Know your consumer rights!

[Paul Hjul]

Maybe we need data bundles that expire on 1 or 3 or 5 or 7 days. We can choose the expiry period. And we buy when we please.

that would be ideal although the sales systems are a bit more complex and what is really needed is for the MNOs to have a portal which allows for the setting of the quantity, the repeat factor and the amount to be allocated and allows for data limits to be implemented as well (to stop the OOB Shark) but more customer choice rather than less is what is needed

 

[Arthur]

Now there's the next Great Idea from South Africa, in the spirit of PCM.

 

[midnightcaller]

that would be ideal although the sales systems are a bit more complex and what is really needed is for the MNOs to have a portal which allows for the setting of the quantity, the repeat factor and the amount to be allocated and allows for data limits to be implemented as well (to stop the OOB Shark) but more customer choice rather than less is what is needed

Why does it have to be complex.
If I go to buy a prepaid bundle , there is a choice for 30 day window. They just need to create more window periods in the menu choice.
What quantity and repeat factor are you talking about?

And data limits are in place. I think you can set a limit before the service gets locked.

 

[Paul Hjul]

its precisely because of the choice mechanism - think the USSD system
basically you can use three sliders:
Expiry (basically number of days the allocation lasts for, default IMHO should be 7 can be reduced to as little as an hour)
Quantity (the size of the bundle in MB/GB)
Frequency (which is set in repeat X times or repeat at expiry or at interval point like daily)

So you can have your phone receive 100Mb every 7 days with a 10 day expiry - allowing some roll over - and the thing quotes a price

There aren't data limits in place hence the OOBShark. The best you can go with is to use a prepaid (or topup) account or to put a CLI line limit but that bircks the smartphone altogether.

 

[Arthur]

In fact, the web portal with two sliders is all that's needed:

* Amount of data required?

* Valid for how long?

Simply side each one to the value you require, check the cost in Rand, enter cell number and cc details, click Buy. Done.

I like it.

And so should the cell companies.

 

[Paul Hjul]

they should but they haven't implemented nor are they prepared to implement an OOBShark killer proper which the improvements to their billing system makes possible
[certainly with respect to both VC and MTN]
my point is that by implementing a proper data portal the MNOs can both give more consumer choice and can drive up their own sales but it will upset some of the sales channels and the apple cart a little.

 

[Captain-Justice]

Easy solutions are available, but the MNOs prefer to keep to the status quo as the current policy is applied one-sidedly (unjustly) to their benefit.

 

[midnightcaller]

The fact that you had a month to month agreement allows you to a pro-rata credit. You paid for a service in advance but did not receive the full period's service and value, as you were within your rights to cancel with a month's notice.

It's the same with your Telkom landline. You pay for the line rental in advance, but when you cancel your line, you receive a pro-rata credit.

Hi CJ

Company A has ignored my request for a credit of the part paid in advance. I have logged a request twice and they haven't responded to me.

Is there a body that regulates security companies hat I can start the complaints process with?
Or should I exhaust company A's complaints process before going to a regulatory body?

 

[Captain-Justice]

Hi CJ

Company A has ignored my request for a credit of the part paid in advance. I have logged a request twice and they haven't responded to me.

Is there a body that regulates security companies hat I can start the complaints process with?
Or should I exhaust company A's complaints process before going to a regulatory body?

The first step will always be to come to an amicable agreement with the service provider. Keep record of all correspondence.

If you're not making any headway and the service provider is affiliated to a Regulatory Body, submit a complaint to them.

You can also submit a complaint to the National Consumer Commission (NCC). They have the power to slap them with a fine if in contravention of the Consumer Protection Act (CPA)

If you have the time and perseverance, there's also the Small Claims Court.

 

[dominic]

http://www.psira.co.za/psira/

 

[richjdavies]

Lots of comments here comparing open, competitive markets (like food and washing powder) with the regulated telecoms ones.

Telecoms companies are a restricted oligopoly, there are only 3 of them because the government decided to only license 3 of them (+ neotel). Because of this though, they have a duty to enforce rules and prices. It is impossible for new entrants to create competition... there's no pressure value of competition to stop

Fortunately there are some substitute alternatives - fixed lines (a monopoly ), ADSL (same monopoly over the local loop/line).

Basically, if I as a consumer think that 30 day bundles suck and they should be 180 days, I don't have the option of creating my own service and selling it to all the guys like me. However, if I think lettuce should last longer and I have a way to do it... I can do it and make a mint...

The fact there are people on here asking for different bundles, but they aren't available, even though they are clearly technically possible, makes me think the market is not providing what people want. When a regulated market fails, the only way to fix it is to enforce/change the rules...

 

[SIlvRav]

You don't see it, but millions of aggrieved users do. The practice to pay for a service and have the unused portion cancelled after 30 days by the supplier is unreasonable, unfair, and unjust.
iBurst was the first SP to immediately comply with the Act and their data bundles roll over for 3 years. I recommend anyone who wants value for their money, to try iBurst. What a pity they don't sell mobile data

To Bring back what you said here....

A contract or agreement needs 3 things...offer, acceptance, and what service for what value.

What a lot of people dont realise, is that when you buy something from a shop, you as the customer is actually making an offer to buy the product, the supplier then accepts your offer and sells you the item...

So by you being the offerer, you by default accepts the time as is....purely because you dont like the terms doesnt make it unfair on the side of the Supplier..... Nobody is forcing you to by the product.

I agree, it will be a lot better if there was a lot more options but if you know you not going to use all the data/airtime withi in 30days, then dont by so much.....Supply and demand. the more you buy the less you pay, but dont be greedy by buying more then you need.

 

[Captain-Justice]

I use 1GB pm. Why must I pay R149 pm and not R299 for 3GB that rolls over for 3 months? I lose 1GB every 3 months because there's no roll over of data and that's not fair. Competition is limited and all 3 MNOs apply the same unfair practice.

 

[ginggs]

I use 1GB pm. Why must I pay R149 pm and not R299 for 3GB that rolls over for 3 months? I lose 1GB every 3 months because there's no roll over of data and that's not fair. Competition is limited and all 3 MNOs apply the same unfair practice.

Cell-C have a 3GB bundle for R299 that lasts for 365 days.

 

[Captain-Justice]

If Cell C can do it, why not Vodacom?

 

[ginggs]

If Cell C can do it, why not Vodacom?

Ask Vodacom.

 

[Captain-Justice]

I did but they not responding.

 

[NWI]

Question for those that have good understanding of the CPA. A hotel that takes a deposit and advises that a 100% cancellation fee is applicable - surely this in contravention of Sec 17(2) of the Act? To my mind a 100% cancellation is not 'reasonable'

 

[Paul Hjul]

Question for those that have good understanding of the CPA. A hotel that takes a deposit and advises that a 100% cancellation fee is applicable - surely this in contravention of Sec 17(2) of the Act? To my mind a 100% cancellation is not 'reasonable'

I'd argue that provided the cancellation is well known in advance and a general industry practice it would be hard to argue that there is contravention. However the NCC could certainly use the desist notice approach and will probably do so incorrectly and have the tribunal throwing it out. I do think hotels are a little "unfair" on this front but whether we should try to regulate that by statute without their consent is a different debate entirely. What I would regard as fair is for hotels to "refund" 80% of the deposit in limited transfer vouchers (so you or an immediate relative in the case of a natural person and for company purpose in the case of a business) but the NCA doesn't really think in this vain.

 

[Greig Whitton]

With respect to Paul, I would argue that a 100% cancellation fee is absolutely unreasonable - unless the cancellation is at the very last minute and affords the hotel no opportunity to use the same room for other guests. I don't see how general industry practice can be afforded too much weight, since that would simply encourage all suppliers to collude on implementing the same unreasonable terms as general industry practice (i.e. just because every hotel insists on a 100% cancellation fee doesn't mean that it is reasonable, even though it may be industry practice).

Unfortunately, the CPA regulations don't address this issue of "reasonableness" for advance booking cancellations despite doing so for fixed term contract cancellations (where "reasonable" is quantified as 10% of the amount that would have been payable for the remainder of the contract term).