Cell C: In Breach of Contract

Shelagh Maher renewed her contract (***) with Cell C on 28 December 2022, effective date 1 January 2023. In brief, she is entitled to 5GB TopUp and an additional 5GB of so-called nite data as well as a 90-minute any-net voice bundle recurring per month for 24 months. She received all this in January as well as February. In March, she did not receive her 90-minute any-net voice bundle. Because she had purchased a large voice bundle in February, she was not aware that she did not receive the voice bundle in March until 31 March when the previously purchased voice bundle expired.

She has spent in excess of FOUR hours on the phone to the Cell C Call Centre since 18:00 on 31 March. The service and knowledge of the agents has been both varied and extremely disappointing.

Shelagh Maher was told on three occasions that her contract was a data only contract even though she has read her contract to the agents, thus insinuating she either could not read or was a ****. They, in turn, insist that the contract states it is a data only contract even though they have not bothered to read the contract sent to her. Another two agents, one of whom was a leader, agreed something was wrong with the system and would load her minutes immediately. They both promised she would receive those minutes before the end of the call. On both occasions, she waited on the phone for over 20 minutes and the agents never 'returned' and she did not receive the minutes. One agent had a very creative reason: she informed Shelagh that even though her contract stated she would receive 90 minutes each month, she only received and paid for such when she topped up. What nonsense! She has been debited the full amount every month and has paid out of purchased airtime when she has topped up.

Apparently, the case has been escalated and Shelagh will have to wait for two working days for Cell C to investigate. This is regardless of the inconvenience caused to the client and the risk the client may have faced had she been in an emergency on 31 March before she realised she had no airtime.

The Cell C Call Centre is like so many other call centres. Despite obviously having many procedures the agents have to follow, they all have different interpretations and make assumptions, thus causing confusion and a lack of trust. Furthermore, they cannot seem to understand while clients such as Shelagh get angry and they tend to play the 'moral high ground' if frustrated clients raise their voices or even God forbid swear. It is pointless telling a client to calm down when they are angry. Any person with a smattering of knowledge about psychology could explain that that is recipe to annoy the client even more. Either ending the call abruptly as a number of agents did or making the client wait indefinitely is shocking manners and a sign of poorly trained and *********** staff.

Shelagh Maher awaits Cell C's feedback. However, they should note they are in breach of contract. In essence, they have debited the client for a service they have not provided. A simple case of *****!