The hidden charges on your cell bill

What is BS is that you still have to pay for an itemised bill. If you don't you would have no idea if you had been subscribed to something.

The networks dont really care, they out to make money, if its not from illegal subscriptions then you have to pay for an itemised bill.
 
Yeah sooooo agree with you guys... Since I moved over to prepaid, paying a LOT less! And I still do exactly the same on my cell as what I did when on contract.
 
Vodacom is the only service provider that has implemented double opt in.

Why don't other operators implement this.
 
kooldude said:
Vodacom is the only service provider that has implemented double opt in.

Why don't other operators implement this.
Click to expand...

Here you go:
Cell C

Using the USSD string *133*1# subscribers can block all existing and future content billing.

MTN

MTN also offers a USSD string (*141*5#) to manage premium content subscriptions, but unlike Cell C’s it doesn’t block all future subscriptions. Instead, users select which services to unsubscribe from.
Click to expand...

http://mybroadband.co.za/news/cellular/97071-disappearing-airtime-unsubscribe-all-wasps.html
 
kooldude said:
Vodacom is the only service provider that has implemented double opt in.

Why don't other operators implement this.
Click to expand...



Not that it's always a help.
My partner is on prepaid Vodacom, and he was still seeing his airtime disappear at a rate of R6 a day to Mobsto, despite numerous "opt out", quit, cease and desist requests to SmartCall Technologies and Vodacom.

Eventually laid a formal complaint with WASPA and it seems to have stopped.

But you shouldn't have to expend such energy to get them to stop stealing your money.
For it is exactly that, theft.
 
Thanks for that CellC number.. just done that on my number.
 
While double opt-in is a step in the right direction, many users often don't realise that they are subscribing to a daily charge. These WASPS lure/con users into subscribing by promises of winning prizes, or "free" stuff which makes users "hasty" in "clicking through" the process to obtain whatever is promised.

Subsequent so-called reminder messages of the subscription are ignored as spam. The charges continue ad infinitum regardless of whether the "service" is used or not (like a gym subscription). Sadly, it's mostly prepaid and poor people who is affected the worst in terms of their livelihood.

There should be an additional rule for these WASPS in that a service must automatically terminate if the user does not opt in again after say 90 days.
 
In addition, these "reminder" messages mean absolutely squat for users who subscribed from a 3G dongle or router which does not make it obvious to a user that a text message was received.
 
This problem has more damage to contract subscribers compared to prepaid
 
Already had my run in with them.
Double opt in is nothing but double clicking, there's a loophole in the procedures which requires zero input verification from the customer. They just detect your number and bill you almost immediately. Sometimes they will ask you to input a number, but that's all just smoke and mirrors.

There's also no clear example, picture provided of how a double opt-in page really looks like, so people have no idea when they on such a page. Lets see if MyBB can find one?

If people were forced to manually enter some kind of code or capicha, there wouldn't be such a huge problem. Atm most of the people are caught via that "click to confirm" method.

Anything else you buy online, you need to enter your information, login etc.

Anyways cancelled all Vodacom contracts because of it, their loss.
 
Last edited:
What I don't understand, is that these charges (at least in some cases) are theft, or at least fraud. Why aren't the police involved? Why aren't the carriers charged criminally for abetting theft or fraud? Why aren't the carriers deemed to be financial institutions? Surely if they're behaving like banks (handing our money out to third parties), they should be regulated like banks? That's the problem with SA - the aggrieved party very seldom has the means to enforce the law, especially against companies who policy is to **** justice and bankrupt their accusers with legal fees.
 
Drunkard #1 said:
What I don't understand, is that these charges (at least in some cases) are theft, or at least fraud. Why aren't the police involved? Why aren't the carriers charged criminally for abetting theft or fraud? Why aren't the carriers deemed to be financial institutions? Surely if they're behaving like banks (handing our money out to third parties), they should be regulated like banks? That's the problem with SA - the aggrieved party very seldom has the means to enforce the law, especially against companies who policy is to **** justice and bankrupt their accusers with legal fees.
Click to expand...

Most of these companies offering pointless services i order to steal your money are located overseas.
A lot of MIRA's clients aren't even South African.
 
WASPS should be banned outright. I think it is high time for the Minister to proclaim it as an undesirable business practise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X