Former England Cricketer sues financial advisor who he says cost him £300,000 in risky investments

Former England cricketer Paul Collingwood is suing a financial adviser to whom he entrusted his and his wife's life savings, claiming his negligent advice cost them at least £300,000 of their family money.

Collingwood, 36, who retired from international cricket in 2011, and his wife Vicky, an HR administrator, say they invested more than £650,000 through adviser-to-the-stars Roderick Langham.

They had hoped to get a steady family income whilst raising their children and a comfortable retirement from the investment.

Now they are seeking their money back with interest from Mr Langham, of Melbourne, Derbyshire, and the investment company of which he was managing director, Sigma Wealth Management Ltd.

They say more than £400,000 of their savings were put into 'high risk and unregulated collective investment' funds which 'did not suit their risk profile', despite Mr Collingwood insisting he told Mr Langham he 'could not afford any risk of losing his capital.'

Each of the investments recommended by Mr Langham and his company to the cricketer and his wife 'depreciated in value', the writ alleges.

Sigma, which according to its website counted Premier League footballers Shola Ameobi and Fabrice Muamba of Bolton Wanderers as clients, as well as the Collingwoods, is now, along with Mr Langham, facing a High Court damages claim from the cricketer and his wife.

In the writ, the Collingwoods, who have two children and live in Stocksfield, Northumberland, say they first approached Mr Langham in 2005.

Mr Collingwood claims he told the adviser he was 'looking for capital growth and could not afford any risk of losing his capital as he and Vicky were looking to start a family and therefore they wished to ensure that their standard of living would remain relatively the same.'

The couple say they relied on Mr Langham's advice on investments, tax and pension planning and claim that they told the adviser they were 'looking for capital growth and were not looking to take any unnecessary risk with their investments, to ensure they had monies available to provide for and look after their children.'