If there really was a broker and if the broker knowingly accepted 3rd party deposits via Declan Nowell (so far all reports are that all money was sent to his personal accounts), that would be a serious AML violation. If the broker promised unreasonable rates of return, that could also be of interest to the courts. If the brokers actually said something like "bring us victims to be fleeced and we'lll give you 20% of all deposits" that would definitely be criminal.
But remember - Declan not only accepted the deposits, but paid the withdrawals very quickly. Are we supposed to believe he paid those out of his own funds while waiting for the withdrawals from the broker? Whether or not he placed some or all money in a broker account and whether whether or not any trading in the account was done by him or by someone else, he was actively accepting UK clients into what was purported to be an investment plan without being registered with the FCA. Even if he was somehow colossally stupid enough to be tricked by a broker, he violated numerous regulations and could also be charged with gross negligence. There's also the highly variable story about his FCA regulation status. This shows he was indeed aware that he and his company needed to be regulated. That's going to make any "But I'm just a gullible person who was used by an evil broker" defense very easy to challenge.
So, Declan is definitely not going to get a free pass even if he can successfully shift some of the blame to a broker (which may or may not exist and which may or may not have done anything illegal).
It's very common for Ponzi schemes to have a trading account, often even one with a well respected broker. The trick is that only a small fraction of client/victim deposits ever go into the account. Every time I've seen this, the account was losing.
Very few lawyers skip all upfront fee and costs unless they are very sure of a large settlement. The only immediate use I can see for a civil lawyer might be to place a lien against any major assets that he could sell (like a house and a car - assuming the car was purchased instead of rented) if the titles to those haven't already been secured by regulators or the criminal courts. Beyond that, keeping a lawyer on standby wouldn't be a bad thing. Since there's a chance that the criminal courts will grab all available assets, any law firm will be hesitant to invest a lot of time, effort, filing fees,etc. for free at this point. IOn the other hand, if criminal courts and regulator aren't thorough enough at trying to recover the fund, having a law firm that's already familiar with the case would be useful.
