Entain investigated by Australian regulator after BetStop breaches
Operator Entain has come under fire after an investigation into breaches of Australia’s national gambling self-exclusion system, BetStop, uncovered widespread compliance failures.
The Australian Communications and Media Authority found that Entain, which runs bookies Ladbrokes and Neds in Australia, committed over 500 violations of self-exclusion rules.
Some of these included allowing people registered with BetStop to continue gambling, failing to close their accounts, and, in some cases, opening new accounts despite individuals being excluded.
BetStop is designed to stop individuals from using betting sites once they have requested to opt out. Operators must then shut down all accounts linked to anyone signed up to the site.
The regulator found that Entain didn’t properly identify multiple accounts held by the same individuals, allowing them to use the site to gamble.
“When someone signs up to BetStop, wagering companies must close all of that person’s accounts held within their services,” Australian Communications and Media Authority member Carolyn Lidgerwood told The Straight.
“In this case, Entain’s systems did not adequately identify and link all wagering accounts held by those customers across its services, including one account that remained open for more than a year after the customer had self-excluded.”
Rather than dishing out a financial penalty, the regulator accepted an 18-month court-enforceable undertaking from Entain. This will require the operator to perform an independent review of its compliance setup and to implement any recommended improvements or face monetary penalties.
Last week, Entain announced a partnership with online gaming provider BGaming.
Verticals:
Sectors:
Topics:
Dig Deeper
Related stories
2025/06/09: Australian regulator warns betting companies over self-exclusion breaches
2026/03/10: Entain Chief Executive calls for Australian banks to fight offshore gambling
2025/07/28: Australian regulator issues remedial direction to ReadyBet for targeting self-excluded players
2025/05/21: Unibet fined over AU$1 million for breaching Australian self-exclusion rules
2025/06/09: Australian regulator warns betting companies over self-exclusion breaches
2026/03/10: Entain Chief Executive calls for Australian banks to fight offshore gambling
2025/07/28: Australian regulator issues remedial direction to ReadyBet for targeting self-excluded players
2025/05/21: Unibet fined over AU$1 million for breaching Australian self-exclusion rules
The Backstory
How Australia’s self-exclusion net tightened around major bookmakers
Australia’s national self-exclusion regime has become a central test of compliance for wagering operators, and enforcement has gathered speed. The Australian Communications and Media Authority has moved from warnings and remedial directions to seven-figure fines and court-enforceable undertakings as it polices BetStop, the National Self-Exclusion Register that requires operators to close accounts and stop marketing to anyone who opts out.
The campaign did not begin with household names. In an earlier sweep, the regulator warned four smaller firms — Buddybet, Ultrabet, Topbet and VicBet — after finding they had failed to close accounts and had sent advertising to people on the register. The action included a formal warning for two firms and an enforceable undertaking from Ultrabet to strengthen controls, while Buddybet exited the market. The ACMA also fined PointsBet AU$500,000 for related failures, underscoring that breaches can carry material costs even when they involve communications rather than active betting. Those actions are detailed in the regulator’s broader warning to betting companies over self-exclusion breaches at Complete iGaming.
From there, penalties and expectations have climbed. The pattern shows the ACMA pressing operators to prove they can reliably identify all accounts tied to a self-excluded person and promptly shut them, then sustain the block across marketing, product and payments funnels. The regulator has signaled that fragmented identity matching, legacy account reuse and siloed marketing systems are no longer defensible risks.
Penalties escalate as cases grow more complex
The clearest sign of rising stakes came with ACMA’s AU$1,014,120 penalty against Betchoice Corporation, which trades as Unibet. The agency found more than 100,000 violations tied to 954 accounts that should have been closed once customers joined the register, including dozens left open for months. While the regulator said no bets were placed during those self-exclusions, it deemed the delays serious because they undercut consumer protections and allowed resumed betting on old accounts after exclusions lapsed. Unibet also accepted a two-year court-enforceable undertaking that mandates an independent review of its systems and refunds to affected customers, according to Complete iGaming’s coverage.
Separately, the regulator has blended spam enforcement with responsible gambling. Tabcorp was hit with a AU$4 million penalty on June 18, 2025 for marketing breaches unrelated to BetStop but pointing to similar governance weaknesses across customer communications. The company was ordered to undergo an independent review of its marketing systems, as reported by Complete iGaming. In another case, Tabcorp received a AU$112,680 fine and a court-enforceable review of its customer verification process after a separate tranche of responsible gambling failures surfaced alongside actions against LightningBet, Betfocus, TempleBet and BetChamps. That round of enforcement is detailed in Complete iGaming’s report.
Taken together, the cases trace a clear arc: when firms fall short on self-exclusion controls, the ACMA is pairing financial penalties with structural remedies — mandated audits, staff training, technology fixes and ongoing oversight — designed to push reforms beyond a single incident response.
Marketing misfires keep triggering remedial orders
Operators have repeatedly stumbled on a seemingly simple rule: do not contact people who have opted out. The regulator’s remedial direction to ReadyBet spelled out just how concrete the requirements have become. Investigators found that over a four-month span ending in December 2023 the company sent 273 texts and push notifications to individuals on the register and failed to promote BetStop in 2,342 app notifications. The ACMA ordered an external audit and staff training, with the threat of civil penalties for noncompliance, according to Complete iGaming.
The earlier sweep of Buddybet, Ultrabet, Topbet and VicBet included allegations of marketing to self-excluded customers, not just account-closure lapses. In that action the ACMA made clear that firms must have working suppression lists across every channel, not just email, and that any gap — from SMS to in-app pushes — can constitute a breach. The warning, and PointsBet’s AU$500,000 fine, are outlined in Complete iGaming’s report.
The through line is that technology and process failures inside marketing stacks now carry the same regulatory weight as product or account controls. For operators, that expands the circle of accountability to include growth, CRM and analytics teams and the vendors that support them.
Payment rails and offshore leakage complicate compliance
As domestic controls tighten, operators argue that enforcement should also target the flow of money to illegal offshore books. Entain’s Australia and New Zealand chief executive, Andrew Vouris, recently urged banks to block payments tied to unlicensed platforms and adopt standards similar to those applied to regulated firms. He also praised the ACMA’s stepped-up campaign but said financial institutions must share the load given the ease with which offshore sites accept local customers. His comments at a Sydney industry forum are recapped by Complete iGaming.
The appeal highlights a tension in the policy mix. Stricter domestic rules raise compliance costs and headline risk for licensed companies while unregulated rivals face none. The ACMA has pushed internet service blocks and public warnings against offshore operators, but the call for bank-level filters suggests a next frontier. For investors, that debate matters because it could determine whether compliance investments deliver a level playing field or simply add friction to licensed books as offshore sites siphon demand.
More enforcement actions are still in the queue
The ACMA has signaled that additional cases are imminent. PickleBet was among six firms found to have allowed a self-excluded customer to open an account and place bets, with enforcement decisions in their final stages. The same round included penalties and directions for Tabcorp, LightningBet, Betfocus, TempleBet and BetChamps. Details on the pending PickleBet decision are in Complete iGaming’s report.
The regulator’s cadence suggests a pipeline approach: investigate cohorts of operators for common control failures, then tailor remedies — fines, enforceable undertakings, remedial directions or warnings — based on the severity and persistence of issues. For compliance teams, that means treating each public action as a blueprint for internal gap analysis rather than an isolated penalty. For boards, it elevates self-exclusion from a narrow responsible-gambling obligation to an enterprise risk spanning identity resolution, data governance, martech integration and vendor oversight.
The next phase will test whether mandated independent reviews and renewed training translate into durable fixes. With Unibet operating under a two-year undertaking, ReadyBet subject to an external audit and multiple operators under warning or review, the ACMA has embedded oversight into business plans. The message is consistent: the cost of getting self-exclusion wrong is growing, and the remedy will extend well beyond a single check or one-off system patch.
