- Banxso used deepfake ads and false promises to lure South Africans into a rigged trading platform, draining life savings through offshore laundering.
- The Western Cape High Court provisionally liquidated the firm, citing structural fraud and misuse of investor funds.
- The case highlights regulatory blind spots, as Banxso continued onboarding clients despite its suspended license.
Carol Margaret Wentzel never imagined that her retirement would be defined by a courtroom battle. A 60-year-old pensioner with three decades of service in South Africa’s retail sector, Wentzel entrusted her life savings, nearly half a million rand, to Banxso (Pty) Ltd, a financial service provider promising high returns through Contracts for Difference (CFDs).
What she received instead was a devastating loss, a blocked trading account, and a legal fight that now implicates over 7 000 investors. The Western Cape High Court provisionally ordered the liquidation of Banxso, citing a business model “designed to defraud investors” and a pattern of conduct that Judge Le Grange described as “deceptive in the true sense of the word.”
But this case is more than a legal milestone; it’s a cautionary tale about digital finance, regulatory oversight, and the vulnerability of ordinary South Africans in the age of algorithmic persuasion.
A pensioner’s plunge into the digital abyss
Wentzel’s journey began with a Facebook ad featuring Elon Musk in what appeared to be a televised interview. The ad, linked to a fictitious platform called Immediate Matrix, promised a miraculous return, R4 700 invested would yield R34 300 in just one week. Intrigued and hopeful, Wentzel clicked through, submitted her details, and was promptly contacted by Banxso agents.
What followed was a textbook case of high-pressure sales tactics. Agents guided Wentzel through deposits, trades, and promises of profit. Her initial R1 800 investment appeared to grow. Encouraged, she deposited R30 000, then R470 000. Within weeks, her entire investment was wiped out, allegedly due to a failed “recovery bonus” form submission. When she tried to withdraw her funds, she was told to invest more.
Wentzel’s experience was not isolated. The court heard affidavits from multiple intervening parties, including David van der Merwe, who lost R1.5 million. All claimed they were misled, manipulated, and ultimately defrauded by Banxso’s agents, some of whom continued onboarding clients even after Banxso’s license was provisionally withdrawn by the Financial Sector Conduct Authority (FSCA) in October 2024.
Behind the curtain, a network of shells and crypto
Banxso claimed to operate as a “Straight Through Processor,” merely facilitating trades between clients and offshore liquidity providers. But the FSCA’s investigation painted a different picture.
The liquidity providers, Flamingo Clearing House, Flamingo Capital Services, and Eclat Technologies, were either unlicensed, inactive, or owned by Banxso’s sole shareholder, identified in the judgment as Mr Sekler. Payments to these entities were minimal and inconsistent with the volume of client deposits. Instead, hundreds of millions of rands flowed through Banxso’s bank accounts, often converted into cryptocurrency via intermediaries like FiveWest and Blockkoin.
The FSCA found that client funds were co-mingled with operational expenses, used for personal purchases, and transferred to unrelated entities such as Ahead Start and Valor Vault. In one instance, R322 446 was sent to a Cyprus-based company owned by Sekler, prompting the South African Reserve Bank to freeze Banxso’s Capitec account.
The courtroom as a crucible for accountability
Judge Le Grange’s ruling was unequivocal. Banxso’s operations were not only unlawful, but structurally deceptive. The court accepted Wentzel’s claim under the condictio ob turpem vel iniustam causam, a legal principle allowing recovery of funds transferred under illegal or void contracts.
The judgment also struck out Banxso’s attempts to discredit Wentzel’s attorneys, Mostert & Bosman, accusing them of “touting” and collusion with regulators. These allegations were dismissed as “reckless and offensive generalisations.”
Crucially, the court granted leave for multiple investors to join the application as co-applicants, recognising their legally cognisable interest and rejecting Banxso’s argument that their claims were “reasonably disputed”.
Conviction.co.za
Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.
2 Comments
The ‘R4,700’ fraud continues unabated on YouTube, relentlessly. They are using well-known South African personalities, politicians (Helen Zille is one) and businessmen to advertise it, with promises of making many thousands almost instantly, GUARANTEED.
I was caught in the Banxso fraud, not via YouTube but via Microsoft, and I am still getting dubious phone calls every week from persons with mid-European accents just like the Banxso fraudsters, purporting to be from a company, based in the UK, that gets funds back for defrauded victims. When I say put it in writing, they will not.
They have not stopped, just slithered on to the next con.
Mr Mudzuli, please consider your investigation ‘not closed’.
Hi there. Noted with thanks… Sorry for what you went through.