Pay by phone casinos in Australia: what carrier billing deposits can and can’t do for you

A pay by phone deposit charges your casino top-up to a mobile bill rather than to a card or bank account, and the option is heavily marketed by offshore casinos targeting Australian players. It is convenient, it feels low-friction, and it is offered by brands that no Australian regulator has authorised. This page unpacks what that combination actually means: how carrier billing works in plain terms, why the regulatory situation matters more than the deposit method does, and which offshore brands have landed on the ACMA’s radar for advertising prohibited casino games to Australians.

Current as of 1 November 2026. Licence and operator claims were checked against the ACMA register of formal warnings and blocking requests, the Interactive Gambling Act 2001, and the BetStop register of self-exclusion.

How “pay by phone” deposits work at a casino

Direct carrier billing is an online payment method that lets a user charge a purchase directly to their mobile phone bill rather than to a card or bank account. Providers of the service include Boku, Fonix, Bango, Fortumo and Google Pay. The casino sends a charge request to your mobile network, your network confirms it, and the amount lands on your next phone bill — or, for prepaid customers, comes off your credit.

The mechanics look simple from the user’s side. You enter a mobile number, the casino verifies it through your carrier, you confirm the deposit by SMS or by tapping a confirmation on your phone screen, and the casino credits your account almost immediately. There is no card number to type, no bank login to share, and no third-party wallet to install. For someone who has never deposited at an online casino before, that is a real point of difference, and it is the reason offshore casinos emphasise the option in their Australian-facing marketing.

The numbers around the processor matter because they describe the scale of the rail you are trusting. Boku, the main carrier-billing processor, describes its network as 200+ local payment methods in 40+ markets — wallets, account-to-account payments and Direct Carrier Billing — and says it holds payment licences in 40+ countries. Boku was founded in 2009 by Mark Britto, Erich Ringewald and Ron Hirson using the combined assets of Mobillcash Ltd. and Paymo, Inc., and is headquartered in London. It listed its shares on the London Stock Exchange’s AIM market on 20 November 2017 through a £125 million initial public offering, and trades under the ticker BOKU; that same year it exceeded $1 billion in annual payment volume for the first time. Boku lets businesses collect online payments through both carrier billing and mobile wallets, drawing on mobile network operator data, and says it operates in over 90 countries.

That footprint tells you nothing about whether any particular casino using Boku is licensed to take your deposit. The processor is licensed; the merchant that signs up with the processor is a separate question, and in Australia’s case it is the question the regulator has answered.

Why the deposit method is not the interesting part

The Australian market splits cleanly in two. On one side are licensed Australian wagering providers — the Northern Territory Racing and Wagering Commission regulates 52 of Australia’s online bookmakers, including Sportsbet, Bet365 and Ladbrokes, which are licensed in the Territory for tax reasons; the commission has no full-time staff and meets once a month in Darwin. These bookmakers offer sports betting and racing, not online casino games or pokies, and their payment rails are governed by the Interactive Gambling Act 2001 and by the Banking Code of Practice. On the other side are offshore casinos that accept Australian customers and offer the games that Australian-licensed operators cannot.

When an offshore casino says it accepts “pay by phone” deposits from Australians, it is using the same Boku rail the licensed side never adopted for casino products. The deposit method is real; the licence to offer casino games in Australia is not.

What carrier billing costs the player

Carrier billing has two costs worth naming. The first is the fee. Most carrier-billed casino deposits carry a surcharge of 10 to 15 percent on top of the amount credited to your casino account — Boku’s standard model is to keep a percentage of the transaction value, and the casino either absorbs it or passes it on. The second is the deposit ceiling. Most carriers cap a single carrier-billed transaction at around A$10 to A$50, and the ACMA’s blocking figures suggest the average blocked-site deposit is well under that ceiling anyway. A punter who wanted to deposit more than the cap has to split the deposit across several transactions or move to a card or wallet anyway, which removes the convenience the marketing emphasises.

Neither cost is hidden. Both are reasons the method is genuinely useful at small stakes for casual players, and genuinely useless as a high-roller rail. They are also reasons the deposit limit is closer to a feature than a bug from a harm-minimisation standpoint — a player cannot easily run up a four-figure balance through carrier billing alone.

The legal picture for Australians: no licensed pay-by-phone casino exists

The Interactive Gambling Act 2001 makes it an offence to provide online casino games, online pokies or in-play betting to a person in Australia; no state or territory licenses them. What is licensable is wagering on races and sport placed before the event, lotteries and keno — in practice licensed by the Northern Territory. Minimum age is 18. A casino brand that holds a Curaçao, Anjouan or Malta licence is not licensed for the Australian market, no matter what the licence badge on its homepage says.

The ACMA enforces this. The ACMA investigates, issues formal warnings and directs internet service providers to block illegal sites. The individual player is not prosecuted — the IGA targets the provider — but an offshore site gives no Australian consumer protection, no complaints body and no recourse if a withdrawal is refused, and it can be blocked with a balance still on it. An offshore brand can also have its banking partners drop it overnight, which is the kind of disruption that turns “my withdrawal is processing” into “the cashier link is no longer available”.

Credit cards, digital wallets and the licensed side

Under the Interactive Gambling Act 2001 as amended in 2023, Australian-licensed online wagering services cannot accept payment by credit card or other credit-related products, a restriction that also constrains gambling use of linked digital wallets like Apple Pay. Legal deposit routes for licensed wagering are debit card, bank transfer, PayID/Osko and BPAY. A site asking an Australian for a credit card or a crypto deposit is operating outside the Australian rules.

The practical effect is that even a licensed Australian bookmaker has a narrower payment menu than an offshore casino does. Apple Pay, Google Pay and Samsung Pay transactions collectively accounted for around 45% of all card payments in Australia by number by the end of 2025, and a meaningful share of those card-funded wallets are credit-card-funded. A licensed bookmaker cannot ride that wave for wagering. An offshore casino, which is not licensed, has no such constraint.

Bank-side, the picture is also tightening. Westpac’s gambling block works at card level: it refuses authorisation of transactions registered under the merchant category code ‘Betting/Casino Gambling’ on eligible personal credit and debit cards. ANZ’s gambling transaction block, activated in the ANZ app, also blocks Gambling Transactions made through a digital wallet such as Apple Pay on an eligible card, not just the physical card. Once a customer turns on ANZ’s gambling block, removing it again requires a 48-hour waiting period, and the bank warns that not all gambling transactions will be blocked and some non-gambling transactions might be blocked in error. These are tools the punter can deploy on the licensed side of the market; they do nothing about a deposit to an offshore casino charged to a phone bill, because that charge never goes through a card network.

What “withdrawal” means at an offshore casino

The marketing around pay-by-phone casinos tends to talk about deposits — instant, frictionless, no card. The withdrawal half of the cycle is rarely discussed, and with good reason. An offshore casino has no Australian bank account to pay into, so even a winning player is generally paid by bank wire to an Australian account (slow, fees on both ends), by cryptocurrency (which carries its own Australian reporting obligations), or in some cases by an international e-wallet that the player has signed up for separately. The friction that the deposit side removed reappears on the payout side, with interest.

The reverse is also worth noting. If the player funded deposits by carrier billing, there is no card to reverse-charge, and the refund question is between the player and the offshore casino’s support team. That is a poor place to be when the regulator can block the casino domain with a balance still on it.

Responsible gaming: BetStop and what an offshore casino ignores

BetStop, the National Self-Exclusion Register, has been live since August 2023 and binds only Australian-licensed online and phone wagering services. The register takes a self-exclusion period of three months or longer, up to a permanent exclusion, and any Australian-licensed wagering provider must check new sign-ups against it and refuse to open an account if a match is found. For someone who has excluded themselves, that closes off every Australian bookmaker at once.

An offshore casino is not connected to BetStop. A self-excluded Australian punter can still open an account at an offshore brand, still deposit by phone bill, still play pokies, and still lose. The exclusion register that the marketing around licensed wagering emphasises does not apply to the offshore market the carrier-billing deposit rail leads into. That is the most important single fact for a player who has previously self-excluded and is reconsidering.

The National Gambling Helpline is 1800 858 858, free, 24/7, with chat at Gambling Help Online. The helpline is funded by the Commonwealth and the states and operates regardless of whether the gambling in question happened at a licensed bookmaker or an offshore casino. H2 Gambling Capital’s 2025 report estimates that Australians lose about A$3.9 billion a year to illegal gambling sites, and that the share of gambling going through legal channels fell from 74% in 2021 to 64%. The share going to illegal operators is large, and a non-trivial slice of those deposits clear through the carrier-billing rail that the official channels do not offer.

The harm-minimisation case for using a licensed Australian wagering provider, where casino games are simply not available, is therefore sharp. A punter who wants to play pokies online has only offshore options, and offshore options sit outside every protection the Australian system offers. A punter who wants to bet on a horse race or a football match has 52 licensed bookmakers to choose from, all of which connect to BetStop, all of which accept debit cards and PayID, and all of which sit inside Australian consumer law.

Pay by phone vs pay by mobile: what the wording hides

The marketing material around offshore casinos uses “pay by phone bill”, “pay by mobile”, “pay by mobile phone bill” and “pay by landline phone bill” almost interchangeably. The technical differences are real but small.

“Pay by phone bill” and “pay by mobile phone bill” both refer to direct carrier billing — the deposit is added to your monthly mobile phone account. “Pay by mobile” sometimes means the same thing and sometimes means a payment through a mobile wallet such as Apple Pay or Google Pay, which is a card transaction underneath and runs through the card network. “Pay by landline phone bill” is an older variant that some UK-facing sites still list, where the charge lands on a home phone bill rather than a mobile one; it is functionally identical to carrier billing but routed through the landline provider.

None of these terms changes the licence question. A casino offering any of them to an Australian customer is offering prohibited interactive gambling, and the deposit method is incidental to that.

Why “instant” deposits are not a competitive advantage here

The pitch from offshore casinos is that carrier billing deposits are instant, which is true at the technical level. The thing the pitch omits is that the deposit is the easy part. The hard part — withdrawing a balance — runs on a different rail entirely, and the speed of the deposit has no bearing on how long the withdrawal takes. A punter who values speed should weight the slower side of the cycle, not the faster one.

PayID-based instant transfers are available at over 100 Australian financial institutions. With Osko, a bank transfer between participating Australian banks arrives in under a minute, 24/7 including weekends, whether it is addressed to a BSB and account number or to a PayID. More than 25 million PayID identifiers had been registered on Australia’s New Payments Platform as of April 2025. Australia’s New Payments Platform became accessible to the public on 13 February 2018 and is owned by New Payments Platform Australia Ltd, a non-profit company whose 13 shareholders include the Reserve Bank of Australia and the country’s major banks. Participants in Australia’s New Payments Platform must keep the platform’s monthly outages to no more than two minutes; in 2021 the ACCC authorised merging NPP Australia with BPAY and eftpos into a single company, Australian Payments Plus. Paying to a PayID shows the name of the account holder before the transfer is sent; AP+ warns that being asked to transfer money to a PayID on an illegal gambling site almost certainly means a scam site.

In other words, the licensed Australian side already has an instant deposit rail that is free, that works through the customer’s own bank, and that connects to every Australian account. The offshore carrier-billing option is competing against a rail that most Australian banks offer natively, and it is competing on a regulatory footing it cannot win.

The mobile experience at an offshore casino

Casinos marketing to Australian players are mobile-first. The signup form fits on a phone screen, the games are written in HTML5 rather than Flash, and the cashier page presents carrier billing alongside cards and crypto. The convenience is genuine: a player can open an account, deposit A$20 to a phone bill, play a few spins of a pokie, and close the tab in under five minutes without ever typing a card number.

That same convenience is the problem from a harm-minimisation angle. The licensed Australian side of the market requires an account, an identity check, a debit card or a bank transfer, and a connection to BetStop. A punter who has excluded themselves cannot get past the second step. An offshore casino asks for a mobile number, an email address, and a date of birth, and the deposit clears before the punter has finished their coffee. Friction is doing harm-reduction work in this market, and the carrier-billing rail strips most of it out.

The licensed side has not been static on this. ANZ, Westpac and the other majors have introduced gambling blocks at the card level, and the IGA’s 2023 amendment closed the credit-card loophole for licensed wagering. From 11 June 2024, credit cards and credit-related products are banned as payment for licensed online wagering, with penalties up to $247,500 for operators. None of that constrains an offshore carrier-billing deposit, because that deposit never touches a card network. The licensed-side friction has moved in the right direction; the offshore rail has not.

What “mobile-friendly” hides about the game library

A carrier-billing-friendly casino is generally an HTML5 casino, which means the games run in a phone browser without an app download. That is also the format the licensed Australian bookmakers use for their racing and sports products, and the user experience is broadly comparable. The games are not. The licensed bookmaker offers a sportsbook and a racing tote; the offshore casino offers pokies, blackjack, roulette, and live-dealer tables from studios in Eastern Europe and Asia. The mobile UX is the wrapper; the content is what makes the offshore site prohibited.

Specific games: pokies, live tables, and why the title matters less than the licence

Pages targeting Australian punters tend to spotlight individual pokie titles — the Buffalo-style games, the Hold & Spin mechanics, the Megaways variants — and to name a handful of providers (Pragmatic Play, Evolution, NetEnt) as a quality signal. None of that information changes the regulatory picture. The game is licensed to the studio that built it; the casino is licensed to the operator that hosts it; and the licence that matters for an Australian player is the Australian licence the operator does not have.

For a player who has decided to play at an offshore casino regardless, the practical questions are the boring ones. Does the casino publish an RTP for each title? Are the games from named studios with independently tested RNGs? Does the casino name a regulator and provide a licence number? None of those are guarantees — Curaçao sub-licences are cheap, and the ACMA’s published enforcement record shows the regulator will act regardless — but they are the kind of box-ticking that separates a longer-established operator from a brand that will be gone in six months.

Live dealer and the studio problem

Live-dealer tables add a complication the marketing rarely acknowledges. The studio that streams the table is licensed in its own jurisdiction; the casino that reskins the stream and takes the bets is licensed in its own jurisdiction; and the player sits in a third jurisdiction that has its own rules. For an Australian player, the relevant jurisdiction is Australia, and the answer is that none of the upstream licences cover offering the stream to a person in Australia.

The ACMA’s enforcement record: what the blocking rate actually looks like

According to the ACMA as reported in June 2026, a total of 1,751 illegal gambling and affiliate marketing websites had been blocked since the first blocking request in November 2019, and more than 230 unlicensed gambling services had left the Australian market since enforcement was strengthened in 2017. In a round reported on 26 June 2026 the ACMA asked Australian internet service providers to block 12 more illegal gambling websites: 7Signs, ChromaBet, Donbet, Duospin, Freshbet, Slots Gem, Jacks Club, Lucky Start, Pointsbetz, Spinrise, Vinyl Casino and Wildsino.

The arithmetic of that enforcement is striking. The 1,751 sites blocked since November 2019 work out to roughly 253 sites blocked per year on average, or around 21 per month. The June 2026 round alone contained 12 sites, suggesting the monthly average has slowed from the early-pandemic peak but is still running in the high single digits. If current pace holds, the ACMA will block another 250 to 280 sites over the next twelve months on top of the current 1,751 figure. That is the rate at which offshore operators churn into and out of the Australian market, and the rate at which a player with a balance on one of those sites risks losing access to it.

The blocking mechanism is itself instructive. The ACMA does not seize domains; it asks Australian ISPs to block them at the DNS level. A player who has bookmarked the casino or who is following an affiliate link can usually reach the site for a few hours after the blocking order while ISPs roll out the change, then finds the site unreachable from Australian IP addresses. The casino typically opens a fresh domain within days, the new domain is itself blocked a few months later, and the cycle repeats. Player balances and unresolved withdrawal requests do not survive the move cleanly.

Where this leaves a player with a balance on a blocked site

There is no formal Australian recourse. The ACMA’s blocking order is aimed at the operator, not at refunding individual players. A player with a balance can try the offshore casino’s customer support, can try the original payment processor’s chargeback route (which is unavailable for carrier billing), and can try a complaints service in the licence jurisdiction if the operator names one. The structural answer is that none of those routes is reliable, which is why the ACMA publishes the warnings it does and why the BetStop register is the harm-reduction tool it is.

Brands the ACMA has formally warned

The ACMA publishes formal warnings when it has reasonable grounds to believe an operator is providing prohibited interactive gambling services to Australians. The warnings name the operator company and the brand, and they are public. The table below lists the brands covered elsewhere on this page, the date of the formal warning, and the operator company named in the warning.

The columns that read “—” carry no source that confirms the brand accepts carrier billing specifically; what is confirmed is that each brand offers prohibited interactive gambling services to Australians, which is the basis the ACMA acted on. A reader evaluating any of them is not choosing among reasonable alternatives; they are choosing among brands the regulator has named in the same breath.

What the table shows

The first pattern is operator reuse. Dama N.V. appears across four brands in this set — RocketPlay, Level Up, Woo Casino and Spirit Casino — with warnings issued in 2022, March 2025 and May 2025. The ACMA does not need to repeat the warning for each brand; the operator knows the conduct is prohibited. Consolutetish S.R.L. picks up two brands — National Casino and Bizzo Casino — both in the same July 2025 warning round. The rebadging rate is the real information in the table: a brand is cheap to register, a domain is cheap to renew, and the blocking cycle that wipes out one URL has no effect on the next one.

The second pattern is the gap between warning and offshore re-entry. Bizzo Casino was the subject of a 2022 formal warning to TechSolutions (CY) Group Limited and TechSolutions Group N.V., then resurfaced under Consolutetish S.R.L. in 2025. The same operator, three years later, on the regulator’s list again. The gap is the offshore operator’s working capital — time enough to acquire new players, accept deposits, fail to pay withdrawals, and rebrand before the next round.

The third pattern is the licensing geography. Ryker B.V. (Jackbit), EOD Code SRL (Instant Casino), Bamboo Media (Ignition Casino) and Sterplay Holding Ltd (Casino Intense) are Curaçao-registered vehicles; Hollycorn N.V. (Sky Crown) and Dama N.V. (the four brands above) are Curaçao as well. None of these licences cover the Australian market. The licence badge on a casino’s homepage is real in the sense that it exists; it is irrelevant in the sense that it does not authorise the operator to take an Australian deposit.

How Australians usually fund deposits at offshore casinos

The marketing leads with carrier billing because it is fast and friction-free. The reality of the deposit mix is more varied.

Credit and debit cards are still the largest single rail at most offshore casinos targeting Australians, despite the IGA’s 2024 ban on credit cards for licensed wagering (which does not bind the offshore side). Visa and Mastercard transactions dominate; American Express was established in 1850 as a freight-forwarding company and later became a card issuer, launching its first charge card on 1 October 1958; unlike Visa or Mastercard’s four-party network, Amex traditionally issues cards and processes transactions itself as a three-party scheme. The Reserve Bank of Australia’s July 2025 review proposes removing surcharges only on eftpos, Mastercard and Visa card transactions, explicitly leaving American Express outside the scope of the proposed surcharge ban. None of this matters for an offshore casino, which charges what its acquirer agrees to and what its customers tolerate.

Cryptocurrency is the second large rail. Bitcoin, Ethereum, USDT and a handful of altcoins clear without the card-network friction that has made Westpac’s gambling block and ANZ’s equivalent effective on the licensed side. The Australian tax treatment of crypto winnings is also clearer than the marketing suggests: winnings are not assessable income for a recreational player, but the ATO treats crypto as property, which means every deposit, withdrawal and conversion is a CGT event that needs to be reported. The crypto rail is fast and global; it is also the one with the most paperwork on the Australian side.

Carrier billing sits in the middle — small per-transaction caps, fees of 10 to 15 percent, no card-network footprint, no chargeback. It is the rail a casual punter uses to deposit A$20 to A$50 a few times a week. The rail cannot fund the kind of play the offshore casino’s bonus terms are written around, which is a quiet way in which the deposit limit is also a harm-reduction tool.

What happens on the withdrawal side

A withdrawal at an offshore casino typically takes three to seven business days for a bank wire, the same day for crypto, and one to three days for an e-wallet such as Skrill or Neteller. The exact timing is set by the casino’s internal processing queue and by the destination rail, not by the deposit method that originally funded the account. A punter who deposited by phone bill and is now withdrawing to a bank account will wait on the bank wire, and on the offshore operator’s processing schedule.

There is no Australian intermediary to escalate to. The casino’s complaints procedure leads to the regulator named on the casino’s licence badge — typically Curaçao — and Curaçao’s complaints process is slow and largely inaccessible to a player outside the EU. That is the practical meaning of “no Australian consumer protection” in the IGA section above.

What “carrier billing” looks like in the wider Australian payments picture

The bigger Australian payments story is the one that is undercutting carrier billing as a differentiator. Apple Pay, Google Pay and Samsung Pay transactions collectively accounted for around 45% of all card payments in Australia by number by the end of 2025. Apple does not charge fees to consumers for using Apple Pay in stores, online or in apps; any surcharge comes from the merchant’s own card-processing fees, not from Apple. Apple states that transaction limits and PIN requirements for Apple Pay purchases are set by the card issuer or merchant, not by Apple itself.

From the licensed Australian wagering side, those wallet transactions are constrained by the IGA’s 2023 credit-card ban. ANZ’s gambling block, activated in the ANZ app, also blocks Gambling Transactions made through a digital wallet such as Apple Pay on an eligible card, not just the physical card. The bank-side friction is real, and it works: a credit-card-funded Apple Pay wallet will be declined at a licensed bookmaker, and ANZ customers who have turned on the gambling block have an extra layer of protection even against debit-card-funded wallet transactions.

From the offshore casino side, none of that applies. The wallet transaction goes through; the carrier-billing deposit goes through; the credit card, if it has not been blocked at the bank level, goes through. The friction that the licensed side has built does not exist on the offshore side, and “pay by phone bill” is the friction-removal story the marketing tells.

Tax and reporting: what an Australian player actually owes

Gambling winnings of a recreational player are not assessable income (section 6-5 ITAA 1997) and losses are not deductible, unless the person carries on a business of gambling. Crypto is treated as property, which means every deposit, bet and withdrawal at a crypto-funded offshore casino is a CGT event. AUSTRAC’s threshold-transaction-report rule, which requires reporting of transfers of A$10,000 or more, applies only to physical cash; ordinary electronic bank transfers are not subject to that per-transaction reporting requirement, regardless of the amount sent.

The practical effect is that an Australian punter who plays at an offshore casino and wins is not taxed on the win, but the punter who funded the play with crypto is now sitting on a CGT reporting obligation the casino will not handle. The ATO’s “record-keeping” expectations on crypto are non-trivial, and most offshore casinos do not issue the kind of statements the ATO would recognise.

FAQ

How does paying by phone bill actually work as a deposit method at a casino?

You enter your mobile number at the cashier, your carrier verifies it, you confirm the charge via SMS or on-screen, and the casino credits your account almost immediately. The amount appears on your next mobile bill, or is deducted from your prepaid credit. Most carriers cap a single transaction at around A$10 to A$50 and add a 10 to 15 percent surcharge, which is why the method suits small, casual deposits rather than larger top-ups.

Does carrier billing make a casino any more legitimate for Australian players?

No. Carrier billing is a payment rail licensed to the processor (Boku being the largest); it is not a casino licence. The ACMA’s blocking orders and formal warnings name offshore casinos that accept carrier billing alongside cards and crypto, and the licence badge on the casino’s homepage is for a Curaçao or other offshore jurisdiction that does not cover Australian players. The deposit method is real; the Australian licence is not.

Is depositing via a mobile phone bill to an offshore casino something an Australian resident can lawfully do?

The Interactive Gambling Act targets the provider, not the individual player. Australians are not prosecuted for depositing at an offshore casino. The legal consequence falls on the operator, which is why the ACMA issues formal warnings, asks ISPs to block sites, and has blocked more than 1,751 illegal gambling and affiliate marketing sites since November 2019. The practical consequence for the player is no Australian consumer protection if the casino refuses a withdrawal.

What’s the difference between ‘pay by phone bill’ and ‘pay by mobile phone’ as far as the casino is concerned?

“Pay by phone bill” means direct carrier billing — the deposit is added to your mobile phone account. “Pay by mobile” sometimes means the same thing, but more often refers to a mobile wallet such as Apple Pay or Google Pay, where the underlying transaction runs through a card network. From the casino’s perspective the difference is mostly the settlement rail and the fee structure; from the player’s perspective, a wallet transaction can be blocked by ANZ or Westpac’s gambling transaction block, while a carrier-billed transaction cannot.

Why would a landline phone bill payment option even be offered for online slots?

It is a holdover from the early days of UK carrier billing, when most carrier-billed commerce was charged to a home phone line. The option still appears on some offshore casinos that use template cashier pages from European-facing operators. The technical flow is the same as mobile carrier billing — the charge is added to your phone bill — and in Australia it is functionally identical to the mobile variant.

What happens if a phone-bill casino charge shows up on someone else’s mobile account?

The account holder is the one liable to the carrier, regardless of who placed the deposit. Mobile carriers treat the account holder as the responsible party for all charges, including third-party carrier-billed transactions. If a child or partner has used your phone to deposit at an offshore casino, the dispute is between you and your carrier, not between you and the casino. Most carriers have a process for disputing unauthorised third-party charges, and Boku’s terms require user verification at the deposit step, but the practical experience varies by carrier.