Wagering compliance

Ultrabet BetStop finding and enforceable undertaking

ACMA found specified BetStop breaches and accepted a court-enforceable undertaking from Ultrabet. It did not publish a scam finding.

AU research deskEvidence reviewed 30 July 2026Evidence can change
Evidence classification

Official ACMA regulator finding. This page does not convert the finding into a fraud or scam verdict.

At a glance

RecordWhat the official source says
Release date5 June 2025
Decision-makerAustralian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA)
Conduct ACMA reportedAn account reopened after self-exclusion ended and betting through that account; marketing sent to another self-excluded person
Regulatory responseCourt-enforceable undertaking to review systems and processes and implement improvements
Evidence boundaryNo conclusion about other accounts or transactions

Two findings, two people

The ACMA said a separate investigation found Ultrabet reopened one person's wagering account after that person's self-exclusion period ended and allowed betting through the account. The regulator also said Ultrabet caused marketing to be sent to another self-excluded person.

Keeping those findings separate avoids implying that the same facts applied to every account or that the release established additional payment or fraud allegations.

Why an expired exclusion does not reactivate an old account

The ACMA release explains that an account closed under National Self-Exclusion Register rules must not be reopened or reinstated merely because registration ends. A person who wishes to recommence gambling must make a clear and deliberate choice. The distinction is between the end of a register period and an automatic restoration of the previous account.

What the undertaking records

The ACMA accepted a court-enforceable undertaking committing Ultrabet to review its compliance systems and processes and implement improvements. This page describes that undertaking as the regulator published it. It does not assert completion, non-compliance or a later outcome without another official record.

Evidence to keep if an account reappears

  • BetStop registration and end-date records.
  • The original account-closure notice.
  • Any reactivation message and the first date access returned.
  • Account statements showing activity, without publishing private identifiers.
  • Marketing received during the exclusion period.

Do not gamble through an accessible account simply to create evidence. Preserve what already exists and use the official complaint path.

Scope and correction route

The evidence supports only the ACMA findings and undertaking stated above. It does not establish a general fraud conclusion. Send a correction to editorial@bestcasinoguide.top with this URL, the challenged statement and a primary record.

Official evidence trail

Primary regulator release

ACMA: four betting services breach self-exclusion rules

Open official source

Sources checked 30 July 2026. Later regulatory records may change this account.