ACMA Finds Palmerbet Took 312 Bets From a BetStop-Registered Customer and Takes an Undertaking, Not a Fine

Palmerbet kept a self-excluded customer's account open for 17 months and accepted 312 bets from them in the last three, the Australian Communications and Media Authority found. A week after Dabble paid $1.07 million for similar breaches, Palmerbet has given an 18-month undertaking and paid no penalty.

• Palmer Bookmaking, trading as Palmerbet, failed to close the account of a customer who registered with BetStop in September 2023 until February 2025, and accepted 312 bets from them between December 2024 and February 2025, according to the Australian Communications and Media Authority
• The ACMA's investigation table records 18 contraventions of the ban on providing wagering services to a registered person and 535 of the duty to close their account, while clearing Palmerbet of sending marketing to the customer
• Palmerbet has given an 18-month court-enforceable undertaking to commission an independent review of its compliance systems and fund the improvements, and has repaid every deposit the customer made after registering; no penalty was imposed
• A week earlier Dabble paid $1,069,200 in penalties for failing to close 157 BetStop-registered accounts and sending 839 marketing messages to 165 self-excluded people
• Legislation taking effect on 1 January 2027 will substantially increase the penalties for BetStop breaches, the regulator says

A Self-Exclusion That Took 17 Months to Reach One Bookmaker

The ACMA said on 23 September that Palmer Bookmaking Pty Ltd, which trades as Palmerbet, had breached the rules of BetStop, the National Self-Exclusion Register that covers every licensed online wagering provider in Australia. BetStop records show the customer registered in September 2023. Palmerbet did not close their account until February 2025, and between December 2024 and February 2025 it accepted 312 bets from them.

Under Part 7B of the Interactive Gambling Act 2001, a licensed wagering provider must close a registered person's account as soon as practicable and must not provide them with online wagering services. The regulator's investigation table, published alongside the announcement, sets out the findings in statutory terms: 18 contraventions of section 61KA(3), the prohibition on providing wagering services to a registered individual, and 535 contraventions of section 61MB(5), the duty to close an account with no outstanding bets. The ACMA found no breach of the rule against sending marketing messages to a registered person, and none of the requirement to promote BetStop.

The outcome is an 18-month court-enforceable undertaking. Palmerbet must commission a comprehensive independent review of its compliance systems and processes and make the investment needed to implement the recommendations, according to the ACMA. It has also repaid every deposit the customer made between registering and the account's closure. If it breaches the undertaking, the regulator can apply to the Federal Court to enforce it. The ACMA did not announce a financial penalty.

Dabble Paid $1.07 Million a Week Earlier

The decision follows the ACMA's action against Dabble Sports, announced on 16 September. Dabble paid $1,069,200 in penalties after the regulator found it had failed to close 157 wagering accounts after their holders registered with BetStop and had sent 165 self-excluded people 839 SMS messages, emails and push notifications. It also sent 45 customers more than 2,000 push notifications without the BetStop information the rules require, and gave a two-year undertaking. ACMA member Carolyn Lidgerwood called the Dabble breaches serious and said BetStop "only works if wagering companies follow the rules".

The regulator has published a run of BetStop cases since 2025, including a $1 million penalty for Unibet and an 18-month undertaking from Entain over Ladbrokes and Neds. It said this month that changes commencing on 1 January 2027 will substantially increase the penalties for breaches.

One Customer Is a Different Case From 157, but the Duration Is the Problem

The gap between the two outcomes is defensible on scale. Dabble failed 157 registered customers and marketed to 165; Palmerbet failed one, and did not market to them. What the numbers in Palmerbet's case describe is a control failure rather than a volume one: an account that had to be closed as soon as practicable stayed open for about 17 months, and 312 bets were accepted on it in the last three. BetStop is designed so that one registration closes every licensed account in the country. A single operator missing that signal for well over a year is the failure mode the scheme cannot tolerate, because the person who self-excluded has no way of knowing it happened.

An Undertaking Is the Regulator's Tool for Fixing Systems, and 2027 Is When It Gets Heavier Ones

Both Dabble and Palmerbet gave court-enforceable undertakings, which address process: an independent review, funded fixes, and the Federal Court if the operator does not follow through. Only Dabble paid, and its breaches reached many customers and included marketing to them. The repayment of deposits removes the customer's loss but not the operator's exposure if the review finds more. From January the arithmetic changes, because the maximum penalties rise. Operators that have not tested how quickly a BetStop registration closes every account they run have about three months to do it.

Palmerbet's case is small in numbers and large in what it shows about the weakest point of a national register. The fix it has promised is the right one; the 2027 penalties will decide how quickly the rest of the market adopts it.