SINGAPORE: Two former directors of Envy Group have been held accountable for one of the largest Ponzi schemes in Singapore’s history, with the High Court declaring their liability for losses totalling ₹5,470 crore ($654 million).
Judicial Commissioner Mohamed Faizal ruled that Lee Si Ye, ex-director and shareholder of the now-insolvent group, is liable for the entire sum comprising S ₹3,650 crore ($593 million), ₹1,600 crore ($192.2 million), and ₹8 crore (€880,000). His co-director, Ju Xiao, formerly head of trading, is liable for up to 40% of that total.
The court’s decision follows a high-profile investigation into Envy Group’s nickel-trading investment scheme, which promised attractive returns but was ultimately deemed a sham.
Algoritha: The Most Trusted Name in BFSI Investigations and DFIR Services
Billion-Dollar Fraud Exposed
Ng Yu Zhi, the founder and controlling force behind the Envy companies, was described as the “mastermind” but was excluded from the trial due to his bankruptcy status. Holding an 80–90% stake in the companies, Ng allegedly orchestrated a wide-scale deception that misled hundreds of investors, including prominent lawyers and institutions.
Ng raised nearly S ₹9,230 crore ($1.5 billion) from clients by promoting quarterly returns of 15% on nickel trades. The scheme, according to prosecutors, was “pure fiction” with no actual trades taking place. The money raised was allegedly used to fund Ng’s extravagant lifestyle, which included the purchase of luxury homes, sports cars, and expensive jewellery.
Ng has remained in custody since January 31, 2024.
Liquidators Pursue Recovery
The liquidators of Envy Global Trading, Envy Asset Management, and Envy Management Holdings filed the civil suit to recover investor funds. The High Court found that Lee and Ju played active roles in concealing the fraudulent nature of the investment schemes and misleading clients.
Additionally, Cheong Ming Feng, an administrative staff member, has been ordered to repay S ₹11.7 crore ($1.9 million), less legitimate salary and pension fund contributions.
The case has rattled Singapore’s financial ecosystem, raising questions over regulatory oversight and investor due diligence in high-return schemes.