Investment Fraud Attorneys | Protect Your Financial Interests

Burger Huyser Attorneys handles investment fraud matters through its general litigation practice, taking instructions from investors who have lost money to fraudulent or unauthorised financial services providers across Gauteng. The service runs a dual track from the firm’s head office at 49 First Avenue, Linden, Randburg — civil recovery in the Magistrate’s Court or the Gauteng Division of the High Court, alongside an aligned regulatory complaint to the Financial Sector Conduct Authority (FSCA) where the conduct falls within the FAIS Act — and extends to urgent interdicts to preserve assets and supporting affidavits for criminal referral to the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation (the Hawks).

Why Engage a Specialist Investment Fraud Attorney

Investment fraud cases sit at the intersection of two legal layers that a generalist often treats in isolation: a regulatory layer (the FSCA, the FAIS Act, and, where the instrument is JSE-listed, exchange rules) and a civil-recovery layer (claims against the financial services provider, individual representatives, and third-party facilitators). Each layer has its own procedural track, evidence rules, and remedies, and missing either side typically costs the client recoverable money or a winnable procedural point.

Several recurring features make these matters more fragile than ordinary commercial disputes:

• Unauthorised FSPs are common. A meaningful share of the matters the firm sees involve a financial services provider operating without FAIS authorisation. Civil recovery against an unauthorised FSP requires careful framing because the FAIS Act’s voiding provisions change what remedies are available, and the defendant may have structured the entity precisely to fall outside the regulatory net.
• Forensic-accounting evidence is the file’s spine. Whether the claim survives depends on whether bank records, statements, FSP agreements, and the digital trail are preserved before the FSP’s records disappear. Once the FSP suspects a complaint, records often do.
• Parallel complaints unlock settlement. Where the FSP is investigatable by the FSCA or criminally chargeable by the Hawks, parallel complaints can pressure asset preservation and bring a settled outcome within months rather than years.

What the Service Covers (Scope of Engagement)

Investment fraud work at the firm covers the full arc of an investor’s matter — from the first call to enforcement of any order obtained — and is run through the same contentious-practice team that handles commercial and contractual disputes.

Stage	What the firm does
Initial intake and triage	Fact-pattern review, identification of the legal route (FAIS complaint, civil claim, criminal complaint, or combination), and conflict checks
Evidence preservation	Formal demands for the FSP’s books and records, advising the client on preserving communications, and coordinating with forensic accountants where the paper trail is complex
Pre-litigation recovery	Letter of demand, structured settlement negotiation, and asset-preservation steps, including interdicts where the funds are being dissipated
Regulatory complaints	Drafting and lodging complaints to the FSCA under the FAIS Act 37 of 2002 and the Financial Sector Regulation Act 9 of 2017, and coordinating with the FSCA’s enforcement division where systemic fraud is suspected
Civil litigation	Pursuing claims in the Magistrate’s Court (claims up to R400,000) or the Gauteng Division of the High Court (larger claims), including derivative claims against third-party facilitators
Criminal complaints	Preparing supporting affidavits for SAPS or the Hawks where the conduct crosses into criminal fraud
Defence representation	Defending investors or representatives facing consequential claims (for example, from counterparties or from the FSP’s liquidators)

Common Forms of Investment Fraud in South Africa

The patterns below appear repeatedly in matters the firm fields through its general litigation practice. None of them is mutually exclusive — most files combine two or three.

• Unauthorised FSPs / FAIS section 7 contraventions. Rendering financial services without an FAIS licence. The agreement may be void in some respects, but the recovery claim is still available.
• Ponzi and pyramid schemes. New investors’ funds pay earlier “returns,” and the structure collapses when recruitment slows.
• Affinity and advance-fee schemes. Targeting communities, faith groups, or professional networks; demanding upfront “fees” before the supposed investment is processed.
• Commodity and foreign-exchange scams. Typically marketed through social media or unsolicited calls, offering guaranteed returns.
• Cryptocurrency and “high-yield” investment platforms. Often offshore and unregulated; recovery is harder but not impossible.
• Property syndication and share-sale fraud. Misrepresentation of the underlying asset’s value, sometimes funnelled through a registered FSP to lend legitimacy.

The South African Legal Framework

The statutes below are the ones most often cited in an investment-fraud file. The outline is deliberately short — the practitioner’s job is to identify which of these layers actually applies to the fact pattern, not to invoke all of them.

Statute	Role in an investment-fraud file
FAIS Act 37 of 2002	The conduct-of-business and licensing regime for financial services providers; section 7 makes it an offence to render financial services without authorisation
Financial Sector Regulation Act 9 of 2017	The Twin Peaks framework that established the FSCA in its current form and empowered it to investigate and refer matters
Common-law fraud and delict	Civil claims for damages flowing from the fraudulent conduct; the foundation of most investor-side recovery claims
Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act 12 of 2004	The relevant criminal-law route for many investment-fraud fact patterns
Companies Act 71 of 2008	Applicable where the FSP is a juristic entity and the fraudulent conduct is orchestrated through the company
Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008	Applies to certain investment-marketing conduct, particularly where the FSP directly markets to the consumer

Before any new investment is accepted, the FSCA’s FSP register is the authoritative source for verifying whether the provider holds a valid FAIS licence — this single check, done in time, prevents most of the matters the firm now handles.

Where Matters Are Heard

Investment-fraud matters run on two parallel tracks: a monetary-recovery track in the courts and a regulatory track at the FSCA.

• Magistrate’s Court for civil claims up to R400,000, with jurisdiction depending on the defendant’s domicile or the cause of action.
• Gauteng Division of the High Court (Pretoria and Johannesburg seats) for larger civil claims, urgent interdicts, and statutory disputes.
• The Gauteng Division’s specialised commercial court movement for complex commercial-fraud matters.
• FSCA enforcement matters run in parallel; an FSCA investigation may lead to administrative penalties or referrals to the National Prosecuting Authority.

The relevant branch is engaged depending on the matter’s forum — Centurion and Pretoria for matters at the Pretoria seat of the Gauteng Division, Sandton or Randburg for the Johannesburg seat, and so on. This coordination is one of the practical benefits of running the matter through a multi-branch firm with a single head-office intake point.

What to Look for When Choosing an Investment Fraud Attorney

Selecting counsel for an investment-fraud matter is not the same as selecting counsel for a routine contractual dispute. The considerations that follow distinguish a specialist from a generalist on facts that recur across this practice area:

• Litigation depth. These matters run through motion and trial court; the attorney should have a documented contentious-practice track record, including urgent motion work where assets are being dissipated.
• Forensic-accounting coordination. The attorney should be able to work with a forensic accountant or instruct counsel where the financial trail is complex.
• FAIS and FSCA familiarity. Knowing the FAIS framework, the FSCA’s enforcement posture, and common FSP structures saves time and shapes the right remedy from the outset.
• Conflict-free intake. Investment fraud matters sometimes touch FSPs who are also clients of the broader firm; clear conflict checks at intake protect the client’s file.
• Transparent cost structure. Fees should be quoted after the initial triage, with a clear distinction between the pre-litigation letter-of-demand phase and the litigious phase.

Burger Huyser Attorneys meets this profile through its general litigation practice, led by Director Nadine Roesch-Prinsloo as Head of General Litigation and director of the Roodepoort branch, with the firm’s multi-branch footprint allowing the matter to be handled at the court closest to the relevant seat of the Gauteng Division.

Practical Considerations: Cost, Timeline, What to Bring

Three questions drive most of the early decisions in an investment-fraud file:

Consideration	What to expect
Cost	Fees depend on the size and complexity of the claim, the number of perpetrators, and whether the matter resolves at the demand-letter stage or proceeds to trial. Burger Huyser quotes per file after the initial intake at the head office.
Timeline	Pre-litigation demand and negotiation typically takes one to three months. Litigated matters in the High Court commonly take 12 to 24 months to reach trial, with parallel FSCA or Hawks complaints potentially running longer.
What to bring to the first consultation	ID; the FSP’s marketing material; the investment agreement and any variation letters; all bank records and EFT confirmations; full correspondence (emails, WhatsApp messages, recorded calls where available); and any prior FSCA or SAPS complaint numbers.

Frequently Asked Questions

How much does an investment fraud attorney cost in South Africa?

Fees depend on the size of the claim, the number of perpetrators involved, and whether the matter resolves at the demand-letter stage or proceeds to litigation. Burger Huyser Attorneys quotes on a per-file basis after the initial triage at the head office (011 888 0246); the firm distinguishes between the pre-litigation phase and the litigious phase so the cost conversation is transparent up front.

How long does an investment fraud claim take to resolve?

Pre-litigation demand and negotiation typically takes one to three months. Litigated matters in the High Court commonly take 12 to 24 months to reach trial, with parallel FSCA or Hawks complaints potentially running longer. Where funds are being dissipated, the firm can move on an urgent interdict to preserve assets.

Can I recover money from an unauthorised FSP?

Yes. Operating without an FAIS licence is an offence under section 7 of the FAIS Act, and the underlying investment can be challenged on multiple grounds (voidness, common-law fraud, statutory consumer-protection remedies). The recovery route is more structured than for a regulated FSP, but it is available.

Should I lodge an FSCA complaint as well as a civil claim?

Often yes. The two run in parallel. The FSCA can investigate the FSP’s authorisation status, refer matters for prosecution, and apply administrative penalties, all of which can pressure asset preservation and unlock settlement. The civil claim is the route to actual monetary recovery.

What if the fraudster is outside South Africa?

Cross-border recovery is harder but possible. The firm coordinates with foreign counsel where the perpetrator or the funds are offshore, and parallel FSCA complaints can assist in identifying local facilitators. Cryptocurrency and offshore-platform matters are reviewed case-by-case.

Where is Burger Huyser Attorneys’ main office, and what are the hours?

49 First Avenue, Linden, Randburg, 2194. Tel 011 888 0246. Open Monday to Friday, 7:30am to 4:30pm, with an after-hours mobile line (061 516 6878) for urgent matters.

If you have lost money to an investment scam or suspect a financial services provider has acted fraudulently, contact Burger Huyser Attorneys’ head office on 011 888 0246 (after-hours 061 516 6878) or visit 49 First Avenue, Linden, Randburg, 2194. The firm handles investment fraud matters through its general litigation practice and coordinates with the relevant Gauteng branch depending on the forum of the matter. Bring your investment agreement, all bank records and EFT confirmations, the FSP’s marketing material, and any correspondence to the first consultation. The firm carries a 4.8/5 average across 250+ Google reviews (Trustindex-verified “Top Rated Law Firm in South Africa”), was named Commercial Law Firm of the Year 2025 by the 5 Star Lawyers Awards, and Best Multi-Sector Law Firm 2023 by Acquisition International.