At her storybook wedding in a grand 400-year-old manor house on Jersey, heiress Tanya Dick-Stock seemed to have a life that wealth could furnish in every possible way.
Yet a chance find during preparations for the 2012 ceremony would draw Tanya and her husband, investment banker Darrin Stock, into a remarkable and deeply complex financial saga.
Behind a locked door at St John’s Manor, the estate Tanya had known since childhood, the couple discovered hundreds of boxes holding an estimated 350,000 documents — records that appeared to point to a discreet offshore financial operation.
The discovery would eventually lead Tanya to allege that her father, with the assistance of some of the world’s biggest banks, stripped assets from her $650 million trust and used it as a legitimate-looking base for an extensive international money-laundering network.
The couple are now pursuing a staggering $15 billion claim against Barclays, HSBC and related trust companies.
Neither bank has been found liable, and the allegations are disputed. An HSBC spokesman described the claims as “unfounded”, while Barclays and Jersey trust company Zedra have declined to comment.
Tanya came across the boxes about a month before the wedding as she searched the estate for a place to store the cake, lanterns and other celebration supplies.
Touring the grounds in a golf cart, she passed the estate’s unused squash courts and thought the vacant building would be perfect for storage.
At her fairytale wedding at a magnificent 400-year-old manor house on Jersey, heiress Tanya Dick-Stock appeared to possess everything money could buy
Behind a locked door at St John’s Manor, where Tanya had stayed since childhood, she found hundreds of boxes containing approximately 350,000 documents
She collected the key and opened the door.
‘It was like the last scene in Raiders Of The Lost Ark, where they have the Ark of the Covenant boxed up and are driving it into a warehouse,’ she recalls.
‘There were crates and crates and boxes. My first reaction was: “Oh, hell’s bells! They’ve filled this up too. What am I going to do now?”
‘It was covered in dust, cobwebs and dead leaves. I thought it might be junk that somebody had forgotten about.’
As the boxes were moved to the stables, however, Tanya noticed that her name – and the names of her trusts – appeared on some of them.
Two years earlier, she says, her father, Canadian-born property tycoon John Dick Sr, had told her: ‘Bad news, Tanya. The trusts are bust. Everything’s gone.’
Tanya said: ‘It certainly wasn’t me. I didn’t receive hundreds of millions of dollars, so I didn’t spend it.’
She asked Darrin to examine the accounts after repeatedly being told that she simply did not understand their complexities.
‘They said I was stupid and shouldn’t worry my pretty little head,’ she says. ‘Then Darrin looked at them and said: “I’ve got bad news for you, Tanya. You are being robbed. You understand just fine.”‘
Among the recovered papers, the couple say, were banking records, wire-transfer confirmations, fabricated loan agreements and internal correspondence.
Tanya Dick-Stock and her husband Darrin are now suing the banks involved for $15billion
The 350,000 documents had to be taken away by a large truck (pictured)
One folder carried the extraordinary title: ‘Confidential – Do Not Retain.’
Tanya says it contained communications instructing clients to destroy documents after reading them. Yet La Hougue, the offshore Jersey operation at the centre of the allegations, had retained copies.
The couple also found memoranda which explained how to fabricate apparently historical documents using appropriately aged paper, ink, machinery and stamps.
Tanya’s trust had been created in Colorado in 1984 following her parents’ divorce and contained valuable assets across the state. According to the lawsuit, it was worth approximately $650million by 1995, when Barclays was serving as trustee.
The trust deed explicitly required any replacement trustee to be a US-regulated bank or trust company and prohibited John Dick Sr from benefiting from its assets.
Yet, the couple allege, Barclays appointed La Hougue, the offshore Jersey operation which has since been purchased by Zedra, as its replacement.
Tanya and Darrin claim that La Hougue did not satisfy the trust’s requirements, making its appointment invalid from the outset. On that argument, Barclays never legally relinquished its responsibilities as trustee.
The couple also allege that La Hougue had close personnel connections with the bank and was originally staffed by former Barclays executives.
Their lawyers invoke the doctrine known as ‘fraud on a power’. Despite its name, it does not necessarily require proof of conventional fraud or theft; it concerns whether a legal power – in this case, the power to appoint a replacement trustee – was exercised for an unauthorised purpose.
Tanya says: ‘Within the four corners of the document, it says very clearly that if Barclays stands down, it must appoint a US-regulated bank or trust company. They didn’t.’
Tanya and Darrin claim that La Hougue did not satisfy the trust’s requirements and Barclays is therefore liable
According to Darrin’s analysis of the documents, each dollar of Tanya’s legitimate wealth could have facilitated the movement of approximately seven dollars in illicit funds
At first, Tanya says, she believed her father and the banks had themselves been victims of La Hougue. Only much later she says did the documents lead her to the devastating conclusion that the banks had been working with him.
‘I didn’t realise that HSBC and Barclays were partners with La Hougue,’ she says.
‘What a betrayal. Everybody was taking a little piece every time they moved money, made a fake loan or took interest or principal payments. Little pieces add up to big pieces.’
At the heart of the wider case is what Darrin describes as international banking’s ‘dirty little secret’: secret or coded accounts provided without meaningful Know Your Customer checks.
He compares the operation to the Netflix crime drama Ozark, in which legitimate businesses such as a car wash and strip club are used to disguise criminal proceeds.
According to Darrin’s analysis of the documents, each dollar of Tanya’s legitimate wealth could have facilitated the movement of approximately seven dollars in illicit funds.
On that basis, he claims, her $650million trust could have supported transactions involving around $4.5billion.
No court has accepted that calculation and the banks deny wrongdoing.
The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime estimates that between 2 and 5 per cent of global GDP – $800billion to $2trillion – is laundered annually.
The lawsuit also alleges connections between La Hougue and Ian and Kevin Maxwell, brothers of convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell.
The amended complaint claims that La Hougue moved money, established shell companies and participated in financial schemes involving the brothers during the mid-1990s.
A spokesman for Ian and Kevin Maxwell declined to comment, but previously said they had no knowledge of tax avoidance or other schemes organised by La Hougue.
La Hougue has also attracted the attention of the US Senate Finance Committee during its investigation into the finances of Jeffrey Epstein. Its inclusion in that investigation does not infer that La Hougue or Tanya’s trust participated in Epstein’s crimes.
The $15billion claim comprises approximately $5billion for the alleged loss of the trust, damages and interest calculated at an annual court rate of 8 per cent.
The couple seeks a further $10billion through claims of unjust enrichment or disgorgement, representing the benefit which it alleges the defendants obtained from using the money for approximately 30 years.
That does not include punitive damages, which the court could award separately if the couple establishes liability and the required level of misconduct.
The banks have always fought to have the dispute heard in the UK or Jersey, while Tanya and Darrin argue that it belongs in the US because the trust was created in Colorado and Tanya is an American beneficiary.
John Dick Sr died in 2023 without being reconciled with his daughter and having maintained his innocence.
He did not buy the couple a wedding present, Tanya says – not even a card. But Darrin believes the boxes he left behind proved far more consequential.
‘He said my dad gave me the greatest wedding present of all time,’ Tanya says, ‘because now we had the proof.
‘They thought they could drown us in paper. They didn’t recognise how stubborn we were going to be. We just kept at it and at it.’
Tanya says her motivation has expanded beyond recovering her inheritance.
‘When it first started, I just wanted my stuff back,’ she says. ‘Now I want these guys exposed. There should be no upside for anyone engaging in this course of conduct.’
Other alleged victims of offshore trusts have contacted the couple. Tanya hopes that if the lawsuit succeeds, she can establish an organisation resembling the Innocence Project to help those who lack the money, health or stamina to fight.
‘I’m not the only one,’ she says. ‘There are so many victims out there. There has got to be some way to give back and help these people.’
A source close to HSBC added that the claims against the bank relate to a Jersey loan made in 2012 that was repaid in 2019. ‘The plaintiffs have pursued a number of claims concerning the same loan and those claims were dismissed by another Court,’ they said.
A source close to the Dick-Stocks’ legal team said: ‘This is not merely a “bad loan” case against HSBC; it’s a dishonest-assistance case charging that HSBC knowingly became a core banking partner of the La Hougue/Pantrust structure.
‘They stepped into the shoes of Barclays Bank and moved billions of dollars with little or none of the required paperwork. Both HSBC and Barclays engaged in creating illicit bank accounts, had inadequate KYC practices, lending structures, and international wire infrastructure, all of which kept this structure maintained for years.
‘The complaint illustrates clearly that HSBC and HSBC USA acted in concert with Barclays, Barclaytrust (Zedra), La Hougue/Pantrust and others; that it facilitated improper Colorado-linked wires that moved money from the trusts; and that it maintained coded or secret accounts, ignored KYC/AML requirements, and provided loans against improperly pledged trust assets.
‘All of this adds up to the fact that HSBC knowingly assisted in the stripping and dissipation of DFT1 [Tanya Dick-stock’s trust] and related trust assets.’
Darrin Dick-Stock adds: ‘John Edwards does not take on cases he doesn’t believe he can win. Nothing in our claim has been in front of any court, anywhere, at any time. Nothing was “addressed” or “thrown out”.
‘It’s as though fraudsters stole your supercar and used it for years to win a lot of money in races. They smash the car up, patch it up and say, “At least the tyres are still the same” when they return it. But not a word about the huge amounts of money they have made fraudulently using your asset.’
A spokesman for HSBC said: ‘These claims are unfounded, and we will vigorously contest them.
‘HSBC operates a robust financial crime compliance program with industry leading controls.’
Barclays and Zedra, on behalf of La Hougue, declined to comment.
