I think this an interesting collision between common use of language and legal use of language. I think it's reasonable for the solicitors here to say that they were accused of running an illegal fraudulent operation affecting multiple people. I also think it's reasonable for the defendant to say that he was personally scammed. If you read the judgement it appears the law sides with the first interpretation so if you're going to accuse a business of running a scam, you better first make sure there are other victims besides yourself.
This is kind of a surprise to me and why I thought it was worth bringing up. Wouldn't it be nice if this issue was clarified in the BBC article perhaps with some helpful advice about how to deal with poor service or indeed genuine scammers while avoiding being accused of libel.