I invested a significant sum into JaeVee SPV1012, trusting the CEO BJ (I've been asked to remove full name by trustpilot as the CEO has complained) and the assurances given about the company’s structure and transparency. Unfortunately, my experience has been far from what was promised.There were major discrepancies between the information I was given and what actually transpired. The company accounts did not reflect the funds I contributed, my expected shareholder rights did not materialize, and I struggled to get clear answers about how my investment was being used.JaeVee SPV1012 is now in administration, along with JaeVee SPV1009, The District Project Ltd, Yarmouth Project Ltd, JaeVee SPV1028 Ltd, and JaeVee SPV1029 Ltd—all companies connected to BJ and JaeVee. These companies share common directors and ownership, raising further concerns about the management and financial practices involved.The primary development lender, Lendnet, had serious concerns about the lack of progress on-site despite the funds they had released. They also noted that the Westlegate development was required to be habitable by October 2023, yet it remained significantly behind schedule.In November 2024, Lendnet flagged discrepancies between the level of funding provided and the actual progress made. By December 2024, they issued a formal demand for £420,000, which had been due in June 2023 but remained unpaid. As a result, joint administrators Gary Shankland and Irvin Cohen were appointed on 16 December 2024, putting the company into administration.Additionally, it turns out that the contractor (JaeVee Homes) is also owned by BJ. The supposedly ‘independent’ project manager (Hatch Project Management) is also owned by BJ—raising serious concerns about conflicts of interest.All companies linked to JaeVee and BJ have also changed their registered office address to a month-by-month serviced office in Shoreditch, London, which does not inspire confidence.If you are considering investing with JaeVee or BJ, I strongly advise conducting thorough due diligence. My experience has been deeply disappointing, and I would caution others to be extremely careful.Addendum 12/03– Response to JaeVee’s ReplyJaeVee’s response avoids key facts from the administrator’s report, Companies House, and their own communications. Here’s a direct reply to each of their points:JaeVee says SPV1012, SPV1028, and SPV1029 are being "bought back", yet provides no details on what this means for investors or where the funds are coming from. The administrator has not confirmed any investor recovery process.Legal Action Against the FunderJaeVee claims it is taking legal action, but this does not explain missing funds, misleading investor updates, or financial discrepancies. If the funder was at fault, why weren’t investors informed of the risks before insolvency?Misrepresentation of Financial PracticesJaeVee says its accounts are fully compliant, yet:+Shareholders’ Agreement does not match Companies House records.+ No Statement of Affairs was provided to the administrator (a legal requirement).+ LendNet flagged major concerns about missing funds before placing SPV1012 into administration.If accounts were accurate, why do the administrator’s findings contradict JaeVee’s claims?Unfounded Accusations Against BJJaeVee says its business structure is "standard", but:+JaeVee Homes (contractor) and Hatch PM (project manager) were both owned by BJ, yet investors were led to believe they were independent.+JaeVee Homes continued receiving payments despite LendNet raising concerns over project progress.If this was industry-standard, why was the ownership structure not disclosed to investors?+JaeVee Homes (contractor) and Hatch PM (project manager) were both owned by BJ, yet investors were led to believe they were independent.+JaeVee Homes continued receiving payments despite LendNet raising concerns over project progress.If this was industry-standard, why was the ownership structure not disclosed to investors?Final Notice & Legal ThreatsRather than answering these concerns, JaeVee dismisses documented facts and threatens legal action. My review is based on:+The administrator’s report (confirming financial concerns).+JaeVee’s own emails (acknowledging shareholding discrepancies).+Companies House filings (which do not reflect the agreed shareholder structure).If you are considering investing with JaeVee, review the administrator’s findings before making any decisions.Do your due diligence.
Claim your business profile now and gain access to all features and respond to customer reviews.
