venkatakrishnan, speaking at a Morgan Stanley conference, says Barclays' MFS impairment will be "materially lower" than £500m. He describes himself as "disappointed" by the exposure and says the bank is reviewing its financial controls. It is the first time a named CEO of a lender has spoken publicly about MFS losses.
FRP Advisory is appointed to oversee nearly 250 property-owning companies that borrowed from MFS — a third administration track alongside AlixPartners and Begbies/Coots & Boots. Properties include addresses in Kensington, Belgravia, Knightsbridge, and Mayfair. Directors Khemanand Hurhangee, Dipeshkumar Patel, and Dipendra Amin named in connection with these entities. Raja's representative states he was not involved in these companies.
Judge Catherine Burton refuses to allow Paresh Raja to install his preferred insolvency practitioners (BTG Begbies Traynor / Coots & Boots) at Pearl Bridging — an MFS-connected entity. The judge described the attempt as "almost like an administration by the back door." The ruling signals the courts are alert to attempts by Raja to influence the administration proceedings from the outside.
A London judge places eight MFS-connected companies into administration following an urgent application by Zircon Bridging and Amber Bridging. Court filings allege a network of companies linked to Paresh Raja sits at the centre of a fraud causing a £1.3 billion shortfall — up from the £930m figure cited in earlier proceedings.
Mr Justice Marcus Smith, in a High Court judgment published weeks before the MFS administration, found that Paresh Raja showed "an obvious intention to create deceptive documents to justify illegitimate payments" in a £20.5m Dubai property deal involving the Fakhruddin brothers. This judgment was in the public domain before MFS collapsed. What lenders, auditors, and regulators knew — and when — is now a live question.
Bloomberg publishes its most in-depth MFS feature to date — a longform investigation centred on 60 Ennismore Gardens, Knightsbridge, and how Santander and Barclays missed red flags across MFS's sprawling property network. The piece confirms Barclays CEO Venkatakrishnan described MFS as "a fairly deep and sophisticated fraud" at the Morgan Stanley conference.
The Financial Conduct Authority confirms it has opened an enforcement investigation into MFS — the first publicly disclosed regulatory action. The FCA notes MFS was an Annex 1 firm, supervised only for anti-money laundering compliance, not broader financial regulation. Raja's lawyers tell The Telegraph: "Mistakes have been made but there has been no intention to defraud whatsoever." Separately, City AM reports the Bank of England rejected calls from the House of Lords to accelerate a stress test of the private credit sector — Governor Andrew Bailey says results will come in early 2027. The FCA probe focuses on whether MFS complied with money laundering regulations.
AlixPartners handles MFS Ltd. Begbies Traynor and Coots & Boots handle the connected entities. Legal proceedings expected across multiple jurisdictions. No criminal referral publicly confirmed. Raja's location unconfirmed. Whether this ends in fraud charges, civil recovery, or something else is still ahead of us.
People connected to MFS based on public records. We want to know more about all of them — what they knew, when they knew it, and what they did.
Raja built MFS and ran it throughout the period under scrutiny. After the collapse he issued a statement calling it a "technical and procedural impasse" — rejected flatly by creditors and administrators in court. He was named by Al Jazeera, Bloomberg, and others in connection with financing Saifuzzaman Chowdhury's £295m UK property portfolio. In court, counsel for Zircon and Amber allegedly stated he had "fled to Dubai." A worldwide asset-freezing order — granted by courts in both London and Dubai — now restricts him from moving assets or spending more than £5,000 per week without administrator approval. A travel ban has also been issued. His lawyers told The Daily Telegraph: "Mistakes have been made but there has been no intention to defraud whatsoever. Mr Raja has not been the beneficiary of any shortfall (if any) there may be." Barclays CEO CS Venkatakrishnan described MFS publicly as "a fairly deep and sophisticated fraud." The FCA has opened a formal enforcement investigation.
Two independent directors were brought in during March 2025 — a move that can signal a company under external scrutiny or regulatory pressure. By early January 2026, Sharon Hewes had resigned. Stuart Hicks followed. Both termination filings (TM01) were made at Companies House on 20 February 2026 — the same day as the administration application. Raja's wife also left the business days before the filing. By the time MFS entered administration, Paresh Raja was the sole remaining director. We want to understand why these directors were appointed, what they found, and why they left.
Bangladesh's former Land Minister built a £295m property portfolio — 482 properties across the UK, Dubai and the US — while earning a declared salary of ~$13,000 a year and subject to Bangladesh's $12,000 annual currency export limit. MFS and Paresh Raja were identified by Bloomberg, Al Jazeera, the Guardian, and the FT as central to financing this portfolio. After the fall of the Hasina government in August 2024, 259 of 352 MFS-linked loans were rapidly repaid. Bangladesh's Anti-Corruption Commission has frozen Chowdhury's accounts. The UK's National Crime Agency is reported to be investigating. The connection between these loan repayments, the subsequent collapse of MFS, and the alleged collateral shortfall is one of the central unanswered questions of this investigation.
Alongside AlixPartners (appointed to MFS Ltd itself), a separate insolvency team has been installed at MFS Group connected entities. Stephen Katz of Begbies Traynor and Nimish Patel of Coots & Boots were appointed to "a number of companies connected with the MFS case." Private creditor Mukesh Patel (no relation) — who holds a reported £7.8m claim — pushed for this appointment and is coordinating a group of unsecured creditors owed approximately £169m. The parallel administration processes raise questions about which entities hold which assets and how recoveries will be divided.
AlixPartners submitted the court documents describing the alleged £930m shortfall. Their reports to creditors will be the most important source of factual information as this administration proceeds. We're tracking every public filing. If you have access to any creditor communications or administrator updates that haven't been published, we want to see them.
These two firms went to court before MFS did — which raises obvious questions about what they knew and when. Their ownership structure isn't clearly established in public records. Their prior relationship with MFS isn't either. We think understanding these two firms is probably key to understanding how the collapse began. If you know who's behind them, please get in touch.
Court documents confirm support from "major international financial institutions" whose names are redacted. Beyond the five publicly confirmed lenders, we don't know who else is in the frame, for how much, or under what terms. This is one of our active lines of inquiry. If you work at an institution that had exposure to MFS — or if you know which institutions did — we'd like to hear from you.
Court filings don't just refer to MFS Ltd — they flag concerns about "entities in its wider MFS Group." What those entities are, who controls them, and whether any were used to hold assets or move money in ways that would matter to creditors: these are open questions. We're mapping the corporate structure. Any help is welcome.
The things that keep us up at night. If you know something that bears on any of these, use the form below.
A £930m shortfall on £1.16bn of loans doesn't happen by accident. Either the same assets were knowingly pledged to multiple lenders, or MFS's internal controls were so broken that nobody noticed. Neither explanation reflects well on management. The harder question is whether anyone outside the firm — auditors, lenders, brokers — had reason to suspect something was wrong and said nothing. We want to find out.
UnansweredMFS had a £2.4bn loan book and was pulling in £71m a year in revenue. Its net assets were £15.9 million. The arithmetic is odd. We want to understand the fee structures, any related-party transactions, dividend payments, and whether money moved in ways that aren't obvious from the public accounts. If you have sight of the internal financials, or know someone who does, that would be significant.
UnansweredSomeone almost always knows, or suspects, before the end. Former employees, brokers who noticed patterns in how deals were structured, lenders whose due diligence threw up questions — we want to hear from anyone who raised a flag and was told not to worry about it. Or who saw something and didn't raise it but wishes they had.
UnansweredThe administration order covers MFS Ltd — but court filings mention the "wider MFS Group." We want a complete map: every connected company, trust, or vehicle associated with MFS or its principals. Were any of them used to hold assets, strip value, or otherwise complicate the picture for creditors trying to recover money? The group structure matters.
UnansweredMFS was FCA-regulated. The FCA had supervisory responsibility. It hasn't yet said publicly whether it was aware of any concerns before the administration filing, whether it has opened a formal investigation, or whether it intends to make any criminal referrals. That silence tells its own story. We're pushing for answers.
UnansweredThey moved before anyone else. They went to court citing concerns that were specific and credible. Their ownership isn't clear from public records. Their relationship to MFS isn't either. We'd very much like to know who is behind these two firms, what their exposure was, and what made them act when they did rather than waiting to see if things resolved themselves. There's a story in there somewhere.
UnansweredWe're still early into this. There's a lot we don't have yet. If you had any contact with MFS — as staff, a borrower, a broker, an adviser, a regulator, a competitor — you probably know something we don't. Even small things can matter.
Some specifics we're short on:
You can also email us directly: tips@mfsfiles.org
Known relationships between MFS and the institutions and individuals around it — based on public records and published reporting. Updated 28 March 2026. Dashed lines indicate connections that are alleged, unconfirmed, or where the nature of the relationship is unclear. This map is incomplete. Tell us what's missing.
Click a node for details. Dashed lines = alleged or unconfirmed. This map is a work in progress — it only shows what's in the public record. If you know more, tell us.
Published coverage we've found useful. If you're a journalist on this story and want to compare notes, use the tip form.
Public filings and records — and things we're still looking for. If you have court documents, admin updates, or anything internal, use the tip form below.
This website is produced by independent journalists and is not affiliated with, funded by, or directed by Market Financial Solutions Ltd, AlixPartners, any creditor institution, any borrower, any investor, any legal firm, or any government body. No organisation has paid for or influenced coverage on this page.
All factual claims published on this page are sourced from court documents, publicly available records (including Companies House filings), published media reports, or direct submissions with stated provenance. This is a developing story. Information may be incomplete, subject to revision, or contested. We correct errors promptly when they are identified. Where information is alleged, unverified, or subject to legal proceedings, it is clearly labelled as such.
All statements on this page regarding named individuals or companies are either (a) reproduced from or accurately summarising court documents filed in ongoing proceedings; (b) drawn from published and attributed media reports; or (c) clearly identified as unverified allegations submitted by third parties. Nothing on this page is intended to defame any individual or entity. Where claims are contested, we aim to represent all available perspectives. Individuals or organisations who believe a published statement is inaccurate or defamatory are invited to contact the editors with supporting evidence. We will review and respond promptly.
Nothing on this site is legal or financial advice. If you think you have a claim — as a borrower, investor, creditor, or counterparty — talk to a solicitor. We can point you towards publicly available information about the administration, but we can't give you legal advice on your specific situation.
We take source protection seriously. The identity of any individual who submits a tip to this page will not be disclosed to any third party — including MFS, its administrators, creditors, law enforcement, or any court — without the explicit prior consent of the source, except where we are compelled by a valid court order issued in England & Wales. We advise sources who are concerned about their safety or legal position to use Signal for encrypted messaging, and avoid submitting tips from work devices or work networks. We are not lawyers and cannot provide legal protection to sources.
By submitting, you're confirming you're not breaching an NDA, a fiduciary duty, or any other legal obligation — and that you have the right to share what you're sharing. We can't vouch for the accuracy of tips we receive from third parties. Tips may be shared with other journalists, law enforcement agencies, or regulatory bodies (including the FCA and Serious Fraud Office) where we believe it serves the public interest, but your identity will not be shared without your consent.
The administration of Market Financial Solutions Ltd is the subject of active legal proceedings in the High Court of England & Wales. Some information about those proceedings may be subject to reporting restrictions or court orders. We won't publish anything we believe could prejudice proceedings or breach a court order. Worth being aware that information shared publicly in connection with live proceedings may have legal consequences.
Quoted extracts from published media reports and court documents are used under the doctrine of fair dealing for the purposes of reporting matters of public interest, in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (UK). Copyright in original content published on this page belongs to the respective authors. Documents submitted to this page remain the property of their authors; by submitting, you grant us a licence to publish and share them for journalistic and public-interest purposes.
Legal notices, takedown requests, corrections, or press enquiries should be directed via the tip submission form on this page, clearly marked "LEGAL" or "PRESS ENQUIRY." We try to respond within five working days. This form is not a valid address for service of legal proceedings; formal legal correspondence should be directed to our legal representatives in the first instance via the contact form.