Palmerbet Took 312 Bets From BetStop-Excluded Customer
Australian bookmaker Palmerbet has entered an 18-month court-enforceable undertaking after the regulator found failures involving one customer registered with the national BetStop self-exclusion system.
The customer joined BetStop on September 2, 2023. Palmerbet did not close the account until February 22, 2025. Between December 2024 and February 2025, the bookmaker accepted 312 bets from the customer.
The ACMA announcement on September 23 says Palmerbet repaid all deposits made after the BetStop registration and before the account was closed.
Wrong Customer Data Kept Returning No Match
Palmerbet had been checking the customer against BetStop. The checks failed for another reason.
ACMA’s investigation report says Palmerbet used an incorrect date of birth and a shortened version of the customer’s first name. Those details did not match the information held in the self-exclusion register.
The wagering account had been opened in August 2018. Identity verification carried out in November 2019 did not verify the customer’s date of birth. ACMA also found that a telephone bill held by Palmerbet showed the customer’s full first name.
The first BetStop query after the customer self-excluded was made on September 6, 2023. ACMA concluded that accurate details would have produced a positive match, allowing the account to be closed by September 7.
The first actual positive match came on February 22, 2025. Palmerbet then closed the account through its automated process.
One Account Produced 553 Contraventions
ACMA counted 18 contraventions for providing wagering services to the excluded customer. These were based on the 18 separate days on which wagering took place, rather than on the number of individual bets. The regulator recorded another 535 contraventions for failing to close the account, with each day treated separately.
By 15M’s calculation, the two findings add up to 553 contraventions from one customer account. The 312 bets therefore did not become 312 separate service contraventions under ACMA’s method of counting.
ACMA’s September 23 action lists no monetary penalty for Palmerbet. One week earlier, 15M covered Dabble’s separate BetStop case, where the operator paid A$1,069,200, about $758,000 using the September 16 AUD/USD closing rate of 0.7088.
Independent Review Comes With Deadlines
Under Palmerbet’s court-enforceable undertaking, the operator must seek approval for an independent compliance consultant within 30 business days of the undertaking’s commencement.
The consultant has six months after appointment to deliver a report. Palmerbet then has 60 business days to prepare an implementation plan covering the recommended changes.
The company must also report identified non-compliance with the relevant IGA requirements to ACMA within one month of becoming aware of it. A breach of the undertaking would allow ACMA to take Palmerbet to the Federal Court.