Betting Companies Penalized for Failing to Protect Problem Gamblers
The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) has identified six betting companies that breached rules designed to protect problem gamblers. These companies failed to comply with BetStop, the national self-exclusion register that allows individuals with gambling addiction to block themselves from betting sites. The breaches were observed in 2024.
Breaches Undermine Self-Exclusion Regime
A significant breach involved the PickleBet platform, where one gambler was able to open an account just two minutes after the company received notification from BetStop of their self-exclusion.
"These breaches undermine the very purpose of the self-exclusion regime, which has been in place for over two years." – ACMA member Carolyn Lidgerwood
Ms. Lidgerwood emphasized the long-standing nature of these rules. The findings highlight a broader issue of gambling harm in Australia, with a report by Equity Economics (commissioned by the Alliance for Gambling Reform and Wesley Mission) indicating that Australians lose over $31.5 billion annually to all forms of gambling.
Companies Face Fines and Remedial Actions
ACMA has taken various actions against the involved companies:
- Tabcorp: Paid a $112,680 fine and agreed to a third-party review of its customer verification processes and staff training. ACMA noted that Tabcorp's internal control systems failed to prevent self-excluded individuals from opening new accounts.
- LightningBet, Betfocus, TempleBet: Each received remedial directions notices, mandating independent audits of their internal systems and the adoption of any resulting recommendations.
- BetChamps: Issued a formal warning.
- PickleBet: ACMA is still determining the appropriate action against the company following the identified breach.
About BetStop: A Crucial Safeguard
BetStop, the national self-exclusion register, was launched in 2023 and had registered approximately 30,000 individuals by late last year. ACMA has indicated that betting companies could face stronger future action, including Federal Court proceedings and civil penalties, if they continue to fail to comply with self-exclusion regulations.