Vodacom still intent on devastating a child with no intent to resolve

<p>Yesterday, 26 March 2018, I posted a valid complaint against Vodacom pertaining to the Dokiwatch supp**** to my son in December 2016. The watch never worked and finally was heating up to the point of burning my son's wrist. We have not had the watch in our possession for almost a year, yet we have continued to honor payment to Vodacom regardless of not having a device. Zak picked up the watch ,promising to resolve the problem. The reason for resorting to HelloPeter has been Zak's ongoingly poor service. Today, my husband received an email from Zak saying FYI.......Incorrect Fact Representation as it was Vodacom Chatz and not Vodacom. The billing system has Vodacom as its Main Company. So is the fact that Vodacom has Vodacom Chatz mean that it is a misrepresentation of facts, false advertising? If Zak is part of Vodacom, and therefore claims that Vodacom Chatz is not their problem, then why is the franchise owner of Vodacom Chatz facing a disciplinary hearing according to Zak? Why did he contact us requesting feedback pertaining to the service at Hillcrest Vodacom chatz as a Vodacom Subsidiary if Vodacom have nothing to do with Vodacom Chatz? Why have Vodacom themselves asked Zak to look into the query if Vodacom do not consider a subsidiary group to fall under their banner of reputable conduct? Doesn't make sense that Vodacom would hold a disciplinary hearing of the subsidiary then... It appears quite clear that whether Vodacom is hurting and disappointing a child or treating with absolute disregard and disrespect a loyal customer , nothing is done to rectify the matter and the client must keep paying for everything or Vodacom will put a balck mark to your name and cancel all other forms of contract as well.</p>