UK NCA Secures £3.84 Million Forfeiture From ENEX Premium Trading in Money Laundering Probe
The UK National Crime Agency has secured the forfeiture of more than US$5.2 million (£3.84 million) from ENEX Premium Trading Limited following a civil recovery investigation into suspected money laundering and sanctions evasion.
ENEX, an agricultural trading and logistics company registered in St Kitts and Nevis, is owned by Azerbaijani national Nadir Valiyev. According to the NCA, significant funds were transferred into newly opened ENEX accounts between July and September 2024. When the UK accounts were opened, Valiyev stated that the source of funds was his personal wealth and retained earnings from earlier trading structures, including UAE-registered Burston Trading FZE.
Funds traced through front companies, EMIs and cryptocurrency
The NCA obtained an Account Freezing Order over the funds in November 2024 after reports alleged that companies linked to Valiyev had been involved in shipments of stolen Ukrainian grain.
During its subsequent investigation, the NCA said it identified a network of suspected front companies and bank accounts used to route transactions through UK electronic money institutions before conversion into cryptocurrency. The frozen UK funds were traced back to ENEX bank accounts in China which, during July to September 2024, had processed tens of millions of pounds from suspected front companies.
The NCA said companies that paid funds into ENEX’s Chinese accounts were later designated under U.S. sanctions for allegedly facilitating illicit Iranian oil sales and revenue flows and for sending funds to Iran’s Quds Force.
Civil forfeiture does not amount to criminal admission
The NCA said it suspects the forfeited funds represent proceeds of money laundering. Valiyev has denied engaging in criminal activity but agreed to forfeit the funds.
Importantly, the settlement is a civil recovery outcome. The NCA expressly stated that the agreement does not amount to an admission of unlawful conduct by ENEX or Valiyev and does not itself constitute evidence of criminal conduct.
The case illustrates how civil recovery powers can be used where investigators identify suspicious cross-border fund flows involving front companies, electronic money institutions, cryptocurrency conversion and entities already subject to international sanctions.
