Chasebet warned over BetStop email failures
Table of contents
- Harris Bookmaking Pty Ltd, trading as Chasebet, has received a formal warning from Australia’s communications regulator after failing to promote BetStop in marketing emails and on its website.
- The ACMA found Chasebet omitted required BetStop references in three promotional emails, with a software consolidation error cited as the cause.
- The New South Wales-licensed bookmaker has since remediated both its website and email marketing, though the ACMA has signalled it will escalate enforcement if breaches recur.
Harris Bookmaking Pty Ltd, trading as Chasebet, has been issued a formal warning by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) for failing to adequately promote BetStop, Australia’s National Self-Exclusion Register, in its marketing communications.
The ACMA investigation found Chasebet did not include the required BetStop references and links in three promotional emails. The probe also identified the same failure on the operator’s website.
Under the Interactive Gambling Act, all licensed wagering providers must include BetStop promotional content and hyperlinks in electronic marketing messages and on their websites.
Software error cited
Chasebet, run by bookmaker Damian Harris and licensed in New South Wales, attributed the omissions to a software consolidation error, advising the ACMA that the breach was unintended.
After the regulator flagged the non-compliance, the company acted promptly to bring both its website and email communications into line with the rules. The ACMA acknowledged the swift remediation but issued the formal warning on record regardless.
Should Chasebet breach BetStop promotion rules again, the ACMA may pursue further enforcement action, which can include financial penalties and court-enforceable undertakings.
Pattern of breaches
The Chasebet action is the latest in a series of BetStop-related enforcement decisions.
In January 2026, the ACMA concluded investigations into six operators including Tabcorp, LightningBet, Betfocus, TempleBet, Picklebet and BetChamps, finding all had failed to comply with rules protecting BetStop registrants. Breaches included allowing self-excluded individuals to open accounts, access wagering services and receive gambling marketing.
Tabcorp received a financial penalty of AU$112,680. LightningBet, Betfocus and TempleBet were issued legally binding remedial directions requiring independent compliance audits.
Earlier rounds of enforcement caught further operators in breach. The ACMA found Buddybet, Ultrabet, VicBet and Topbet had each violated self-exclusion rules. Ultrabet was required to submit a court-enforceable undertaking after reactivating an account at the end of an exclusion period without the customer’s explicit consent.
PointsBet was hit with a AU$500,800 penalty for sending marketing to over 500 self-excluded individuals and misclassifying promotional emails to avoid unsubscribe obligations.
The Chasebet case is distinct. Rather than marketing to self-excluded individuals, the operator failed to promote BetStop at all in its outreach. That is a separate but equally enforceable obligation under the framework.
Offshore crackdown continues
The ACMA’s enforcement reach extends beyond licensed operators. The regulator has directed ISPs to block 1,640 illegal gambling and affiliate websites since its first blocking request in November 2019, with fresh investigations continuing to identify services operating in breach of the Interactive Gambling Act.
Over 230 offshore operators have exited the Australian market since the ACMA began enforcing illegal offshore gambling rules in 2017.
The dual-track approach reflects a consistent regulatory strategy: holding licensed operators to account on consumer protection obligations, and limiting the reach of unlicensed services operating outside the framework.
For operators inside the regulated market, the record is clear. Technical errors and unintended omissions have not shielded companies from formal action, and the ACMA has demonstrated a willingness to escalate for repeat or more serious breaches.
Keep reading
Do you have a story worth sharing?
Send it over to our editors!
