United States, 8th Sep 2026 — Kopa Limited says it believes it was targeted by a sophisticated bank-guarantee scam and has issued a formal complaint to Balkan Capital Assets LLC and its named Chief Executive Officer, Alexandru D. Bodislav, seeking repayment of a GBP 442,400 contract fee and USD 75,630 booking fee. No funded credit facility resulted. Balkan’s principal agreement, Addendum #01 and official notices identify Bodislav as CEO and carry his name and title.
Kopa says the key issue is not simply a lender’s refusal. Its complaint focuses on the evidence used to release escrow funds, the compulsory sequence of late-stage documents, the fact that a “full performance” acknowledgement was required after Kopa had relayed Barclays’ serious authenticity finding, and the prolonged pattern of unanswered calls after payment. Kopa repeatedly escalated the matter directly to CEO Alexandru D. Bodislav on 17 May 2026. After consulting Nahaboo, Bodislav replied that “on the company’s behalf all elements are in line” and left Nahaboo responsible for supporting Kopa. Kopa answered with details of another missed promised call and offered the complete communications record; Bodislav never replied again.
The transaction was intended to use an £8 million demand guarantee to support a £7.2 million facility. Kopa paid the booking fee and placed the contract fee into escrow in October 2025. The escrow agreement contemplated release in two tranches: 30% after evidence of a transmitted MT799 or substitute MT998, and 70% after evidence of an MT760.
On 28 October 2025, Balkan compliance stated that a SWIFT pre-advice had been transmitted through Asia Nexus Investment Bank and requested the first tranche. The next day, Kopa reported in writing that Barclays’ trade team could find neither the 14 October nor 28 October message.
The process then moved from SWIFT to a physical guarantee. WhatsApp messages show Balkan representative Christian Nahaboo asking Kopa on 5 November to confirm execution of a formal request, joint instructions and addendum “to speed up.” After Kopa confirmed, Nahaboo stated that Balkan would proceed with authorisation for the issuing bank to issue the guarantee.
On 11 November, Kopa told Nahaboo that Barclays’ SWIFT personnel had said a supplied document was “not genuine.” Kopa says Barclays’ complaints and fraud departments categorically confirmed that the purported transmission receipts were fake and that the messages had not been received.
On 12 November, Balkan sent a Collateral Receipt and Acceptance to be executed and certified the following day. The document required Kopa to acknowledge that Balkan had “fully, duly, and successfully performed” all obligations. Kopa signed it, believing execution was necessary to complete the package and proceed to drawdown.
Six days later, Millennium Financial Services rejected the drawdown because the physical guarantee had not been placed with a designated Recipient Bank. Nahaboo told Kopa there was “no need to panic,” called custody “nothing complicated at all,” described it as a normal service even small banks provided, said McPherson “always [had] a solution,” and said he was sure another bank would not refuse. Kopa says it contacted HSBC and Santander immediately, later approached every licensed UK bank and Santander Portugal, and found no bank willing to provide the required custody service. Other explored proposals relied on third-party escrow rather than custody by a European bank. Millennium terminated the facility and no loan funds were disbursed. Kopa alleges that Balkan required or accepted an impossible condition it knew—or was reckless as to whether—Kopa could satisfy, having failed to identify a willing custodian before the fees were released.
251 unanswered calls after payment
The deterioration began much earlier than March. From 1 December 2025 to 13 August 2026, the export contains 1,364 entries from McPherson: 960 written entries and 404 call-log entries. Between 1 December and 16 May alone, 251 calls were expressly marked “No answer”: 32 in December, 72 in January, 51 in February, 51 in March, 30 in April and 15 in May.
The most concentrated period ran from 27 March to 16 May 2026, when 52 voice calls and one video call were marked “No answer” and no completed call was logged. Nahaboo continued to send intermittent holding messages, often promising to call. On 17 May, McPherson recorded contemporaneously that more than 60 promised callbacks had not happened. Kopa’s allegation is therefore one of sustained post-payment avoidance of substantive engagement, not that literally every written message went unanswered.
Kopa calls for independent verification and refund
“The paperwork cannot be read in isolation from the process that produced it,” said Alistair McPherson of Kopa Limited. “We were told to sign the hard-copy documents so the transaction could proceed. From December onward I kept chasing: the export records 251 unanswered calls by mid-May, including 53 during one prolonged period without a single completed call. No funding ever arrived.”
Kopa is asking Balkan to return the two principal sums within 14 days, preserve all transaction records, and provide native or server-side evidence capable of independently establishing the alleged SWIFT transmissions and acknowledgements.
Balkan disputes responsibility
Balkan’s recorded position is that it fully performed by delivering the demand guarantee, acted transparently and in good faith, and cannot be responsible for Kopa’s obligations under a separate lender agreement. Balkan says Kopa requested the hard-copy route and later signed an acknowledgement of full performance; it attributes the failed drawdown to Kopa’s inability to satisfy Millennium’s custody conditions.
Kopa accepts that those are serious contractual points and has included them in its public account. It says they do not resolve whether the first escrow trigger was valid, whether the hard-copy and performance documents were procured through materially misleading representations or pressure, whether the instrument was practically usable for the identified purpose, or why so many post-payment calls went unanswered.
Public-interest warning
Marbella escrow lawyer’s involvement
The escrow correspondence identifies Oscar Abeti, Abogado, LLM and Solicitor of England & Wales, of BCP International Law Firm—the trading name of Cuatro Puertos Abogados S.L.U.P.—at Avenida Ricardo Soriano 12, Edificio Marqués de Salamanca 1º-1, 29601 Marbella, Spain (VAT B92153808). Those professional details are reproduced from his contemporaneous email signature.
Abeti circulated the escrow agreement, confirmed on 23 October that Kopa’s payment had been received into “our escrow account,” corresponded on the fee releases and hard-copy procedure, and delivered the original guarantee at the 14 November Marbella notarial meeting. Kopa does not allege from those facts alone that Abeti knew any SWIFT evidence was false, but says his firm’s escrow and communication records are central to establishing what was received, verified and released.
Further question over Millennium’s capacity
Kopa also reports that the bank used by Millennium confirmed by telephone that Millennium held accounts there, while the person spoken to expressed doubt that Millennium could satisfy transactions worth millions. Kopa presents this as its account of the individual’s view during a call, not as a formal written conclusion by the bank.
A custodian was ultimately found—but still no funding
Kopa says it spent weeks obtaining a proposed custody arrangement involving HR Bank and AAA Escrow. The WhatsApp record shows Kopa raising the Nevis bank offer with Nahaboo on 8 January 2026. On 7 April, Nahaboo wrote, “They agreed for its custody, right? This is what I remember,” and reproduced written confirmation that HR Bank was prepared to accept custody through AAA Escrow, subject to substantial fees.
Nahaboo subsequently requested details of the arrangement, discussed whether Hamilton or a US bank would be the legal custodian, asked about the custody fee and said he was trying to bring Millennium back. He helped draft the renewed email that Kopa then sent to Millennium. On 15 July Kopa recorded that Millennium had ignored it; Nahaboo did not dispute that it had been sent. Nevertheless, no renewed facility was issued and no funding followed.
Kopa says this evidence overturns the suggestion that the sole problem was its inability to find a custodian. It proves that a concrete custody solution was found and communicated. Kopa believes the continued failure supports an inference that the custody requirement was never the true obstacle and that the transaction’s promoters did not expect Kopa to satisfy it.
CEO Alexandru Bodislav was placed on direct notice
Balkan’s Collateral Transfer Agreement, Addendum #01 and official notices identify Alexandru D. Bodislav as Chief Executive Officer and bear his name and title. On 17 May 2026 Kopa repeatedly escalated directly to him, reporting more than £500,000 in alleged losses and exposure, borrowing secured against the family home, more than 65 unsuccessful lender approaches, potential claims exceeding £2 million, severe hardship, repeated missing creditor questions and extensive unanswered communications.
After consulting Nahaboo, Bodislav told Kopa that “on the company’s behalf all elements are in line” and said Nahaboo would continue supporting its inquiries. Kopa replied that Nahaboo had just made another promised call only to defer it and then disappear, and offered the complete WhatsApp record. Bodislav did not reply again.
Bodislav has a substantial public profile in Romania as an academic, economist and commentator on political and economic affairs, including appearances on the programme “România Politică.” His published academic CV describes public-affairs consultancy for political clients, including parties. Kopa does not claim without further evidence that he holds elected office or a government post; it says his visible role in public discourse makes his handling of a severe customer complaint in his stated capacity as Balkan CEO a matter of legitimate scrutiny.
Kopa is preparing a redacted evidence page so that businesses considering advance-fee guarantee arrangements can ask better questions. The page will urge prospective customers to obtain written confirmation from their own bank and lender before paying, to require bank-originated verification for any SWIFT message, and to avoid signing late-stage full-performance acknowledgements without independent advice.
Evidence standard
Kopa’s central allegation is that the overall operation was a sophisticated bank-guarantee scam. That conclusion is presented as Kopa’s evidence-based belief. Supporting statements are separated into facts shown by supplied documents, contemporaneous statements and Kopa’s account of its dealings with Barclays.
Media contact
info@kopa.uk – website BALKANCAPITALASSETSSCAM.COM
Media Contact
Organization: Balkan Capital Assets
Contact Person: Media Contact
Website: https://www.balkancapitalassetsscam.com/
Email: Send Email
Country:United Kingdom
Release id:48899
The post Balkan Capital Assets – A Sophisticated Bank-Guarantee Deal Faces Scrutiny After Kopa Limited Reports No Funding appeared first on King Newswire. This content is provided by a third-party source.. King Newswire is a press release distribution agency. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licences, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright concerns related to this article, please contact the company listed in the ‘Media Contact’ section above.
