The Triple Zero Rort
- CONTESTEDACMA began Federal Court proceedings against Optus Mobile over the 18 September 2025 emergency call outage; the allegations are untested.One thousand and five
- Opened on fileThe calls that did not connect
The regulator calls access to Triple Zero the most important public safety responsibility a telco has. Optus failed it twice in 22 months. After the November 2023 outage, which ACMA found left 2,145 emergency calls unsuccessful and 369 required welfare checks undone, three Optus companies paid infringement notices totalling just over $12 million, and payment was not an admission. On a separate public-safety matter in the same period, emails obtained by the ABC under FOI show ACMA told Optus its notice would sit at the lower end of a $1.5 million to $3 million range if it offered an enforceable undertaking on terms acceptable to ACMA, and sent it the draft announcement to check for accuracy. ACMA said procedural fairness required this and that it does not negotiate release content; Optus made no comments. In February 2026 ACMA’s Chair told a Senate committee that in future it would not consult on media releases before they go public. After the second major outage, on 18 September 2025, ACMA went to the Federal Court, alleging 1,005 contraventions. Those allegations are untested.
Fig. 02 / What happened
Fig. 03 / Who the record names
How we know
The exhibits sit beside the title above, each tied to the article that documented it. How evidence and sources are graded: evidence grade, source tiers.
What else is connected
Named in this case and in others. A count of where the record names them, not a finding about what they did.
From the desk
- Recommendation 18 review due to the MinisterWho answers for Triple Zero · The Triple Zero RortThe Department's review of all Triple Zero legislation and regulation, reported via the Custodian
Read the desk note
The Department of Infrastructure says Recommendation 18 of the Bean Review, a review of all legislation and regulation relating to Triple Zero, is the final outstanding recommendation from that review. Its public consultation ran from 26 May to 30 June 2026, and its report is due to the Minister, via the Triple Zero Custodian, by March 2027. Watch for whether the review reaches the $30 million penalty regime, the review of ACMA the Senate committee has recommended, or the Emergency Call Person question, and for whether the government has by then responded to the Senate committee's 21 September 2026 report.
- Record: THE TRIPLE ZERO RORT, article 2, "Factual accuracy", corrected and updated, 10 October 2026Factual accuracy · The Triple Zero RortA paragraph on the UTS study of telecommunications enforcement is corrected, and Optus's reply of 8 October 2026 is printed in full.
The paragraph above first said that the study says nothing about Triple Zero. That was wrong. One of the study's three court penalties, $400,000 in 2014, was for breach of the Telecommunications (Emergency Call Service) Determination 2009, the rules on access to the emergency call service, and the study records one enforceable undertaking for breach of the same Determination. The study's period…
Read the desk note
UPDATED 10 October 2026 (case: THE TRIPLE ZERO RORT, article 2 of four).
ARTICLE CHANGES. A correction to the paragraph on the UTS Centre for Media Transition study: it does cover Triple Zero, with a $400,000 court penalty in 2014 and an enforceable undertaking, each for breach of the Telecommunications (Emergency Call Service) Determination 2009. Optus's reply of 8 October 2026 is now printed in full in the Right of reply section and in the reply record; earlier the article quoted two of its three substantive sentences and described the third. The standard record now names the Disclosure Log 153 documents as the primary reference for the finding.
STILL OPEN. Optus replied on 8 October 2026 without answering the question whether it knew the undertaking would put the notice at the lower end of the range, or the question whether it sought changes to any other ACMA draft enforcement release it was sent, and if so which releases and what changes. No response was received from ACMA by the deadline, 5pm AEDT on Thursday 8 October 2026. No response was received from Telstra by the deadline, 5pm AEDT on Thursday 8 October 2026. Any response received later will be added as a dated update.
NEXT DATE: not yet set. The Senate has not published the program for the 2026-27 Supplementary Budget Estimates; its estimates page says the program "will be published once available" (checked 8 October 2026). This desk will watch for it.
- Record: THE TRIPLE ZERO RORT, article 4, "Who answers for Triple Zero", corrected and updated, 10 October 2026Who answers for Triple Zero · The Triple Zero RortThe penalty-unit figure for the Enhancing Consumer Safeguards Bill is corrected to about $11 million, and Optus’s reply of 8 October 2026 is printed in full
The bill paragraph above gave the penalty-unit figure as about $10 million. That was the figure at the earlier penalty-unit value: the Parliamentary Library’s Bills Digest puts 30,300 penalty units at $9.999 million. A penalty unit has been $364 since 1 July 2026, and the bill applies only to conduct wholly on or after it commences, so 30,300 penalty units is $11,029,200 at that value (THE RORT’s…
Read the desk note
UPDATED 10 October 2026 (case: THE TRIPLE ZERO RORT, article 4 of four).
ARTICLE CHANGES. A correction to the dollar figure for the maximum penalty in the Enhancing Consumer Safeguards Bill. At the penalty unit in force since 1 July 2026 it is about $11 million; the figure first given was the one at the earlier unit value. Optus’s reply of 8 October 2026 is now printed in full in the Right of reply section and in the reply record; earlier the article quoted two of its three substantive sentences and described the third. One reference added: ASIC, fines and penalties.
STILL OPEN. The Department's reply does not answer the six questions put to it: whether the $30 million maximum applies to conduct before 31 October 2025, whether the Enhancing Consumer Safeguards Bill would change the maximum penalty for any breach of the Triple Zero rules, which 12 of the 18 Bean Review recommendations were in place, and by what date, on the Department's account, the 17 other than Recommendation 18 were complete, when the government will respond to the Senate committee's report, and whether the caution the ABC reported Labor senators expressing about reviewing ACMA is the government's own position. Optus's reply does not say whether Optus contests ACMA's allegations, when it implemented Recommendations 3, 4 and 16, how many of the 21 Schott Review measures are implemented, or whether compensation was offered. No formal government response to the Senate committee's report had been located as of 8 October 2026. The Federal Court file number and first listing for ACMA v Optus Mobile Pty Limited have not been located. Any later response from ACMA or Telstra will be added as a dated update.
NEXT DATE: March 2027, when the Department's Recommendation 18 review is due to the Minister.
- Record: article 1 updated, 8 October 2026The calls that did not connect · The Triple Zero RortOptus's media team replied on 8 October 2026 and the reply is in the article; the 7 October paragraph is left as published
Optus's media team replied by email on 8 October 2026 to the questions THE RORT emailed on 2 October. The email is signed Optus Media Team and carries no request that it be kept off the record. It says: "Optus’s position on these matters is on the public record, including our submission to the Senate Environment and Communications Committee following the September 2025 Triple Zero outage." That…
Read the desk note
UPDATED 8 October 2026 (case: THE TRIPLE ZERO RORT, article 1 of four).
ARTICLE CHANGES. One dated update added to the closing section, after the paragraph it follows, which is left as published. It records that Optus's media team replied by email on 8 October 2026 to the questions of 2 October, in an email signed Optus Media Team, and quotes the reply's sentences on Optus's public position and on matters before the Federal Court. It records that the reply does not say whether Optus contests ACMA's allegations, whether it accepts the other alleged contraventions covered by the notices, and does not answer the question on the enforceable undertaking in the Integrated Public Number Database matter, and that Optus says in a release dated 21 September 2026 that its welfare check processes have been strengthened. One reference added: that release. The 7 October paragraph, which said no questions had been put when the article was published, was true on that date. No figure in the article changed.
STILL OPEN. The questions to Optus on ACMA's Federal Court proceeding, on the other alleged contraventions covered by the November 2024 infringement notices and on the enforceable undertaking in the Integrated Public Number Database matter are not answered by the reply. Right of reply for ACMA and Telstra: offered by email on 2 October 2026; a response was requested by 5pm AEDT on Thursday 8 October 2026. Any response, or its absence, will be added when it comes in.
NEXT DATE: not yet set. The reply date for ACMA and Telstra was 5pm AEDT, Thursday 8 October 2026. No hearing date for ACMA's Federal Court case against Optus Mobile has been located; this desk will watch for one once it is listed.
- Record: article 1 updated, 8 October 2026, the Department's reply and the reply deadlineThe calls that did not connect · The Triple Zero RortThe Department's media team replied on 8 October 2026 with a response attributed to a spokesperson, and the reply is in the article in full; no response was received from ACMA or Telstra by the deadline; the Optus update of the same date is left as published
Read the desk note
UPDATED 8 October 2026 (case: THE TRIPLE ZERO RORT, article 1 of four).
ARTICLE CHANGES. A second dated update added to the closing section, after the Optus update of the same date, which is left as published. It records that THE RORT emailed six questions to the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications, Sport and the Arts on 2 October 2026, and publishes in full the response the Department's media team (Media Services) sent by email on 8 October 2026, on the record, which the email says can be attributed to a spokesperson from the Department. It records, question by question, what the reply does not say in answer to questions 1 to 6. It records that no response was received from ACMA or from Telstra by the deadline, 5pm AEDT on Thursday 8 October 2026. No figure in the article changed.
STILL OPEN. The six questions to the Department remain open: the update sets out what the reply does not say on each. The questions to Optus named in the record of 8 October 2026 on Optus's reply are not answered by that reply. ACMA and Telstra did not respond by the deadline.
NEXT DATE: not yet set. No hearing date for ACMA's Federal Court case against Optus Mobile has been located; this desk will watch for one once it is listed.
- Record: article 3 updated, 8 October 2026One thousand and five · The Triple Zero RortOptus's media team replied on 8 October 2026 and the reply is in the article; the 7 October paragraph is left as published
Optus's media team replied by email on 8 October 2026 to the questions THE RORT emailed on 2 October. The email is signed Optus Media Team and carries no request that it be kept off the record. It says: "Optus’s position on these matters is on the public record, including our submission to the Senate Environment and Communications Committee following the September 2025 Triple Zero outage." That…
Read the desk note
UPDATED 8 October 2026 (case: THE TRIPLE ZERO RORT, article 3 of four).
ARTICLE CHANGES. One dated update added to the closing section, after the paragraph it follows, which is left as published. It records that Optus's media team replied by email on 8 October 2026 to the questions of 2 October, in an email signed Optus Media Team, and quotes the reply's sentences on Optus's public position and on matters before the Federal Court. It records that the reply does not say whether Optus contests ACMA's allegations, give the date on which, by its own assessment, Optus implemented each of the three Bean Review recommendations addressed to Optus and other carriers, say how many of the 21 Schott Review measures are implemented, say what the 605 figure counts, or say whether compensation was offered, and that Optus says in a release dated 21 September 2026 that it accepted all 21 recommendations of the review led by Kerry Schott AO and that many are completed or embedded. One reference added: that release. The 7 October paragraph, which said no questions had been put when the article was published, was true on that date. No figure in the article changed.
STILL OPEN. The questions to Optus on ACMA's Federal Court proceeding, on the Bean Review and Schott Review recommendations, on the 605 count and on compensation are not answered by the reply. Right of reply for ACMA, and the question to the South Australian and Western Australian coroners: offered by email on 2 October 2026; a response was requested by 5pm AEDT on Thursday 8 October 2026. Any response, or its absence, will be added when it comes in. The Federal Court's first listing for ACMA v Optus Mobile Pty Limited, and whether any coroner makes a finding on a death reported in connection with the outage, remain unresolved.
NEXT DATE: not yet set. The reply date for ACMA and the coroners was 5pm AEDT, Thursday 8 October 2026.
- Record: article 3 updated, 8 October 2026, the Department's reply and the reply deadlineOne thousand and five · The Triple Zero RortThe Department's media team replied on 8 October 2026 with a response attributed to a spokesperson, and the reply is in the article in full; no response was received from ACMA, or from the addresses the coroners' questions were sent to, by the deadline; the Optus update of the same date is left as published
Read the desk note
UPDATED 8 October 2026 (case: THE TRIPLE ZERO RORT, article 3 of four).
ARTICLE CHANGES. A second dated update added to the closing section, after the Optus update of the same date, which is left as published. It records that THE RORT emailed six questions to the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications, Sport and the Arts on 2 October 2026, and publishes in full the response the Department's media team (Media Services) sent by email on 8 October 2026, on the record, which the email says can be attributed to a spokesperson from the Department. It records, question by question, what the reply does not say in answer to questions 1 to 6. It adds one sentence on the $30 million maximum: the Act that set it, for contraventions of subsection 148(1) or (3) of the Telecommunications (Consumer Protection and Service Standards) Act 1999, and its commencement on 31 October 2025, beside the $250,000 per contravention ACMA's release states for its case. It records that no response was received from ACMA, from the Western Australian Department of Justice, to which the question for the Coroners Court of Western Australia was sent, and from the South Australian courts media address, to which the question for the coroner was sent, by the deadline, 5pm AEDT on Thursday 8 October 2026, and that the only mail received from South Australia was an automatic out-of-office reply from a Courts Administration Authority staff member. One reference added: the Act on the Federal Register of Legislation. No figure in the article changed.
STILL OPEN. The six questions to the Department remain open: the update sets out what the reply does not say on each. The questions to Optus named in the record of 8 October 2026 on Optus's reply are not answered by that reply. ACMA, the Western Australian Department of Justice and the South Australian courts media address did not respond by the deadline. The Federal Court's first listing for ACMA v Optus Mobile Pty Limited, and whether any coroner makes a finding on a death reported in connection with the outage, remain unresolved.
NEXT DATE: not yet set.
- Record: THE TRIPLE ZERO RORT, article 2, "Factual accuracy", publishedFactual accuracy · The Triple Zero RortOptus replied on 8 October 2026 without answering the two questions on this article. No response was received from ACMA by the deadline, 5pm AEDT on Thursday 8 October 2026. No response was received from Telstra by the deadline, 5pm AEDT on Thursday 8 October 2026.
Read the desk note
ATTENDED 8 October 2026 (case: THE TRIPLE ZERO RORT, article 2 of four).
FINDING. Documents ACMA released under freedom of information, published in its Disclosure Log 153 on 3 February 2025, show that on 27 November 2023, the day it met Optus over an Integrated Public Number Database investigation, ACMA emailed Optus inviting it to offer an enforceable undertaking and stating that its infringement notice would fall between $1.5 million and $3 million, at the lower end if Optus offered an undertaking on terms acceptable to ACMA. On 4 December 2023 an email from Optus to ACMA said Optus agreed to offer an undertaking and asked ACMA to confirm the final amount of the notice. On 29 February 2024 ACMA sent Optus an embargoed draft of its announcement and invited comment on its factual accuracy; Optus had none. On 6 March 2024 ACMA announced Optus had paid $1,501,500, $1,500 above the floor of the stated range. At Senate Estimates on 25 February 2025 ACMA's Chair said: "We reject the fact that it's a deal. It is a negotiated outcome." On 10 February 2026 she told the same committee: "in future we will not be consulting on media releases before they go public", and ACMA's written answer to a Senate question says it will tell an investigated entity of its intention to publish no more than one business day before publication. Both Telstra drafts ACMA supplied to the Senate differ from the published releases; the documents do not show who asked for the changes. Nothing examined shows the Triple Zero penalties themselves were previewed or discussed in advance this way.
ARTICLE CHANGES. Article 2, "Factual accuracy", published, laying ACMA's own documents beside its account at Senate Estimates in 2025 and 2026, its written answers to Senate questions and the ABC's reporting. The article has a Right of reply section recording Optus's reply of 8 October 2026 and the absence lines for ACMA and Telstra, given under STILL OPEN.
STILL OPEN. Optus replied on 8 October 2026 without answering the question whether it knew the undertaking would put the notice at the lower end of the range, or the question whether it sought changes to any other ACMA draft enforcement release it was sent, and if so which releases and what changes. No response was received from ACMA by the deadline, 5pm AEDT on Thursday 8 October 2026. No response was received from Telstra by the deadline, 5pm AEDT on Thursday 8 October 2026. Any response received later will be added as a dated update.
NEXT DATE: not yet set. The Senate has not published the program for the 2026-27 Supplementary Budget Estimates; its estimates page says the program "will be published once available" (checked 8 October 2026). This desk will watch for it.
- Record: THE TRIPLE ZERO RORT, article 4, "Who answers for Triple Zero", publishedWho answers for Triple Zero · The Triple Zero RortThe Department of Infrastructure and Optus replied on 8 October 2026
Read the desk note
ATTENDED 8 October 2026 (case: THE TRIPLE ZERO RORT, article 4 of four).
FINDING. Two major Optus outages, 22 months apart, sit under one duty priced three different ways: paid infringement notices for the first, a $250,000-per-contravention Federal Court case for the second, and a $30 million maximum in law since 31 October 2025. This article sets the three side by side on one basis and follows the reviews, the Senate committee's 21 September 2026 report and the Custodian, whose legislative function, the Department says, Act No. 50 of 2025 confirmed.
ARTICLE CHANGES. Article 4, "Who answers for Triple Zero", published. It carries the reply of a spokesperson from the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications, Sport and the Arts and the reply of Optus's media team, both received on 8 October 2026 to the questions THE RORT emailed on 2 October 2026, and records what each reply does not answer. It carries two absence lines. No response was received from ACMA by the deadline, 5pm AEDT on Thursday 8 October 2026. No response was received from Telstra by the deadline, 5pm AEDT on Thursday 8 October 2026. It also records the ABC's report of 1 October 2026 on temporary disaster roaming, the Parliament's record that the first Enhancing Consumer Safeguards Bill lapsed, and the Department's account of when the Custodian was established.
STILL OPEN. The Department's reply does not answer the six questions put to it: whether the $30 million maximum applies to conduct before 31 October 2025, whether the Enhancing Consumer Safeguards Bill would change the maximum penalty for any breach of the Triple Zero rules, which 12 of the 18 Bean Review recommendations were in place, and by what date, on the Department's account, the 17 other than Recommendation 18 were complete, when the government will respond to the Senate committee's report, and whether the caution the ABC reported Labor senators expressing about reviewing ACMA is the government's own position. Optus's reply does not say whether Optus contests ACMA's allegations, when it implemented Recommendations 3, 4 and 16, how many of the 21 Schott Review measures are implemented, or whether compensation was offered. No formal government response to the Senate committee's report had been located as of 8 October 2026. The Federal Court file number and first listing for ACMA v Optus Mobile Pty Limited have not been located. Any later response from ACMA or Telstra will be added as a dated update.
NEXT DATE: March 2027, when the Department's Recommendation 18 review is due to the Minister.
- Record: article 1 updated, 7 October 2026The calls that did not connect · The Triple Zero RortThe Triple Zero Rort · right of reply offered 2 October 2026
When this article was published on 25 September 2026, no questions had been put to ACMA, Optus or Telstra. THE RORT emailed all three on 2 October 2026, and a response was requested by 5pm AEDT on Thursday 8 October 2026. Any response, or its absence, will be added as dated updates.
Read the desk note
UPDATED 7 October 2026 (case: THE TRIPLE ZERO RORT, article 1 of four).
ARTICLE CHANGES. One dated update added to the closing section, after the paragraph it follows, which is left as published. It records that THE RORT emailed its questions to ACMA, to Optus and to Telstra on 2 October 2026, after the article was published on 25 September 2026. No figure in the article changed.
STILL OPEN. Right of reply: offered by email on 2 October 2026; a response was requested by 5pm AEDT on Thursday 8 October 2026. Any response, or its absence, will be added when it comes in.
NEXT DATES: 8 October 2026, 5pm AEDT, the reply date for ACMA, Optus and Telstra. No hearing date for ACMA's Federal Court case against Optus Mobile has been located; this desk will watch for one once it is listed.
- Record: article 3 updated, 7 October 2026One thousand and five · The Triple Zero RortThe Triple Zero Rort · right of reply offered 2 October 2026
THE RORT put the question to the South Australian and Western Australian coroners by email on 2 October 2026. An automatic reply came back from South Australia; that is not a response. Any answer, or its absence, will be added here.
Read the desk note
UPDATED 7 October 2026 (case: THE TRIPLE ZERO RORT, article 3 of four).
ARTICLE CHANGES. Two dated updates added to the closing sections, after the paragraphs they follow, which are left as published. The first records that THE RORT put its question on the coroners' findings to the South Australian and Western Australian coroners by email on 2 October 2026. The second records that THE RORT emailed its questions to ACMA and to Optus on 2 October 2026, after the article was published on 25 September 2026. No figure in the article changed.
STILL OPEN. Right of reply: offered by email on 2 October 2026; a response was requested by 5pm AEDT on Thursday 8 October 2026. Any response, or its absence, will be added when it comes in. The Federal Court's first listing for ACMA v Optus Mobile Pty Limited, and whether any coroner makes a finding on a death reported in connection with the outage, remain unresolved.
NEXT DATE: 8 October 2026, 5pm AEDT, the reply date for ACMA and Optus.
- Article updatedOne thousand and five · The Triple Zero Rort
The line above that no coroner has yet made a finding rests on one source and date: ABC News, 24 November 2025, when WA Police Commissioner Col Blanch said the investigations were not complete for the coroner. That report covers the Perth death only: it does not say whether any coroner had made a finding on the South Australian deaths. THE RORT has not found a later public finding and is putting…
- Record: THE TRIPLE ZERO RORT, article 1, "The calls that did not connect", publishedThe calls that did not connect · The Triple Zero RortRight-of-reply questions to ACMA and Optus have not been sent; this article publishes ahead of them, with any answers added as dated updates.
Read the desk note
ATTENDED 25 September 2026 (case: THE TRIPLE ZERO RORT, article 1 of four).
FINDING. The Australian Communications and Media Authority found that Optus's 8 November 2023 outage produced 2,145 unsuccessful emergency calls and 369 welfare checks that were required and not carried out. Three Optus companies paid infringement notices totalling $12,000,420, and the notice for Optus Mobile states that payment is not an admission of liability. This article sets out that record, the same duty enforced against Telstra, a separate penalty over the database Triple Zero uses for caller location, and the recurrence twenty-two months later that has now put Optus Mobile before the Federal Court.
ARTICLE CHANGES. Article 1, "The calls that did not connect", published, covering the 2023 outage, ACMA's findings, the infringement notices, the Telstra and IPND penalties in the same period, and the handoff to the 2025 outage. Article 3 of this case, "One thousand and five", publishes alongside it; two more articles are held pending right of reply.
STILL OPEN. Right-of-reply questions to the Australian Communications and Media Authority (case plan questions 1 and 2) and to Optus (question 12) have not been sent. Any answers, or their absence, will be added here as dated updates.
NEXT DATE: not yet set. No hearing date for ACMA's Federal Court case against Optus Mobile has been located; this desk will watch for one once it is listed.
- Record: THE TRIPLE ZERO RORT, article 3, "One thousand and five", publishedOne thousand and five · The Triple Zero RortThis article carries no responses to THE RORT's own questions; none had been sent at publication
Read the desk note
ATTENDED 25 September 2026 (case: THE TRIPLE ZERO RORT, article 3 of four).
FINDING. Optus says a firewall upgrade went wrong on 18 September 2025 and Triple Zero calls failed for over 14 hours, from 00:17 to 14:34 AEST, across South Australia, Western Australia, the Northern Territory and far west New South Wales. By Optus's own count, 605 service numbers tried to reach Triple Zero and 150 got through. The second major outage came twenty-two months after the first. This time ACMA did not issue an infringement notice. On 30 July 2026 it began Federal Court proceedings against Optus Mobile, alleging 1,005 contraventions of two emergency call obligations, and said the recurrence was one of its reasons.
ARTICLE CHANGES. Article 3, "One thousand and five", published, covering the outage as Optus told the Senate, the smaller Dapto failure ten days later, ACMA's move to the Federal Court, the responses from the minister and Optus, and what remains unsettled.
STILL OPEN. Right of reply to ACMA and Optus will be sought; any response, or its absence, will be added when it comes in. The Federal Court's first listing for ACMA v Optus Mobile Pty Limited, and whether any coroner makes a finding on a death reported in connection with the outage, remain unresolved.