Generating key takeaways...
Readers who bought bonds and cask investments marketed by Nicholas James Finance are warned recovery looks bleak after Whisky&Co entered liquidation and Companies House opened strike‑off proceedings against Linc Drinks, exposing disputed warehouse claims, bold valuation promises and potential breaches of investor eligibility checks.
Tony Hetherington has sounded a stark warning to readers who bought into investments promoted by Nicholas James Finance Ltd after two of the firms it marketed — Linc Drinks Ltd and Whisky&Co Ltd — have collapsed or face regulatory action, leaving investors facing an uphill battle to recover money. “I am afraid the picture does not look good,” he wrote in the Financial Mail on Sunday after reporting that Whisky&Co had gone into liquidation and that Companies House has opened strike‑off proceedings against Linc Drinks. (This column passed its evidence to the Financial Conduct Authority earlier in the year, prompting the regulator to open enquiries.)
The sales agent at the centre of the controversy, Nicholas James Finance, was not authorised by the Financial Conduct Authority to sell investments to the general public, according to the Mail on Sunday investigation. Companies House filings identify Ashley James Wilkinson as the director and person with significant control of Nicholas James Finance, and the company is registered in London. The firm appears to have relied on a legal exemption that permits the sale of high‑risk instruments to wealthy or sophisticated investors, but Hetherington reported that the firm did not adequately check whether purchasers met the necessary criteria before offering them risky bonds and cask investments.
The claims made for Linc Drinks were particularly bold. Prospectuses presented to potential investors sought only a relatively small sum of money but insisted Linc Drinks would reach a valuation of £150 million within a year and even hinted at a takeover by a household name in spirits — assertions Hetherington described as implausible. Companies House records show Linc Drinks was incorporated in 2017 and that filings name Sam Williams as a director appointed in 2024, but official filings do not verify commercial representations made to investors and the company has attracted a compulsory strike‑off notice for failing to file required documentation.
Problems with Whisky&Co’s pitch went beyond optimistic forecasts. Hetherington reported that Whisky&Co sold casks as investments on the basis that they would be stored in HMRC‑approved bonded warehouses in Scotland; in reality, the casks were said to be Irish whiskey held in Ireland. That distinction matters: HMRC’s rules on excise‑warehousing and duty suspension are jurisdictional, and goods held in Irish bonded warehouses fall under Irish excise procedures rather than HMRC oversight. Without clear, verifiable bonded‑warehouse paperwork showing UK storage, investor claims to HMRC protections are weak. Companies House records confirm Whisky&Co’s incorporation and filings, and name Ashley Wilkinson as its director.
Investors were also offered projections of annual returns of up to 12 per cent and reassurances of market access via connections with auction houses — claims Hetherington says were promoted by the sales firm. An auctioneer reportedly named in promotional material denied any close relationship when contacted, undermining another strand of the firms’ marketing narrative. Taken together, the combination of high return promises and disputed commercial links is the crux of why regulatory and insolvency professionals see the situation as serious.
Developments over the summer hardened the outlook. Whisky&Co went into liquidation on 5 August and Nicholas James Finance applied for strike‑off in late July, while Companies House has begun proceedings to remove Linc Drinks from the register after missed filings. Those formal steps, together with the lack of contactability of named directors at advertised business addresses, leave investors with limited immediate recourse and increase the likelihood of formal regulatory or insolvency action.
For people who bought casks or bonds, the legal and practical position is complicated. An Insolvency Service precedent in a separate cask case showed that where a liquidator or Official Receiver concludes a company does not own the goods held in bonded warehouses, the liquidator can disclaim warehouse contracts — effectively renouncing them as onerous — and advise customers to contact warehouses directly about beneficial ownership. That outcome does not guarantee recovery of money, because title, contractual arrangements and the paperwork evidencing bonded storage all determine whether customers remain beneficial owners or become unsecured creditors of an insolvent company. HMRC guidance on excise warehouses makes clear how important documentary proof of bonded storage and formal warehousekeeper responsibilities are to those determinations.
Given those legal mechanics, Hetherington and official notices point to practical steps for concerned investors: secure and preserve all documentation (contracts, invoices, warehouse receipts, emails and any promotional material), check Companies House filings for official records of officers and charges, contact the named warehouses to establish the physical and legal status of any casks, and notify the FCA and Insolvency Service of potential claims. Investors may also need to obtain specialist legal advice about whether they are treated as beneficial owners of product in bonded warehouses or as creditors of the companies that sold them the investments. The Mail on Sunday has reported the case to the FCA and invited responses from the firms’ directors, but the paper says it received no reply from the principal behind the group.
The unfolding affair underlines two wider points for anyone tempted by retail investments in alternative assets: statutory company filings show legal existence and officers but do not endorse commercial claims, and jurisdictional details about where goods are held and under whose bonded authority they sit can be decisive if things go wrong. Investors affected by these events now confront a combination of regulatory enquiry, insolvency procedure and the often slow business of proving ownership — a combination that, in similar past cases, has left many recovering only a fraction of what they invested.
📌 Reference Map:
Reference Map:
- Paragraph 1 – [1], [2]
- Paragraph 2 – [1], [3]
- Paragraph 3 – [1], [4]
- Paragraph 4 – [1], [5], [6]
- Paragraph 5 – [1], [2]
- Paragraph 6 – [1], [4], [5], [3]
- Paragraph 7 – [1], [7], [6]
- Paragraph 8 – [1], [7], [4], [6]
- Paragraph 9 – [1], [4], [5]
Source: Noah Wire Services
Noah Fact Check Pro
The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first
emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed
below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may
warrant further investigation.
Freshness check
Score:
8
Notes:
The narrative is recent, with the article dated August 17, 2025. The collapse of Whisky&Co Ltd into liquidation on August 5, 2025, and the strike-off proceedings against Linc Drinks Ltd in late July 2025, align with the timeline. However, similar issues with whisky cask investment firms have been reported earlier in 2025, such as the liquidation of Cask Whisky Ltd on October 8, 2024. ([gov.uk](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/cask-whisky-ltd-an-update-for-customers?utm_source=openai)) This suggests that while the specific companies mentioned are recent, the broader issue has been ongoing. The article appears to be based on a press release, which typically warrants a high freshness score.
Quotes check
Score:
7
Notes:
The article includes direct quotes attributed to Tony Hetherington. A search for these quotes reveals no exact matches in earlier publications, indicating they may be original or exclusive content. However, without access to the original press release, it’s challenging to confirm the originality of the quotes.
Source reliability
Score:
6
Notes:
The narrative originates from the Daily Mail, a reputable UK newspaper. However, the article is based on a press release, which may indicate a single-source narrative. The companies mentioned, such as Nicholas James Finance Ltd, Linc Drinks Ltd, and Whisky&Co Ltd, have limited online presence, raising questions about their verifiability. For instance, Companies House records confirm the incorporation of Whisky&Co Ltd, but detailed information is scarce. ([companiesintheuk.co.uk](https://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/ltd/whiskyco?utm_source=openai)) This lack of verifiable information about the companies involved suggests potential issues with source reliability.
Plausability check
Score:
5
Notes:
The claims about the collapse of Whisky&Co Ltd and the strike-off proceedings against Linc Drinks Ltd are plausible, given the recent developments in the whisky investment sector. However, the lack of detailed information about the companies involved and the reliance on a single press release raise concerns about the narrative’s credibility. The tone and language used in the article are consistent with typical journalistic reporting, but the absence of corroborating sources makes the claims less certain.
Overall assessment
Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): OPEN
Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): MEDIUM
Summary:
The narrative presents recent developments in the whisky investment sector, including the liquidation of Whisky&Co Ltd and the strike-off proceedings against Linc Drinks Ltd. While the timeline aligns with recent events, the reliance on a single press release and the limited verifiability of the companies involved raise concerns about the narrative’s credibility. Further independent verification is recommended to confirm the accuracy of the claims made.
