FC
FAITH C
1 reviews | Active since Dec 2017
10 Apr 2025, 11:31
Bad treatement
I have a fiber to the home contract and was retrenched and now unable to afford it. For the past two weeks I have been calling the vodacom fiber section and been treated so badly. One lady told me my retrenchment is not her problem she cannot help. I have shared retrenchment letters with vodacom and noone has responded to my plea to review my request. I am very disheartened that people can be so ******** of the reality of many South Africans and the with USAID cuts thousands of people have lost jobs and when one is coming forth to say hey look here is my challenge, let us work together to also ensure that I dont compromise myself in event when I cant pay only to be taken from pillar to post. The service has been bad for over 14 days calling everyday and not getting any help
Helpful (0)
Replies (2)0
Replies (2)
Vodacom's replyOfficial
10 Apr 2025, 12:04Dear Customer,
Thank you for making us aware of your complaint.
Kindly be advised that a consultant will make contact with you in due course to assist with your query.
***Please note*** Beware of phishing ****s.
Vodacom will not contact you via WhatsApp to request your personal details.
Regards,
Vodacom Consumer Website Team
Vodacom's reply10 Apr 2025, 12:04
Official
Dear Customer,
Thank you for making us aware of your complaint.
Kindly be advised that a consultant will make contact with you in due course to assist with your query.
***Please note*** Beware of phishing ****s.
Vodacom will not contact you via WhatsApp to request your personal details.
Regards,
Vodacom Consumer Website Team
FC
FAITH C's updateReviewer Update
10 Apr 2025, 17:43I trust youare well. This is to provide you feedback on the issue of trying to cancel mycontract due to a retrenchment process which is beyond my control. I was told regardlessof retrenchment I should still pay cancellation fee of over 13 months despiteme declaring that I have no livelihood and providing proof thereof. I amengaging with the consumer protection act and find this practice unfair. I wasnever advised of the need to have insurance for this contract in case of aretrenchment. The call I received today I was told I should have hadinsurance, or I should have transferred the line to someone else. All these Tsand Cs were never articulated to me to inform my decision-making process.Vodacoms failure to clearly articulate these underlying terms and conditions iscontravention of the CPA. Vodacom’s conduct at thisjuncture is “*********” as it “imposed terms and conditions that negated theconsumers’ right to cancel their fixed-term contracts. Below I want to remind Vodacomof the Tribunal ruling over Section 14 of the CPA and breaches thereof in thiscase. The cancellation penalty being imposed negates my right as a consumer whois faced with retrenchment to cancel the contract and puts me at risk of a badcredit record should I fail to pay Vodacom. I have come forward in spirit ofgood faith to seek assistance only to be faced by ruthless and heartless iterationsof people on the phone from Vodacom not showing any empathy to my plight andsticking to the rigid rules they are trained on and failing to go into the CPAto look at how best I can be assisted as a customer.
It is important for Vodacom to accept the global reality of increasing unemployment and retrenchment and to what benefit is it to hold a client to ransom even after they have shared their retrenchment letters in good faith. The NCC explained that section14(3)(b)(i) provided that the supplier may impose a reasonable cancellationpenalty with respect to any goods or services supp**** to the consumer.Regulation 5(2) listed the relevant considerations in deciding on a reasonablecancellation penalty and regulation 5(3) of the CPA stated that a suppliermight not impose a cancellation penalty that had the effect of negating theconsumer’s right to cancel.Vodacom’s imposition of a 75%cancellation penalty constituted a contravention of these regulations as didthe mobile operator’s failure to cancel consumers’ contracts timeously afterhaving been notified by consumer
It is important for Vodacom to accept the global reality of increasing unemployment and retrenchment and to what benefit is it to hold a client to ransom even after they have shared their retrenchment letters in good faith. The NCC explained that section14(3)(b)(i) provided that the supplier may impose a reasonable cancellationpenalty with respect to any goods or services supp**** to the consumer.Regulation 5(2) listed the relevant considerations in deciding on a reasonablecancellation penalty and regulation 5(3) of the CPA stated that a suppliermight not impose a cancellation penalty that had the effect of negating theconsumer’s right to cancel.Vodacom’s imposition of a 75%cancellation penalty constituted a contravention of these regulations as didthe mobile operator’s failure to cancel consumers’ contracts timeously afterhaving been notified by consumer
FC
FAITH C's update10 Apr 2025, 17:43
Reviewer Update
I trust youare well. This is to provide you feedback on the issue of trying to cancel mycontract due to a retrenchment process which is beyond my control. I was told regardlessof retrenchment I should still pay cancellation fee of over 13 months despiteme declaring that I have no livelihood and providing proof thereof. I amengaging with the consumer protection act and find this practice unfair. I wasnever advised of the need to have insurance for this contract in case of aretrenchment. The call I received today I was told I should have hadinsurance, or I should have transferred the line to someone else. All these Tsand Cs were never articulated to me to inform my decision-making process.Vodacoms failure to clearly articulate these underlying terms and conditions iscontravention of the CPA. Vodacom’s conduct at thisjuncture is “*********” as it “imposed terms and conditions that negated theconsumers’ right to cancel their fixed-term contracts. Below I want to remind Vodacomof the Tribunal ruling over Section 14 of the CPA and breaches thereof in thiscase. The cancellation penalty being imposed negates my right as a consumer whois faced with retrenchment to cancel the contract and puts me at risk of a badcredit record should I fail to pay Vodacom. I have come forward in spirit ofgood faith to seek assistance only to be faced by ruthless and heartless iterationsof people on the phone from Vodacom not showing any empathy to my plight andsticking to the rigid rules they are trained on and failing to go into the CPAto look at how best I can be assisted as a customer.
It is important for Vodacom to accept the global reality of increasing unemployment and retrenchment and to what benefit is it to hold a client to ransom even after they have shared their retrenchment letters in good faith. The NCC explained that section14(3)(b)(i) provided that the supplier may impose a reasonable cancellationpenalty with respect to any goods or services supp**** to the consumer.Regulation 5(2) listed the relevant considerations in deciding on a reasonablecancellation penalty and regulation 5(3) of the CPA stated that a suppliermight not impose a cancellation penalty that had the effect of negating theconsumer’s right to cancel.Vodacom’s imposition of a 75%cancellation penalty constituted a contravention of these regulations as didthe mobile operator’s failure to cancel consumers’ contracts timeously afterhaving been notified by consumer
It is important for Vodacom to accept the global reality of increasing unemployment and retrenchment and to what benefit is it to hold a client to ransom even after they have shared their retrenchment letters in good faith. The NCC explained that section14(3)(b)(i) provided that the supplier may impose a reasonable cancellationpenalty with respect to any goods or services supp**** to the consumer.Regulation 5(2) listed the relevant considerations in deciding on a reasonablecancellation penalty and regulation 5(3) of the CPA stated that a suppliermight not impose a cancellation penalty that had the effect of negating theconsumer’s right to cancel.Vodacom’s imposition of a 75%cancellation penalty constituted a contravention of these regulations as didthe mobile operator’s failure to cancel consumers’ contracts timeously afterhaving been notified by consumer