RSAWeb relocation = hidden fixed-term contract? Charged R2.7k cancellation

[kataza]

I’ve had RSAWeb since 2021 with no real issues.

In Jan 2026 I moved and asked them to relocate my fibre. This was done telephonically. Straightforward request: move the line to the new address.

Now here’s where it gets interesting.

I later cancelled the service and got hit with a R2,720 “early cancellation fee”.

Their explanation:

• relocation = cancellation of old service
• new service = new contract
• that contract has a fixed-term (tied to pricing/promo)

Here’s the problem:

1. The entire relocation was handled over the phone
2. No one told me:
   • this is a new fixed-term contract
   • you are entering a 12-month period
   • cancellation penalties will apply
3. Their own response states:
   • there is no contract duration selection
   • no tick-box
   • no explicit agreement
4. The contract was only sent to me on 23 April, after I disputed the fee

So effectively:
You can be put into a fixed-term contract without ever being told you are in one, simply because of the product pricing.

That doesn’t sit right.

I understand T&Cs exist, but this is not a minor clause. A 12-month lock-in with penalties should be clearly disclosed, especially in a telephonic process.

Feels like:

• operationally convenient for them
• but not transparent for the customer

Curious if anyone else has had the same issue with relocation?

 

[PBCool]

Hi, its not so much a fixed term but its more general terms and conditions. You do have an argument if the change hasnt been communicated to you between the move or have had an email referencing the new terms.

 

[airborne]

Open a dispute with ICASA or whoever it is overseas these things, someone will mention the name soon enough.

 

[kataza]

Hi, its not so much a fixed term but its more general terms and conditions. You do have an argument if the change hasnt been communicated to you between the move or have had an email referencing the new terms.

I get what you’re saying, and I agree to an extent.

The issue for me isn’t that terms and conditions exist. It’s that the material change was never actually communicated.

In my case, the relocation was handled entirely telephonically. There was no point where:

• a new fixed-term contract was explained
• a lock-in period was mentioned
• cancellation penalties were disclosed

That’s exactly the problem.

A 12-month lock-in with financial penalties is not a minor clause buried in T&Cs. It’s something that should be clearly explained, especially in a phone call where you don’t see any checkout screen or links to terms.

Even more telling is that the actual contract was only sent to me on 23 April, after I raised the dispute. I asked so many time to provide me with proof that the contract or new TOS was sent to me or communicated, to which they could not provide me with anything other than stating it was "incorporated by reference".

So yes, I’d agree with you, if the change had been communicated. But in this case, it simply wasn’t, and that’s where the issue lies.

 

[Herr der Verboten]

I get what you’re saying, and I agree to an extent.

The issue for me isn’t that terms and conditions exist. It’s that the material change was never actually communicated.

In my case, the relocation was handled entirely telephonically. There was no point where:

• a new fixed-term contract was explained
• a lock-in period was mentioned
• cancellation penalties were disclosed

That’s exactly the problem.

A 12-month lock-in with financial penalties is not a minor clause buried in T&Cs. It’s something that should be clearly explained, especially in a phone call where you don’t see any checkout screen or links to terms.

Even more telling is that the actual contract was only sent to me on 23 April, after I raised the dispute. I asked so many time to provide me with proof that the contract or new TOS was sent to me or communicated, to which they could not provide me with anything other than stating it was "incorporated by reference".

So yes, I’d agree with you, if the change had been communicated. But in this case, it simply wasn’t, and that’s where the issue lies.

You could try cpa, icasa and ispa - but be sure to do it properly.

Probably start with ispa and cpa.

 

[Jean Claude Vaaldamme]

Did you pay for the relocation?
Did you get a new router?
Did they have to "install" the new location?

 

[PBCool]

I get what you’re saying, and I agree to an extent.

The issue for me isn’t that terms and conditions exist. It’s that the material change was never actually communicated.

In my case, the relocation was handled entirely telephonically. There was no point where:

• a new fixed-term contract was explained
• a lock-in period was mentioned
• cancellation penalties were disclosed

That’s exactly the problem.

A 12-month lock-in with financial penalties is not a minor clause buried in T&Cs. It’s something that should be clearly explained, especially in a phone call where you don’t see any checkout screen or links to terms.

Even more telling is that the actual contract was only sent to me on 23 April, after I raised the dispute. I asked so many time to provide me with proof that the contract or new TOS was sent to me or communicated, to which they could not provide me with anything other than stating it was "incorporated by reference".

So yes, I’d agree with you, if the change had been communicated. But in this case, it simply wasn’t, and that’s where the issue lies.

If its all outlined in the terms, wrt to the move then its kinda the same thing.

 

[PBCool]

Did you pay for the relocation?
Did you get a new router?
Did they have to "install" the new location?

We typically relocate at no cost.

 

[kataza]

The problem is not the process, it’s the lack of disclosure.

At no point during the call was it explained that:

• this triggers a new fixed-term agreement
• there is a 12-month lock-in
• early cancellation penalties would apply

No TOS was even sent to agree to, or even just sent as an FYI.

If they had simply said:
“Just so you know, this is effectively a new contract with a minimum period and penalties”

then this wouldn’t even be a discussion.

 

[PBCool]

The problem is not the process, it’s the lack of disclosure.

At no point during the call was it explained that:

• this triggers a new fixed-term agreement
• there is a 12-month lock-in
• early cancellation penalties would apply

No TOS was even sent to agree to, or even just sent as an FYI.

If they had simply said:
“Just so you know, this is effectively a new contract with a minimum period and penalties”

then this wouldn’t even be a discussion.

Look I totally agree with you, just saying legally its acceptable. Not saying morally nor will it retain customers at all.

What is the reason for cancelling?

 

[kataza]

Look I totally agree with you, just saying legally its acceptable. Not saying morally nor will it retain customers at all.

What is the reason for cancelling?

After the relocation, they somehow reverted my billing details to an old account I used around 2022, instead of the one that had been working for years.

Because of that, payments failed, and my line got suspended three months in a row.

That was the point where I decided it’s just not worth the admin anymore.

 

[Johnatan56]

Look I totally agree with you, just saying legally its acceptable. Not saying morally nor will it retain customers at all.

What is the reason for cancelling?

Not sure it's legally acceptable if new contract, they'd have to say these contract terms exist / new contract would enter in force as common expectation would be it just continues whatever contract is currently (month to month if it was so) and that any fees would be mentioned.

 

[PBCool]

Not sure it's legally acceptable if new contract, they'd have to say these contract terms exist / new contract would enter in force as common expectation would be it just continues whatever contract is currently (month to month if it was so) and that any fees would be mentioned.

Yeah but if there are relocation fees listed in the T/Cs then technically the same contract just relocation fees, but I agree it shouldnt be term based because then it is a fixed contract thing.

 

[Bliksis]

ISPs and FNOs have us by the bells.

 

[PBCool]

ISPs and FNOs have us by the bells.

We end up absorbing a lot of costs to make this easier for consumers.

 

[Jean Claude Vaaldamme]

^^^ Robinhood...............Prince of thieves

 

[PBCool]

^^^ Robinhood...............Prince of thieves

Yikes.

 

[CrypticZA]

After the relocation, they somehow reverted my billing details to an old account I used around 2022, instead of the one that had been working for years.

Because of that, payments failed, and my line got suspended three months in a row.

That was the point where I decided it’s just not worth the admin anymore.

Rsaweb took 6 months to draw up a new contract for my previous companies fiber. At the time they were billing us like R7k for a 50/50 line. For 6 months we were forced to pay this while they finalised the new contract which was R1799 per month.

We followed up and everything crickets from their side and when we said they can rather release the line we will go elsewhere they magically had the new one ready. We signed and idiot move then demanded a credit and they said we only signed the contract now so no credits or anything were due. I wanted to leave them way before this but person in charge didn't..

Terrible company admin wise.