Wolverhampton Councillor Scrutinized Over Promotion of Multi-Billion-Dollar Crypto Scheme
Wolverhampton, Saturday, 7 November 2026.
Wolverhampton councillor Susan Lawrence faces scrutiny after promoting the collapsed $1.9 billion HyperVerse crypto fraud, despite currently sitting on a committee overseeing a multimillion-pound public budget.
A Councillor’s Dual Role: Promoter and Overseer
Susan Lawrence, a Reform UK councillor elected to Wolverhampton City Council, has become the focal point of a growing governance scandal after it was revealed that she had actively promoted HyperVerse, a cryptocurrency investment scheme that collapsed in 2022 with an estimated loss of $1.9 billion (1.909 billion USD) to global investors [1][2]. While Lawrence’s current role includes serving on the council’s audit and risk committee—where she helps oversee the financial reporting and governance of a multimillion-pound municipal budget [1][2]—her past involvement with HyperVerse has raised serious questions about conflicts of interest and institutional accountability. The juxtaposition of her dual roles has intensified scrutiny from local officials, financial regulators, and the public, particularly as HyperVerse is widely categorized by US federal authorities as a fraudulent pyramid and Ponzi scheme with no legitimate revenue model beyond new investor funds [1].
The Rise and Fall of HyperVerse: A Scheme of Unprecedented Scale
HyperVerse operated from 2020 to 2022 under the guise of a high-yield investment platform, promising returns as high as 12% monthly to participants worldwide [1][2]. However, US court documents later described it as a ‘fraudulent pyramid and Ponzi scheme’ that defrauded investors of approximately $1.89 billion USD (1.890 billion USD), equivalent to 1.41 billion GBP at the time of collapse [1][2]. The scheme’s collapse left many victims in severe financial distress, with reports indicating that some were driven to suicidal ideation due to the loss of life savings and pensions [1][2]. Lawrence, identified as a ‘super leader’ within the scheme, played a prominent role in its UK promotion, traveling to Dubai in 2021 to meet HyperVerse co-founder Sam Lee—a move that occurred despite the UK Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) issuing a public warning against the platform in 2021 advising consumers to ‘avoid dealing with this firm and beware of scams’ [1][2].
Regulatory Warnings Ignored: The FCA’s Caution and Lawrence’s Continued Involvement
The UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) issued a formal warning against HyperVerse and its associated entities in July 2021, explicitly cautioning the public about the risks of engaging with the platform [1]. Despite this regulatory intervention, Lawrence continued to promote HyperVerse and later iterations such as HyperNation and Vidilook, positioning herself as a ‘super leader’ for Vidilook—a role typically reserved for high-level promoters within pyramid schemes [1]. The FCA’s intervention underscores a broader pattern of regulatory challenges in policing decentralized and cross-border crypto frauds, particularly those operating before the implementation of stricter crypto-asset regulations in the UK and EU [1][alert! ‘Regulatory timelines for crypto oversight vary; comprehensive frameworks were still evolving in 2021’].
Reform UK’s Response and the Broader Implications for Public Trust
In response to the revelations, Reform UK issued a statement defending Lawrence, asserting that she was ‘one of many victims of this scam,’ having lost her pension and tens of thousands of pounds in the scheme [1]. The party spokesperson added that Lawrence later became involved with HyperNation in an attempt to recover her losses and claimed that she had not been employed by UK promoter Desmond Amey—whose company was shut down by the UK High Court for funneling millions into the platforms—and had not been questioned by any authority regarding her links to HyperVerse [1]. While Reform UK’s defense attempts to contextualize Lawrence’s actions as those of a deceived individual, the episode has nonetheless spotlighted the risks posed when public officials with financial oversight roles have prior affiliations with fraudulent investment schemes. The case serves as a cautionary tale for local governments worldwide, emphasizing the need for stringent vetting processes in the selection of audit committee members and greater transparency regarding financial conflicts of interest.