Sign up to the Lincolnshire Live newsletter for daily updates and breaking news Sign up here! Thank you for subscribing See our privacy notice Invalid Email

A Bawtry businessman has been jailed for eight and a half years after conning England international and Chelsea football player, Gary Cahill out of £800,000.

Stewart Groves, 37, from Bawtry, set up his company, Rapid Finance Ltd Incorporated, to make investments on behalf of a single client, who was Mr Cahill.

The 33-year-old player initially invested £500,000, but then successfully petitioned a court in Lincoln to have the company wound up in September 2015, where Groves was banned from being the director of a company for a decade.

The ruling then sparked an investigation into Rapid Finance by the Insolvency Service, which found Groves had transferred a significant amount of the footballer's money into his own accounts instead of making legitimate investments.

It also emerged Groves had twice supplied false reports to Mr Cahill in a bid to cover his own back and trick the footballer into believing the investments were going ahead as planned.

Groves then encouraged the defender to invest a further £300,000.

Over the course of two years, Cahill invested more than £800,000 in the company and more than £700,000 of it was transferred to accounts belonging to Groves and connected parties.

(Image: PA)

This was all being done without Mr Cahill being made aware.

A criminal investigation conducted by South Yorkshire Police brought the businesses man back into the court on April 11.

Appearing at Sheffield Crown Court, Groves, of Bawtry, was found guilty of fraud by misrepresentation.

He was sentenced to eight and a half years in prison.

Gerard O’Hare, chief investigator of the Insolvency Service, said in a statement released on Thursday, May 16, said: “Stewart Groves intentionally misled the company’s sole investor into believing his funds were being invested securely and the false reports supplied even lead to more money being provided.

“This behaviour will not be tolerated and this ban should serve as a warning to other directors tempted to act in a similar way that they have a duty to act in the best interests of the company – not themselves.”