How Did This Multi-Million Euro Scam Last So Long?

A major investment fraud network processed funds through Maltese-licensed payment firms. Yet authorities failed to intervene in time.

A recent investigation by the Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) has revealed how an international scam network defrauded victims across multiple countries, moving millions through regulated financial institutions, including a Malta-licensed payment provider, OpenPayd. The leaked documents show that fraudulent transactions took place over an extended period, raising serious questions about why authorities and financial regulators failed to act sooner.

Were Anti-Money Laundering Measures Ignored?

Under European and Maltese financial regulations, entities handling transactions (particularly those involving high-risk industries like financial trading) must adhere to stringent anti-money laundering (AML) protocols. Payment service providers such as OpenPayd are legally obligated to monitor and report suspicious transactions to authorities, including the Financial Intelligence Analysis Unit (FIAU) .

Despite this, the leaked records show that at least €2.5 million in suspected fraudulent funds passed through OpenPayd in a three-month period alone. The funds, linked to CurrencyRock, a Lithuanian entity running a suspected sham investment platform, were then funneled to another Malta-based company, Payhound.

If such transactions occurred over months or even years, why were there no timely red flags raised? Did OpenPayd and other payment intermediaries submit Suspicious Transaction Reports (STRs) to the FIAU or other relevant enforcement bodies? And if so, what actions were taken?

Who Was Responsible for Oversight?

The Malta Financial Services Authority (MFSA), responsible for overseeing financial service providers, declined to comment on specific cases. However, it stated that “appropriate regulatory and enforcement action is taken in accordance with its mandate.”

But this response leaves critical questions unanswered:

• Did MFSA conduct any compliance reviews of OpenPayd or Payhound in light of the transactions revealed in the leak?
• Were FIAU or the Malta Police’s Financial Crimes Investigation Department (FCID) alerted and if so, why was no immediate action taken?
• Have any cross-border investigations been initiated with Europol, the European Banking Authority (EBA) or other international enforcement agencies?

The Financial Arbiter’s Decision: A Loophole That Let Firms Walk Free?

Multiple scam victims attempted to seek recourse by filing complaints before Malta’s Financial Services Arbiter, Alfred Mifsud. However, in at least three cases in 2024, complaints against OpenPayd were dismissed on technical grounds. The arbiter ruled that since the scam victims were not direct clients of OpenPayd, the payment provider fell outside the jurisdiction of his office.

This loophole effectively allowed OpenPayd to continue operations despite facilitating transactions linked to fraudulent activities. However, Mifsud acknowledged the issue, stating that upcoming legal changes “aim to ensure that any licensed financial service provider involved in a suspected fraudulent transaction will be answerable to the arbiter.”

While this may be a step forward, it does not address the fact that OpenPayd continued processing suspect payments for an extended period. Should financial authorities have intervened earlier?

International Investigations and Malta’s Role

The scale of the scam is staggering. The leak uncovered that, between 2021 and 2025, two fraud networks (one based in Georgia and another in Israel and Europe) processed over €260 million from unsuspecting victims. Documents show that these criminal networks operated structured call centers, with scammers working out of major cities, using deceptive social media ads and sophisticated manipulation tactics to steal funds.

Despite multiple victims reporting their losses to law enforcement, investigations remain fragmented across jurisdictions. Law enforcement agencies in Sweden, Germany, Canada and Australia have initiated inquiries, yet there is no clear indication that Maltese authorities (including the FIAU, MFSA or Malta Police) have taken direct enforcement actions against the entities implicated in the leak.

The lack of swift regulatory and legal action raises concerns about whether Malta’s financial oversight mechanisms are robust enough to prevent such schemes from flourishing.

The Need for Accountability

The revelations in this investigation underscore the urgent need for greater accountability from payment service providers, regulators and law enforcement agencies. As more details emerge, authorities such as the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) and the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) should be asking why firms like OpenPayd and Payhound were able to process millions in suspect transactions before any meaningful intervention occurred.

The FIAU, Malta Police and MFSA now have an obligation to clarify:

• What actions, if any, have been taken against OpenPayd, Payhound and other involved entities?
• Were any Suspicious Transaction Reports filed with the FIAU regarding these fraudulent payments?
• Why were victims unable to receive proper recourse through the Financial Services Arbiter?

If such a large-scale scam could operate for years without effective intervention, it raises a troubling possibility: Are regulatory bodies turning a blind eye or are enforcement mechanisms simply too weak to stop financial crime in real-time?

The victims deserve answers. Will authorities finally act or will this be another case of financial fraud slipping through the cracks?

FAQs

What is the main issue discussed in this article?
The article discusses a major investment fraud network that processed funds through Maltese-licensed payment firms, raising questions about the failure of authorities to intervene in time.

What was the role of OpenPayd in the fraud?
OpenPayd, a Malta-licensed payment provider, processed millions in suspected fraudulent funds linked to a scam investment platform.

Why did authorities fail to act sooner?
The investigation raises concerns about why authorities, including the FIAU, MFSA, and Malta Police, failed to intervene despite large sums of suspicious transactions.

What are Anti-Money Laundering (AML) measures?
AML measures are protocols that payment service providers must follow to detect and report suspicious transactions to prevent money laundering and financial crimes.

How much fraudulent money passed through OpenPayd?
At least €2.5 million in suspected fraudulent funds passed through OpenPayd in just a three-month period.

What is the Financial Services Arbiter’s role?
The Financial Services Arbiter, Alfred Mifsud, handles complaints related to financial services. However, complaints against OpenPayd were dismissed on technical grounds, leaving victims without recourse.

Did OpenPayd comply with AML protocols?
Despite the suspicious funds being processed, it's unclear whether OpenPayd followed all required AML protocols, including filing Suspicious Transaction Reports (STRs).

What is the Financial Intelligence Analysis Unit (FIAU)?
The FIAU is Malta’s financial intelligence agency, responsible for investigating and addressing money laundering activities and suspicious transactions.

How did international authorities respond to the scam?
Authorities in countries like Sweden, Germany, Canada, and Australia have initiated investigations, but there has been no clear action from Maltese authorities.

What needs to change to prevent such fraud in the future?
The article calls for greater accountability from payment providers, regulators, and law enforcement agencies to prevent large-scale fraud and ensure timely intervention.