Farage and Tice Sue UK Crime Agency Over Leaked Bank Records, While Their Own Donor Disclosures Stay Under Investigation

Nigel Farage and Richard Tice have taken the National Crime Agency to court. Bloomberg reported on August 7 that the two Reform UK leaders filed a claim in the High Court seeking more than 25,000 pounds, roughly $33,000, in damages, accusing the NCA of leaking their confidential financial information to the press.

Tice laid out the accusation bluntly on TalkTV, as reported by Guido Fawkes' Order Order. "Nigel and I believe that the National Crime Agency have committed multiple criminal offences," Tice said. "They leaked copies and details of individual bank statements, bank transfers, details of conversations with bank managers, and we've had enough of it."

Tice said Reform gave the NCA roughly five weeks to investigate internally. When the agency didn't produce results, he said, they filed. "They basically refused to do so, today we have submitted High Court proceedings for leaking confidential information," Tice told TalkTV. He said they're seeking both an apology and damages.

The NCA isn't denying that something is being looked at. A spokesperson told the BBC: "Following complaints brought by Richard Tice MP and Nigel Farage, the NCA's Professional Standards Unit is conducting an investigation. That work is ongoing. It would not be appropriate to comment further at this time."

What actually got flagged

The underlying financial details are specific. According to the BBC, Tice's company Tisun Investment received an 80,000-pound loan from George Cottrell in late 2024. That same year, Tice's other company, Britain Means Business, received a 1 million-pound donation from Cottrell's mother. Electoral Commission data shows Britain Means Business then donated 500,000 pounds to Reform UK that same month.

Those transactions were flagged to the NCA through the suspicious activity reports program, known as SARs, which banks and other institutions use to alert law enforcement to potential money laundering. A SARs flag is not a crime report and does not itself establish wrongdoing. It's a routine compliance mechanism, and plenty of legitimate transactions get flagged.

Separately, Bloomingbit reported that a 5 million-pound transaction involving crypto investor Christopher Harborne, made shortly before Farage was elected to Parliament in 2024, was also flagged to the NCA via the same SARs process, according to reporting by the Guardian that both the BBC and Bloomingbit cite.

Cottrell himself is a convicted fraudster whose relationship with Reform has drawn separate scrutiny. The Sunday Times reported he supplied Farage with support, including security and social media staff, in the year before Farage became an MP. Under parliamentary rules, newly elected MPs must declare gifts or benefits received in the 12 months before election if they relate to "parliamentary or political activities," though there's an exemption for support that is "purely personal." Reform has argued Farage didn't breach the rules because Cottrell's support was personal in nature, not political.

Two separate tracks, both still open

There are two distinct, unresolved threads running at once. One is whether the NCA improperly leaked private banking information, which is what Farage and Tice are now suing over. The other is whether Farage properly disclosed donations and support tied to Harborne and Cottrell's mother, which remains under a separate parliamentary inquiry.

Bloomingbit reported that Farage "has been under investigation for months over failures to declare large donations," and that the related parliamentary inquiry has been "temporarily suspended because of a by-election." That inquiry hasn't concluded. It's paused, not closed.

If the NCA did leak confidential bank data to reporters, that's a problem. Financial institutions and law enforcement agencies handling SARs data are supposed to keep it confidential specifically because premature exposure can wreck reputations before any wrongdoing is proven, and it can also tip off people who are actually laundering money. Tice's underlying complaint, that private banking conversations and transfer details ended up with the Guardian, is a legitimate grievance regardless of what one thinks of Reform UK politically. Due process cuts both ways.

But the leak lawsuit doesn't resolve the separate disclosure questions. Whether Farage should have declared Cottrell's support under parliamentary gift rules is a matter for the parliamentary standards process, not the High Court. Whether the SARs flags on Harborne's 5 million pounds and the Cottrell family money reflect anything improper is a matter for whatever investigation, if any, follows from those SARs filings, not for a defamation-style leak claim.

BBC News noted it has not seen the actual detail of the High Court claim, relying instead on a Reform UK spokesperson's confirmation that filings were made. The specifics of what exactly Farage and Tice allege the NCA did, and what evidence they have that the leak originated there rather than elsewhere, haven't been made public yet.

The NCA's Professional Standards Unit investigation into the leak allegations is ongoing, with no timeline given. The parliamentary inquiry into Farage's donation disclosures remains suspended pending the by-election. Neither process has produced a public finding. Until one does, nobody outside those two investigations knows whether either side broke any rules.