Europe, handled as one case — not twenty-seven
Cross-border cases stall for a predictable reason: each authority sees only its own fragment. We keep a single evidence file and file into every relevant jurisdiction from it, so the case is read as one connected matter rather than a series of unrelated complaints.
- 27
- European jurisdictions
- 13+
- Authority channels
- 6
- Language
- 1995
- Practising since
Western Europe
- Ireland
- France
- Belgium
- Netherlands
- Luxembourg
- United Kingdom
Southern Europe
- Italy
- Spain
- Portugal
- Greece
- Cyprus
- Malta
Central Europe
- Germany
- Austria
- Poland
- Czechia
- Slovakia
- Hungary
- Slovenia
Northern & Baltic Europe
- Denmark
- Sweden
- Finland
- Estonia
- Latvia
- Lithuania
South-Eastern Europe
- Croatia
- Romania
- Bulgaria
The channels we coordinate
Different fraud types belong to different desks. Sending everything to the police is the most common reason a report dies quietly. These are the channel types our filings are routed through.
National cybercrime and economic-crime units
Criminal complaints in the jurisdiction where the loss occurred and, where relevant, where the funds landed. Filed to the specialist unit rather than a general desk.
Financial supervisors and market regulators
Complaints against licensed banks, payment institutions, e-money firms and investment intermediaries — including firms that falsely claim authorisation.
Financial Intelligence Units
Suspicious-activity notifications where fraud proceeds have moved through accounts inside the regulated system.
Data protection authorities
Where personal data was harvested, misused or unlawfully transferred as part of the fraud.
Financial ombudsman and dispute schemes
Escalation where a bank or payment institution has declined a reimbursement or complaint without proper basis.
Receiving institutions and exchanges
Direct formal notice and freeze requests to the banks, payment institutions and virtual-asset service providers that hold or held traced funds.
Why the cross-border piece is the whole game
A typical matter involves the country of residence, the country of the receiving bank, the country where an intermediary is licensed, and the country where an exchange or corporate shell sits. Filed separately, each authority sees a small loss with no context and prioritises accordingly. Filed as one connected file, with the tracing attached and the related matters cross-referenced, the same facts read as an organised operation — and are treated as one.
- One evidence file, translated and adapted per jurisdiction rather than rewritten.
- Parallel filings timed so that acknowledgements can be cross-referenced.
- Related matters grouped where the operator, wallets or infrastructure overlap.
- A single case officer holding the whole picture, in your language.
Cases rarely stay in one country.
Neither does the file. Have the jurisdictional position assessed at no cost.