At first glance, T1 Payments may look like an old story from the heyday of binary options, high-risk MLM, and aggressive offshore processing. Its glory days as one of the major high-risk payment processors are long over. But the case is far from dead. Courts in the U.S. and Europe are still dealing with the wider fallout, including the role of its long-time partner Payvision. And now, fresh developments — from renewed U.S. litigation pressure and bankruptcy fallout to overdue accounts and revealing disclosures at Pixxles — are turning this supposedly closed chapter into a hot case once again. That is why
Key Findings
- Pixxles is FCA-authorised as an Authorised EMI, making the quality and transparency of its disclosures especially important.
- The 2023 accounts identify Amber Fairchild as the ultimate controlling party and disclose material related-party balances and expenses with counterparties left unnamed.
- Those same accounts disclose £1,276,606 in other debtors paid to a company with a common shareholder and director, £618,765 in intermediary service fees paid to a company with a common shareholder and director, and £59,961 owed to one of the directors on an unsecured, interest-free, on-demand basis.
- Pixxles reported 2023 turnover of £1,886,496, a loss of £389,165, debtors of £3,359,951, and creditors due within one year of £3,968,629, ending the period with net liabilities rather than positive net assets.
- The 2023 accounts were filed only on 28 July 2025, and the next accounts for the period to 29 December 2024 are already several months overdue.
- Pixxles was also hit with a First Gazette notice for compulsory strike-off in March 2025 before that action was discontinued.
- In Nevada federal litigation, Pixxles Ltd, Pixxles LLC, Amber Fairchild, and Donald Kasdon remain tied to the New U Life case, where amended civil theft and federal RICO claims survived dismissal.
- As FinTelegram recently reported, the wider T1 Payments saga has entered a post-bankruptcy fallout phase, including renewed merchant-case pressure and a March 30, 2026 default judgment against T1 in related litigation.
A Regulated EMI Sitting In The T1 Blast Radius
There are routine small-company accounts, and then there are accounts that look like they were filed from inside a live legal minefield. Pixxles’ 2023 financial statements belong in the second category.
On paper, Pixxles is a UK company authorised by the FCA as an Authorised Electronic Money Institution. In reality, the company sits inside a much darker story: the collapse of T1 Payments, the personal and corporate links around Donald Kasdon, the role of Amber Fairchild, and U.S. lawsuits that keep naming the same cluster of people and entities.
That is what makes these accounts so important. They are not just a filing. They are a glimpse into a regulated payments company operating in the long shadow of a collapsed high-risk processing network.
The Explosive Core: Large Related-Party Transactions, But No Real Names
The 2023 accounts are revealing because they do not just show a loss-making regulated firm. They show a company with a balance sheet heavily exposed to related-party dynamics, while leaving readers largely in the dark about who those related parties actually are.
In Note 20, Pixxles says that other creditors include £59,961 owed to one of the directors, unsecured, interest free, and repayable on demand. It also says that other debtors include £1,276,606 paid to a company with a shareholder and director in common, and that administrative expenses include £618,765 in intermediary service fees paid to a company with a common shareholder and director. The same note begins a further line on commission fees of £110…, but the uploaded XHTML cuts off before the full figure can be read.
In Note 21, the accounts state plainly that “The ultimate controlling party is A Fairchild.”
That is the heart of the story. The accounts disclose major insider-linked balances and expenses, but do not properly identify the counterparties. In a normal private company, that would already warrant scrutiny. In an FCA-regulated EMI operating under the shadow of U.S. lawsuits and bankruptcy fallout, it becomes a major transparency problem.
The Numbers Behind The Red Flags
The wider financial picture only sharpens the concern.
Pixxles reported:
- Turnover: £1,886,496
- Gross profit: £1,149,751
- Administrative expenses: £1,538,916
- Loss for the period: £389,165
On the balance sheet, the company reported:
- Debtors: £3,359,951
- Creditors due within one year: £3,968,629
- Net position: net liabilities rather than positive net assets
This is not the profile of a comfortably ring-fenced regulated institution. It is the profile of a company whose finances appear deeply interwoven with others and whose short-term obligations weigh heavily on the business.
That is precisely why the related-party note matters so much. The real issue is not whether such transactions exist. The real issue is who the counterparties were, what they were doing for Pixxles, whether the transactions were arm’s length, and whether the company depended on a wider insider-affiliate network to function.
Amber Fairchild, Donald Kasdon, And The Wider Litigation Network
Readers should not view the accounts in isolation.
As FinTelegram recently reported in its latest T1 case note, the broader T1 Payments story has shifted from operating history to post-bankruptcy fallout. Nevada court records show that T1’s Chapter 7 case was treated as closed by June 10, 2025, that stayed merchant litigation restarted, and that one related action ended in a March 30, 2026 default judgment against T1.
Pixxles sits squarely inside that same blast radius.
In the New U Life litigation, the Nevada federal court’s September 29, 2024 order states that amended civil theft and federal RICO claims, including against Pixxles LLC and Pixxles LTD, survived dismissal. The order records that Kasdon, Fairchild, King, and the Pixxles entities moved to dismiss and lost at that stage. That does not establish liability, but it does show that the court found the pleadings sufficient for the case to continue.
This is where the personal links become more than gossip. Pixxles’ own accounts say A Fairchild is the ultimate controlling party. U.S. litigation places Amber Fairchild in the same defendant and counterclaim-defendant constellation as Donald Kasdon and the Pixxles entities. The concern is therefore not merely that Fairchild and Kasdon were personally connected. The concern is that the company’s own financial disclosures, the corporate-control record, and the live U.S. litigation all point to a business whose true economic perimeter may be much wider than the face of the accounts suggests.
Overdue Accounts And Administrative Stress Signals
Then there is the timing problem.
Companies House shows that the 2023 accounts were filed only on 28 July 2025 after a string of accounting-period changes. The next accounts, made up to 29 December 2024, were due by 24 January 2026 and remain overdue.
That alone is a red flag for a regulated payments firm.
But there is more. In March 2025, Pixxles was hit with a First Gazette notice for compulsory strike-off, only for that action to be discontinued days later.
None of this proves misconduct by itself. But it is exactly the kind of administrative and reporting instability that regulators, claimants, and counterparties notice when they are trying to assess whether a regulated EMI is operating on a solid footing.
What The Pixxles Accounts Really Tell Us
So what do the 2023 Pixxles accounts actually tell us?
They tell us that this is not a neat, self-contained EMI story.
They tell us that a regulated payments company controlled by Amber Fairchild reported large balances and expenses linked to unnamed common-control counterparties, while the wider T1/Kasdon litigation machine kept running in the background.
They tell us that the balance sheet looked stretched, the reporting cycle became erratic, and the next accounts are already late.
And they tell us that anyone trying to understand the big picture — from T1 plaintiffs to regulators — should not read Pixxles as an isolated regulated firm, but as part of a wider, still-contested network.
Latest Status
Company: Pixxles Ltd
Status: Active at Companies House; accounts overdue.
Regulatory status: FCA-authorised Authorised Electronic Money Institution.
Controlling party per 2023 accounts: A Fairchild
2023 filing date: 28 July 2025
Next accounts due: 24 January 2026 for the period made up to 29 December 2024; currently overdue.
Key concern: large unnamed related-party balances and expenses disclosed in a regulated firm linked to live U.S. litigation around the T1/Kasdon network.
Why it matters: readers can see signs of concentrated control, related-party opacity, late reporting, and litigation overlap — all at once.
Boxed Explainer: What The Pixxles Related-Party Note Tells Us
The most explosive part of the 2023 Pixxles accounts is not the loss figure. It is the related-party note.
That note shows that Pixxles had substantial financial dealings with affiliates tied by common ownership or management, but it does not properly identify those counterparties. The company says it had £1.28 million in other debtors paid to a company with a shareholder and director in common and £618,765 in intermediary service fees paid to a company with a common shareholder and director. It also discloses a director-linked balance of £59,961, unsecured, interest-free, and repayable on demand.
For FinTelegram, that is the real headline: a regulated EMI disclosing large insider-linked exposures while keeping the names in the shadows. In a litigation-heavy environment involving T1, Kasdon, Fairchild, and Pixxles, that is not a footnote. That is the story.
Chronology
- 30 March 2026 — Related T1 litigation produces a default judgment against T1, reinforcing the post-bankruptcy fallout context around the wider network.FinTelegram is revisiting it now.
- 4 October 2018 — Pixxles Ltd incorporated in the UK.
- 15 June 2021 — FCA register shows Pixxles as an Authorised Electronic Money Institution.
- 29 September 2024 — Nevada federal court denies dismissal motions in T1 Payments v. New U Life and allows amended civil theft and RICO claims, including against Pixxles LLC and Pixxles LTD, to proceed.
- 25 March 2025 — Companies House issues a First Gazette notice for compulsory strike-off.
- 29 March 2025 — Strike-off action discontinued.
- 28 July 2025 — Pixxles files its full accounts made up to 28 October 2023.
- 24 January 2026 — Deadline for next accounts, made up to 29 December 2024. Accounts now overdue.
Entity Map
| Entity / Person | Role in the Story | Why It Matters |
|---|---|---|
| Pixxles Ltd www.pixxles.com | UK company and FCA-authorised electronic money institution | The main subject of this report. Its 2023 accounts disclose large related-party balances and expenses with unnamed common-control counterparties, while its 2024 accounts are overdue. |
| Amber Fairchild | Director and ultimate controlling party of Pixxles | Identified in the 2023 accounts as the ultimate controlling party. Also appears in the U.S. litigation orbit alongside Donald Kasdon and the Pixxles entities. |
| Donald Kasdon | Founder and former CEO of T1 Payments | Central figure in the wider T1 Payments story and the U.S. litigation and bankruptcy fallout. His connections to Pixxles and Amber Fairchild are part of the broader network readers need to understand. |
| T1 Payments | Collapsed U.S. high-risk payment processor | The core legacy entity in the story. Its bankruptcy and renewed litigation exposure provide the wider context for why Pixxles matters today. |
| Payvision | Former European processing partner of T1 Payments | Important because courts in the U.S. and Europe are still dealing with the wider T1/Payvision fallout, keeping the old case alive and relevant again. |
| Pixxles LLC / Pixxles LTD | Related Pixxles entities named in U.S. litigation | Named in the Nevada New U Life litigation as part of the wider dispute constellation around T1 Payments, Kasdon, and related parties. |
| New U Life | U.S. litigation counterparty | One of the most important public court cases tying together T1 Payments, Donald Kasdon, Amber Fairchild, and the Pixxles entities. |
| Gaia Ethnobotanical / Vida Divina | Merchant plaintiffs in related U.S. litigation | Their cases help show the post-bankruptcy fallout around T1 Payments, including the March 30, 2026 default judgment against T1. |
Call for Information
FinTelegram invites whistleblowers, former employees, merchants, compliance officers, auditors, and counterparties with information on Pixxles, T1 Payments, Amber Fairchild, Donald Kasdon, or related entities to contact us via Whistle42. Confidential submissions help expose the structures, relationships, and payment flows hidden behind the formal corporate record.
