VGCCC Imposes $80,000 Fine on Online Bookmaker QuestBet

The Victorian Gambling and Casino Control Commission (VGCCC) has fined online bookmaker QuestBet $80,000 for continuing to accept bets from a customer displaying observable signs of gambling-related distress.

Announcing the fine, VGCCC CEO Suzy Neilan said QuestBet’s non-compliance with its gambling harm minimisation obligations was indicative of a concerning culture.

“Our investigation of QuestBet’s practices found the bookmaker failed to have in place adequate systems to protect individuals identifiably at risk of gambling harm,” Ms Neilan said.

“Minimising gambling harm is an obligation every operator holds – including bookmakers – who must monitor customer wellbeing and intervene if they observe signs of distress.

“This substantial penalty demonstrates the seriousness of the bookmaker’s failure to meet its legal and moral obligations.”

The VGCCC investigation was prompted by a complaint from a customer who claimed QuestBet had allowed them to continue betting – and losing – a significant sum of money in a matter of weeks, without intervention.

“We found that between April and June 2023, the customer contacted QuestBet more than 20 times to request additional credits and bonus bets. On 6 occasions, they mentioned having experienced several large losses.

“This was a clear sign that the customer was struggling. A sign that QuestBet chose to ignore, instead encouraging and enabling the customer to keep gambling with the aid of bonus bets in 5 of the 6 occasions.

“Consequently, the customer lost about $15,000 over two months,” Ms Neilan said.

Staff of gambling operators must provide assistance to customers facing negative consequences from their gambling. There is a range of tools and resources staff might suggest to customers in this situation to assist them to, for example, set and track time and money limits, take a break, self-exclude or access help services.

“QuestBet suggested none of these, thereby breaching the Victorian Bookmakers’ Association Responsible Gambling Code of Conduct and causing further distress to the customer.

“Nor did the bookmaker formally respond to our request for an explanation for its lack of care or a reason not to be sanctioned, despite requesting, and being granted, several extensions to do so,” Ms Neilan said.