Australia’s online betting giants are facing one of the most consequential legal challenges the industry has seen, as a former financial planner convicted of multimillion-dollar fraud seeks to force bookmakers to return the stolen funds he gambled through their platforms.
Filed in the Federal Court, the case targets Sportsbet, Tabcorp and Entain—three dominant players in the nation’s wagering market—alongside two former VIP customer managers accused of nurturing the very behaviour that led to devastating financial losses for vulnerable clients.
A Case That Could Redraw Industry Boundaries
At the center of the lawsuit is Gavin Fineff, now serving a nine-year prison sentence for defrauding clients of more than $3 million to fuel a spiraling addiction. His legal team contends that the bookmakers not only failed to detect obvious warning signs but actively encouraged him to keep betting extraordinary sums without verifying the source of his money.
The case argues that the operators had visibility into Fineff’s compulsive behaviour yet failed to intervene. Lawyers advising on the action describe it as a potential turning point: if successful, it may pressure the industry to overhaul how it treats high-risk gamblers and to enforce its own compliance requirements.
What makes this case particularly striking is that Fineff himself stands to gain nothing financially. Any compensation would be directed to his victims—many of whom lost life savings and, in some instances, the chance to recover before their deaths. Some family members say that although restitution would be welcome, it does little to diminish their anger over the original crimes or the role betting companies played in enabling them.
Failing the Most Basic ‘Know Your Customer’ Tests
Central to the proceedings is whether the agencies ignored obligations under anti-money laundering laws that require monitoring of large or suspicious betting activity.
For years, Fineff was earning roughly $130,000 annually. Meanwhile, he was placing tens of millions of dollars in bets. The mismatch between income and gambling expenditure, the legal team argues, should have triggered immediate scrutiny.
According to Fineff’s claims:
He lost more than $3.6 million with BetEasy (later merged with Sportsbet) over 17 months, having wagered around $50 million in that period.
He lost more than $750,000 with Ladbrokes across 21 months.
He says neither Sportsbet nor Ladbrokes required proof of income.
Tabcorp reportedly requested income verification only after losses approached $3.9 million.
Regulators in the Northern Territory—the licensing jurisdiction for many online bookmakers—have previously sanctioned both BetEasy and Entain for failing to identify that Fineff was displaying clear signs of problem gambling. Each received fines for multiple breaches but continued operating.
Inside the Shadowy World of VIP Gambling Programs
One of the most explosive elements of the case is its scrutiny of VIP programs, a lucrative but controversial component of Australia’s betting ecosystem.
VIP managers cultivate relationships with high-spending customers, offering perks such as bonus bets, matched deposits, and access to premium events. This small fraction of gamblers is extremely profitable; AUSTRAC has noted that roughly 2% of Entain’s customers generate 65% of its revenue.
The lawsuit names two former VIP managers, alleging they encouraged Fineff to re-engage with betting even after periods of inactivity—behaviour his legal team says amounted to enabling harm. Industry contracts seen by investigators show some managers receiving commissions as high as 20% of a gambler’s net losses, creating a clear financial motive to keep clients wagering rather than stepping in when harm escalates.
A recent federal inquiry highlighted the risks inherent in these incentives and recommended a ban on inducements and commission-based remuneration. This court action may finally force a public examination of how these programs operate behind the scenes.
Victims Seek Accountability—But Not Closure
Even if the lawsuit succeeds, many of those impacted say justice remains incomplete. Some victims have passed away without seeing restitution, and families continue to grapple with the emotional and financial wreckage. Several describe Fineff’s conduct as deeply calculated and targeted, noting that many of those deceived were elderly and left without the means to rebuild.
Yet anger is also directed squarely at the betting companies. Critics argue the industry has long prioritised revenue over customer welfare, rewarding employees who extract ever-greater losses from gamblers while overlooking signs of addiction or suspicious financial activity.
An Industry on Notice
Should the Federal Court rule in Fineff’s favour, the outcome could reshape the compliance landscape for online betting in Australia. Operators may be forced to demonstrate far more rigorous monitoring of customer behaviour, reassess VIP practices, and potentially relinquish profits derived from gamblers whose losses should have raised immediate alarms.
For now, the case signals a reckoning: a challenge to the business model that has allowed large operators to profit from extreme gambling behavior with minimal oversight. And for the families whose lives were upended, it offers a rare chance to hold not just an individual offender accountable but also the system that enabled him.
Source: abc.net.au