ACMA finds bet365, Entain and Flutter to have breached in-play betting rules

The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) has ruled that Entain, bet365 and Flutter Entertainment-owned Sportsbet have breached the Interactive Gambling Act 2001 concerning the use of “fast/quick codes” to facilitate in-play betting.

Entain-owned Ladbrokes and Neds, bet365 and Sportsbet were providing customers with these codes to use for in-play sports betting, as per the regulator’s findings.

These breaches were identified during an investigation by the ACMA between September 2022 and September 2023, with the outcome issued on 19 October 2023.

This investigation was initiated after the ACMA received a complaint from an Australian resident in June 2022 regarding so-called ‘fast codes’.

This involves a fast or quick code being provided to a customer to use either on an operator’s website or app to assist with building an in-play wager.

These codes are usually two to four alphanumeric characters and correspond to a relevant event, bet selection and type of bet for each player’s in-play bet.

When a customer calls the operator, they quote the code and the bet amount to confirm the bet. 

According to the ACMA, Sportsbet began using the fast code service on 14 June 2017, while bet365 used it on its desktop and mobile app sites from 27 February 2017.

Neds started using fast codes in May 2019, and likewise Ladbrokes from June 2018 before migrating to use Neds’ process in May 2019.

All of these operators were found to have individually generated these codes for each in-play bet built by a customer via the respective operator’s app or website.

Under these circumstances, the regulator found that the codes were generated solely from the bets made online or in the app and not via a phone call, which is exempt from the rules.

Under the Interactive Gambling Act 2001, in-play betting on sport in prohibited with “limited exceptions”, which include placing bets over the phone.

However, an additional caveat is that the bet selection, bet type, wager amount and confirmation of placing the bet must be provided by the customer “wholly” over the phone.

All of the operators involved argued that the quick codes service was a “telephone betting service” and therefore was in line with regulations in the market.

The ACMA said: “Where the fast code is customer-specific, this indicates that the fast code is generated based on specific information about the bet or bet type being inputted by the customer prior to and outside of the subsequent phone call. In this scenario, the fast code is no longer just a generic shorthand reference that remains the same for all customers.”

As part of the investigation, each operator submitted individual retorts to the ACMA’s findings.

Entain stated that all its dealings were “wholly by the way of a voice call” as the customer is not providing any details of the bet to the operator until they speak to a telephone representative.

Entain added that by quoting the fast code to the operator, the bettor is providing the bet and bet-type information. The operator argued that the fast code is a shorthand reference for the event, bet type and bet selection, which remains generic and the same for all customers as they are not customer-specific.

The operator also said that both the Ladbrokes and Neds services are consistent with the amendments made to Australia’s gambling laws by the Interactive Gambling Amendment Act 2017, which prohibited click-to-call services. 

Bet365 submitted similar retorts to Entain in that the dealings with customers were carried out entirely over the phone and that details of the bets were only given to the operator when customers spoke to telephone representatives. 

Like Entain, bet365 also maintained the quick code service is in line with the permitted services allowed by the law. 

Sportsbet claimed that the bets were made solely via a voice call and that the fast code was not customer-specific but helped the operator identify the event the individual wanted to bet on.

The ACMA rejected all three responses and concluded that the fast code service is not an excluded wagering service in accordance with the law, or telephone betting service and, therefore, is a prohibited service.

After being notified by ACMA, all operators have taken steps to change their systems and bring their respective fast code services into compliance with the country’s Interactive Gambling Act 2001. 

Steps taken by the three operators to amend their fast code systems to be compliant with the regulations involve generating such codes before the relevant events take place, independent of a player picking that bet, so ensuring the codes will be generic and therefore the same for every player.

In light of these actions, ACMA has decided not to take enforcement action against the operators.