Vodacom - Appalling Service to Mourning Pensioner

⸻

Dear Vodacom,

I am writing this on behalf of my father, a 73-year-old pensioner, who has been a loyal Vodacom customer for many years. I wish to express our deep dissatisfaction with the appalling treatment he has received, which is not only in contravention of basic customer service standards but also appears to infringe on his rights as outlined under South Africa’s Consumer Protection Act (CPA), the Electronic Communications Act, and other applicable legislation protecting vulnerable persons.

Background of the Matter • My father holds three Vodacom contracts, two in his business name (now inactive) and one in his personal capacity. • Two of the contracts were for his daughters. Tragically, one of his daughters passed away in September 2024. Despite this devastating loss, he continued to pay her contract until January 2025. • Due to financial hardship as a pensioner, he could no longer pay the full amount, but from May 2025 onwards, he has been paying R100 per month towards the arrears — a clear demonstration of good faith and willingness to settle. • Without any prior contact, notice, or opportunity to negotiate, Vodacom handed him over to a debt collector, despite his ongoing payments. • Recently, as his other two contracts neared their 24-month term, he contacted Vodacom cancellations to give the required 30 days’ notice to move them to prepaid.

Unacceptable Conduct from Vodacom Staff 1. He was told that he could not cancel the two unrelated contracts until the outstanding personal contract was settled, despite the fact that: • The contracts are not interlinked. • Two are business-related (inactive) and one is personal. 2. He explained his situation and confirmed that he is already paying R100 per month towards the arrears, but was told he must set up an additional R200 payment arrangement. 3. He agreed in good faith, believing once the two active contracts ended, he could redirect those funds to settle the arrears quicker. 4. The call was cut off, and on calling back, he was then told he must contact the debt collectors to settle — and that the cancellations could not be processed at all until the full arrears are cleared.

Why This Is Unacceptable and Possibly ******** • Consumer Protection Act (Section 48): Prohibits unfair, unreasonable, or unjust contract terms and business practices. Forcing a customer to maintain unrelated, expired contracts in order to settle an entirely separate debt is unreasonable and amounts to financial exploitation. • Electronic Communications Act & ICASA Code of Conduct: Require service providers to deal with customers fairly, transparently, and without imposing undue hardship. • Elderly & Vulnerable Persons Protections: As a 73-year-old pensioner who has suffered bereavement, my father falls within a vulnerable category that should be afforded greater leniency and support, not unnecessary financial pressure. • Basic Contract Law: Each contract is an independent legal agreement. Linking the cancellation of unrelated accounts to the settlement of another account is coercive and not standard lawful practice.

Impact on My Father • He is being forced into a position where he must continue paying R700 per month for 19 more months on two expired contracts — totalling R13,300 — plus R200 per month on the arrears (R3,800), meaning Vodacom will extract R17,100 in total when the actual outstanding debt is just R3,800. • This is an unacceptable burden on a pensioner living on a fixed income. • The handling of this matter shows a complete lack of empathy and contradicts Vodacom’s stated commitment to ethical and fair treatment of customers.

Required Resolution 1. Immediate cancellation of the two expired contracts without linking them to the outstanding personal account. 2. Written confirmation of the agreed payment arrangement for the R3,800 arrears, allowing him to pay it off in reasonable instalments without harassment or third-party interference. 3. Investigation into why he was handed to debt collection despite ongoing payments. 4. Assurance that staff will be trained on proper application of the CPA and fair treatment of elderly customers in financial hardship.

If Vodacom fails to respond within 7 working days, I will have no option but to escalate this matter to: • The National Consumer Commission • ICASA • The Credit Ombudsman • And, if necessary, pursue further action through public consumer rights platforms.

Vodacom’s actions in this case appear to be an attempt to maximise profit at the expense of a grieving, elderly customer, and this will not be tolerated.

I trust that Vodacom will urgently address this matter and provide the necessary resolution.