Forced to pay for *****ulent Charges on Account

I would like to lodge a formal complaint regarding the recent charges on my mother-in-law's Vodacom account. On 8 February 2025, she was the victim of a smash-and-grab incident in Pretoria, in the Magnolia Dell area, around 9 p.m. She is in her 80s, and was alone when her handbag and phone were ****** from the vehicle. Thankfully, her security agency eventually assisted her, and they were able to contact her son in Cape Town.

The trauma of this incident, along with the urgent need to cancel her ****** cards and devices, was extremely distressing for both her and my husband. It was a nightmare for him, not being able to be physically present to support his mother. He only managed to contact Vodacom around 11 p.m. that evening, after cancelling all bank cards etc., and went through the necessary prompts to speak to the right department. However, he was repeatedly frustrated by an AI bot named "Toby" and had to call back multiple times due to the bot not accepting his responses nor allowing him to access certain menus for other options. After significant delays and multiple attempts, he was finally able to report the device (phone) as ****** past midnight, assuming this would also block the SIM.

The following day, my mother-in-law visited Vodacom at Brooklyn Mall to arrange a SIM swap and get a new SIM card, as the ****** phone contained the original SIM. However, nearly a month later, she was shocked to receive a bill that included a R1139.03 charge for a "Airtime Transfer Services" as well as additional Once-off Charges for " My Minutes 50" and "Just 4 You 100 Minutes for 30 Days (Voda to Voda)" – services she did not activate or purchase.

She visited Vodacom Brooklyn Mall again on Monday, 31 March, providing the SAPS case number and necessary documentation, and requested proof of the activation of this service and details about the numbers involved in the transfer as this was not present on the statement. However, Vodacom was unable to provide any specific information, claiming they could not see the details on their system. She was later informed by a representative named Cassandra that the SIM card was never reported as ******, and that she was therefore liable for all charges incurred.

The issue here is that an elderly woman, in a state of distress after a traumatic event, was not in the right frame of mind to consider the necessary steps to block her SIM card as she also had no phone to do so. Her son was also caught in a panic trying to ensure her safety and security once the security company contacted him. The fact that Toby, the AI bot, failed to properly guide him through the process – particularly not asking whether the SIM card was in the ****** phone – is a serious failure of customer care. If this had been a human representative, they would have been able to provide proper assistance and ensure that all necessary actions were taken to protect my mother-in-law against *****ulent activities.

Furthermore, Vodacom has failed to provide proof of when this call forwarding service was activated, yet they are demanding payment for it. Given that the phone was reported ****** and blocked promptly, the SIM was not blocked at the same time by Vodacom, *****ulent charges occurred. Vodacom, as a mobile provider, has an obligation to protect its customers from *****, especially in such a distressing situation. The fact that my elderly mother-in-law and her son were not fully aware of the need to block the SIM at the same time as the phone, and were not guided through this process by the AI Bot, is unacceptable.

We are requesting that Vodacom provide proof of this activation and the itemized billing, as well as refund the charges incurred after the theft, for the following reasons:

1. The device was reported ****** as promptly as possible, and the SIM should have been blocked as well, but seems it was not, due to the inability to explain this to an AI bot.

2. *****ulent charges were allowed to occur due to Vodacom's failure to properly guide them through the process.

3. The customer is a pensioner and was unable to report this herself as she had no phone. Her son, too, was distressed and frustrated, believing he had done all necessary steps to ensure the device and SIM were blocked, based on his call to Vodacom and following the prompts.

This situation has caused unnecessary stress, and it is demoralizing to expect an elderly person to navigate such an ordeal without proper assistance from Vodacom during the reporting phase and the post follow up on charges. We hope that Vodacom will take this matter seriously and resolve it promptly.

To add to this, surely it is not conducive in an emergency situation as this, that an AI Bot is an appropriate mechanism to handle matters of this nature?

We look forward to a response from Vodacom.