Recommended Free Tools
A fund associated with Jefferies alleges that iron ore traders Radiant World and Sapphire Minmetals used falsified documents in receivables-financing deals. The nearly $900 million figure is the reported nominal value of at least 50 receivables cited in the fund lawyer’s affidavit—not a proven loss, the amount advanced, or a court-established fraud total. As of October 11, 2026, the allegations had not been resolved at trial.
What does the nearly $900 million figure mean?
It refers to the nominal value assigned to at least 50 receivables that LAM Trade Finance Group II LLC says were supported by falsified documents. The figure was reported by Bloomberg and Moneycontrol from an affidavit by Christopher Bushell, the fund’s lawyer. Bushell described the alleged conduct as “fabricated and falsified” legal and financial documents “on an industrial scale.” Those are counsel’s allegations, not a judicial finding.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
A receivable is an amount a seller expects a buyer to pay for goods or services. In receivables financing, a lender or fund advances money against that expected payment. The central dispute here is whether the financed receivables corresponded to valid underlying sales, and who would be responsible for paying them. The available reporting does not resolve those questions.
How much does the fund say it is owed?
Bloomberg and Moneycontrol reported that LAM Trade Finance Group II was owed more than $610 million across financing deals involving Radiant World and Sapphire Minmetals. More than $550 million of that amount was connected to receivables for purported sales to Glencore and Vitol. These reported amounts describe the fund’s financing exposure; they should not be treated as the same measure as the nearly $900 million nominal receivables value.
#1 Best Overall
| Figure | What it represents | Attribution and status |
|---|---|---|
| Nearly $900 million | Nominal value of at least 50 receivables the fund says were linked to falsified documents | Bushell affidavit, as reported by Bloomberg and Moneycontrol in October 2026; allegation, not an established loss |
| More than $610 million | Reported amount owed to LAM across financing deals with the two trading firms | Bloomberg and Moneycontrol, October 2026; reported financing exposure |
| More than $550 million | Portion linked to receivables for purported sales to Glencore and Vitol | Bloomberg and Moneycontrol, October 2026; the counterparties reportedly said they had no outstanding obligation to the fund |
| $499 million | Value of the reported freezing order against global assets of named parties | Bloomberg and Moneycontrol, October 2026; interim court measure, not a final judgment or recovery |
| About $500 million | Separate allegations concerning Radiant World invoices raised by other banks and creditors | Summarized by Bloomberg and Moneycontrol in October 2026; separate creditor matters, not a comparable or established loss |
The separate claims by other creditors should not be added to the fund’s nearly $900 million figure as if the combined sum were proven losses. The figures refer to different claims and may not measure the same thing.
What did Glencore and Vitol say?
According to Bushell’s affidavit, Glencore and Vitol each provided evidence of falsified sales documents and told the fund that they had no outstanding obligation to it. Both declined to comment to the October report. Their reported position does not, by itself, establish whether an underlying sale occurred, who produced disputed paperwork, or who is liable for any financing balance.
The fund’s affidavit also describes its attempts to contact purported end buyers as repayment deadlines were missed. The fund says it contacted Glencore in February 2026 and approached Vitol and Gunvor, which the October account referred to as Centalion Group following an October rebrand. In early April, it says it agreed not to contact end buyers in exchange for Radiant repaying by September. According to the affidavit, Radiant made two payments and defaulted again by the end of April. This is the fund’s account, not a court finding.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
What has the London court ordered?
By October 10–11, 2026, a London court had reportedly granted the fund a $499 million freezing order against global assets of Radiant World, Sapphire Minmetals and their majority owners. A freezing order is an interim measure intended to restrict dealings with assets while legal claims proceed. It does not decide whether the allegations are true, establish final liability, or mean the fund has recovered the money.
How the case reached this stage
- August 27, 2026: Reuters reported that LAM Trade Finance Group II had filed a pre-action application in London’s High Court. At that point, the public court file had no publicly available documents, and the application’s purpose was unclear from that file.
- September 2, 2026: Bloomberg and Business Times reported applications in London, including one seeking an injunction that could lead to a full lawsuit. The reported named parties included Radiant World, its founder Pinkesh Nahar, Sapphire Minmetals and Sapphire chairman Rakesh Sethi.
- September 2026: Bushell’s affidavit was filed, according to the October reporting. It became public during the week of October 10.
- By October 10–11, 2026: The $499 million freezing order had been granted, according to the October reports.
What do the companies and named individuals say?
Radiant World has repeatedly denied wrongdoing. Reuters reported on September 2 that the company strongly denied allegations that invoices supplied to banks may not have been valid. As of the October reporting, lawyers for defendants including Radiant and Nahar had not yet filed their defense; that is a status reported at the time, not a claim about later developments.
Sapphire chairman Rakesh Sethi did not respond to the October report’s request for comment. In September, Reuters reported that Sethi disputed that Sapphire and Radiant were part of one group; Glencore chief executive Gary Nagle had described them as part of the same group. Their relationship is therefore disputed in the cited reporting, not settled by it.
Why is this described as a Jefferies-linked claim?
The named claimant is LAM Trade Finance Group II LLC, part of Point Bonita Capital, which is associated with Jefferies. The October reporting said Jefferies held a 5.9% stake in Point Bonita, citing its latest quarterly report, and characterized Jefferies’ direct exposure as limited relative to the fund. The claim itself belongs to LAM Trade Finance Group II; describing it as a Jefferies-linked fund’s allegation is more precise than saying Jefferies itself is the claimant.
What remains unresolved?
- Whether the disputed receivables corresponded to valid sales and whether any named party is legally responsible for payment.
- Whether the fund or other creditors will recover any of the amounts they claim.
- The final status of individual transactions, the outcome of any full lawsuit, and whether a court will make a final liability ruling.
The October reports describe an affidavit, party statements and an interim order. They do not establish a final fraud judgment, a full accounting of creditor losses, or recovery of assets.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
