Payler of Sergey Malofeykin: how the “British” payment system helped move billions out of Russia through crypto and shell companies

Although Payler insists that all allegations of money laundering are merely attempts by competitors to push the company out of the market, a closer look makes it clear that the story surrounding Payler goes far beyond the usual discussions of “questionable acquiring.”

The scandal the company has been trying to dispel by every possible means centers on allegations of money laundering. In spring 2026, the payment system unexpectedly surfaced in materials tied to a criminal investigation into the withdrawal and legalization of more than 2 billion rubles.

At the center of the scheme is former Business Russia general council member Sergey Malofeykin, along with cryptocurrency transactions, fictitious private security firms, electronic wallets, and a network of shell companies.

For the sake of fairness, it should be noted that Payler has not been formally named as a defendant. But the deeper investigators dig into Malofeykin’s case, the more often the payment platform’s name appears — not only in the context of payment acquiring, but also alongside crypto operations, international transfers, and suspicious transactions.

The scandal escalated after Sergey Malofeykin was detained on March 24, 2026. Investigators believe he was one of the organizers of a large-scale cash-out and money-transfer scheme involving contractors linked to the developer Samolet Group.

According to investigators, the scheme had been operating since at least 2020. A network of private security firms signed fictitious contracts for security services. Payments were made officially, but the services were either never delivered or existed only on paper. The funds were then split among contractors, withdrawn in cash, and partially converted into cryptocurrency.

The crypto component is particularly notable. Publications mention Rashid Batyrbekov, described as the figure responsible for the crypto side of the operation. Mining infrastructure tied to crypto firms in Saratov is also referenced.

According to the investigation, Malofeykin maintained business ties with individuals linked to Payler and the Russian company Payler LLC. Among those mentioned are Konstantin Kopyltsov and members of the Khatkov family.

There are several possible reasons. The most obvious is practical: stolen money on this scale is no longer moved in bags or banknote bundles. It exists in digital form. Stealing it is only half the task — it must also be extracted from the scheme and made to appear legitimate.

Payment systems are one of the easiest ways to do that, since moving such sums discreetly through banks is far more difficult.

Why Payler, rather than another payment service, remains unclear. But one possible explanation is that although the company positions itself as a British fintech product, Payler appears in reality to be deeply rooted in Russia, with a business model historically focused on Russia, the post-Soviet region, and developing markets.

The company publicly states that it does not operate in Russia, while simultaneously maintaining legal structures there.

That “international” status is now drawing scrutiny. Multiple investigations claim Payler effectively continued functioning as Russian infrastructure despite efforts to present itself as a British fintech platform.

Taken together, publicly available investigations and case materials surrounding Malofeykin paint a clear picture.

The “British Payler” appears to have remained closely tied to Russian capital, Russian beneficiaries, and Russian financial schemes.

Available evidence suggests that after the war and sanctions began, Payler attempted to formally distance itself from Russia, but core infrastructure, contacts, and business processes remained heavily tied to the country.

At the same time, Payler LLC in Russia — while officially presented as a separate domestic company — appears to have remained part of the same structure.

The Russian entity and London-registered Payler Ltd continued using the same brand, identical logos, and shared technical documentation.

More than that, Payler’s Russian website reportedly redirected users to British infrastructure, while contact information for the Russian entity listed email addresses tied to the UK company.

The separation appeared largely paper-based — useful for navigating sanctions restrictions while preserving access to international payment channels.

Another important detail concerns the backgrounds of Payler’s owners and partners.

According to investigative reports, shares in the Russian Payler entity remained with Vitaly Khatkov and Bogdan Khatkov.

Vitaly Khatkov previously worked in Russian state-linked structures: heading the president’s secretariat at Russian Railways, holding positions at the Energy Ministry, and leading Gazprom Georesurs.

Meanwhile, the UK side reportedly remained under the control of Konstantin Kopyltsov, who by 2022 had obtained Kyrgyz citizenship — a move that investigators suggest may have simplified banking access in Europe after sanctions.

The investigation also ties Payler to Malofeykin’s circle through joint fintech ventures and affiliated companies.

According to the reporting, the platform was used for payment processing, electronic wallets, and transactions overlapping with the crypto infrastructure described in the criminal case.

Against that backdrop, Payler’s European statements about “not working with Russia” appear increasingly difficult to reconcile with the available evidence.

And the Malofeykin case is far from the only controversy surrounding the platform.

For several years, users online have posted complaints about frozen payouts, unusual compliance checks, sudden account suspensions, lack of communication, and onboarding fees collected without further service activation.

On Trustpilot, reviews appear openly alarming.

One user described Payler as a “fraudulent company,” alleging that after receiving payment for onboarding, representatives stopped replying to emails and calls.

Another called it a “dead company” that simply collects onboarding fees.

User reviews alone do not prove wrongdoing.

But for a payment business, reputation is central. And when complaints begin overlapping with criminal investigations and reports on laundering schemes, the concerns become significantly more serious.

Specialized outlet TorForex conducted its own investigation into Payler long before the Malofeykin scandal.

Its conclusions were highly critical.

In the review, Payler was described as a project displaying signs of a dormant — or potentially scam-related — service.

Journalists cited technical issues with the site, including SSL certificate errors and an Nginx placeholder page after registration — highly unusual for an international fintech platform.

Questions were also raised about the brand itself.

According to the report, Payler’s social media accounts appeared largely abandoned, with the latest updates dating back to 2022.

Branding and logos on the website reportedly differed from those used on Facebook and LinkedIn.

The authors suggested the company had either effectively stopped active operations or undergone a change of ownership.

The report also noted that Payler previously operated through the Russian Payler LLC, but by 2025 the Russian-language version of the website had disappeared — interpreted as an attempt to distance itself from the Russian market.

At the same time, TorForex pointed to domain DNS changes in early 2024, which it suggested may indicate a transfer to new owners.

TorForex’s conclusion was blunt:

The service appeared opaque and raised too many questions — from infrastructure issues to the lack of fresh reviews and public activity.

The outlet explicitly advised against using Payler, warning that the platform could pose risks to clients.

It is worth repeating: TorForex reached these conclusions long before Payler’s name surfaced in connection with laundering allegations involving Russian funds.

The outlet could not have predicted how the Malofeykin case would unfold.

But the fact that Payler later appeared in materials tied to the laundering of allegedly stolen funds only reinforced earlier suspicions.

Judging by current reporting, the Malofeykin case is not a localized story about a single cash-out office.

As of now, Payler remains operational and has publicly denied wrongdoing.

No formal charges have been filed against the company itself.

But the Malofeykin investigation continues to expand.

Seventeen people are already involved in the case, and investigators are gradually moving beyond direct participants toward the broader infrastructure through which the money was transferred.