An investigation by the National Consumer Commission into MTN’s subscriber agreements and service quality was unlawful, the cellular operator argued before the National Consumer Tribunal on Friday. It also said a compliance notice issued to MTN by the consumer watchdog was sent to the wrong party. The hearing is the first under the Consumer Protection Act (CPA), which was implemented in April last year.
MTN is challenging a compliance order notice it received compelling it to amend its subscriber agreements and align its practices with the act. The commission has asked for a fine of 10 percent of MTN’s 2011 turnover if it is found guilty of contravening sections of the act.
Robby Coelho, a partner at law firm Webber Wentzel representing MTN, said the commission had acted beyond the powers granted by the act and therefore its investigation was unlawful. MTN said the commission had ruled against it based on an incorrect and outdated subscriber agreement even though it had implemented a new CPA-compliant contract.
Mamodupi Mohlala, the national consumer commissioner, said at the time the notice was issued in August that MTN’s amended customer contract was not yet in effect, which it should have been from April 1. Mohlala said the new contract still did not comply with section 63 of the act because it did not guarantee quality of service targets and make pricing transparent.
Advocate Alfred Cockerill, representing MTN, argued that the commission had incorrectly issued the compliance notice to MTN instead of MTN Service Provider. “If we are correct, and we believe we are, then that’s the end of the matter. The entire compliance notice (would be) invalid,” Coelho said.
Mohlala said, however, that MTN, the mother body, was licensed to provide telecoms services and not its subsidiary, MTN Service Provider, and if the latter was reprimanded then “the consumer doesn’t have recourse”. “We have also noted, in terms of their contract provision of network services, the subsidiary is not licensed to provide network services,” she said.
The tribunal did not specify a date for judgment. Hearings have also been set for other companies, including Vodacom, Cell C and TopTV.
Source: madeasy.co.za
Showing posts with label National Consumer Commissioner. Show all posts
Showing posts with label National Consumer Commissioner. Show all posts
Monday, January 23, 2012
Saturday, August 13, 2011
A cellular licence to print money
The proverbial licence to print money is not the chain of casinos or bottle stores of a generation ago. It’s the telecommunications company, exploiting the now universal desire for people to be online and electronically in touch. This is a sector that generates massive revenues. Vodacom, South Africa’s biggest network provider with 26.6-million customers, in the past year turned over R54bn and almost doubled its net profits to R8bn. International player MTN, with 18.8m local subscribers, increased profits by 20% and had SA revenues of around R37bn.
This is also the sector that draws the most consumer complaints, along with the pharmaceutical/healthcare industries, retail and banking. It is then logical that the new National Consumer Commissioner, Mamodupi Mohlala, targeted telecommunication providers as a priority in implementing the recently passed Consumer Protection Act (CPA).
One of Mohlala’s first acts was to force SA’s four cellular network operators and two fixed-line providers to bring their customer contracts in line with the CPA. Despite knowing the intentions of the Act for five years, not a single one was compliant and, in most cases, 75% of their cellphone contracts were in breach.
Basically these companies were quite happy to take advantage of consumers – many illiterate and poor, and for whom a cellphone is a necessity that comes at a disproportionately large monthly cost – for as long as they could get away with. Since then Vodacom has come under further pressure from the commissioner, who ruled that it should compensate those of its subscribers who suffered financial loss when the Vodacom network collapsed a few months back. Vodacom has point-blank refused to comply. As an aside, Vodacom’s media liaison division failed to respond to repeated calls from this writer. Ironically, this is the company that sponsors an annual series of journalism awards.
Given the greed and arrogance that prevails, it should then come as no surprise that the cellular providers have since lobbied to be exempted from the CPA, on the grounds that they are already regulated by the Independent Communication Authority (Icasa). Fat lot of good Icasa would be. Writing in Business Report a few months ago, economic empowerment strategist Thabo Masombuko outlined a stinging assessment of ICASA’s consumer policing abilities, which have made the sector “a haven for tariff looting, exorbitant charges and ridiculous costs … While costs have ballooned, cellular and landline services have become an out-of-reach pie in the sky for millions of users.”
There is an established pattern to this. When cellular licences were first issued to Vodacom and MTN, part of their obligation was the rolling out of rural coverage as a development of national infrastructural that it was hoped would improve the countryside’s potential to create jobs. Unfortunately, it was an obligation only scrappily met, given the lure of lucrative urban rollouts — and the lovely tax from the resultantly dazzling profits — with the result two decades later of unreliable, low-speed rural coverage.
Nor has state entity Telkom, met its statutory obligation to provide countrywide communication systems. Faced with endemic cable theft, the Telkom’s outrageous solution has been simply to cut off both telephone and landline broadband services in rural areas, in favour of a wireless voice service that verges on the useless, in the view of its critics. By the Telkom example, this week’s theft of cabling serving the Gautrain would be dealt with by mothballing the service and suggesting that passengers use taxis instead.
The opportunity costs of these failures are enormous. The World Bank estimates that a 10% increase in broadband penetration delivers a 1.3% rise in economic growth. Is is however an unpalatable fact that in SA, just a dozen or so kilometres outside of the major cities and towns, broadband access is virtually unobtainable. And when available, SA’s mobile broadband remains prohibitively expensive, among the dearest in the world. This inertia and indifference by both the private sector and the state, impacts directly on government’s objective of providing the infrastructural backbone that will allow local communities to grow local jobs, instead of encouraging a growing flow of job seekers to the cities.
When Roy Padayachie took over the long-neglected Communications portfolio he set as his ministerial goal to partner with the private sector to harness telecommunications technology to economic growth. It’s a laudable but unrealisable dream, unless he can get the cellular providers to take their developmental responsibilities a little more seriously.
Source: Mail & Guardian Thought Leader: William Sauderson-Meyer
This is also the sector that draws the most consumer complaints, along with the pharmaceutical/healthcare industries, retail and banking. It is then logical that the new National Consumer Commissioner, Mamodupi Mohlala, targeted telecommunication providers as a priority in implementing the recently passed Consumer Protection Act (CPA).
One of Mohlala’s first acts was to force SA’s four cellular network operators and two fixed-line providers to bring their customer contracts in line with the CPA. Despite knowing the intentions of the Act for five years, not a single one was compliant and, in most cases, 75% of their cellphone contracts were in breach.
Basically these companies were quite happy to take advantage of consumers – many illiterate and poor, and for whom a cellphone is a necessity that comes at a disproportionately large monthly cost – for as long as they could get away with. Since then Vodacom has come under further pressure from the commissioner, who ruled that it should compensate those of its subscribers who suffered financial loss when the Vodacom network collapsed a few months back. Vodacom has point-blank refused to comply. As an aside, Vodacom’s media liaison division failed to respond to repeated calls from this writer. Ironically, this is the company that sponsors an annual series of journalism awards.
Given the greed and arrogance that prevails, it should then come as no surprise that the cellular providers have since lobbied to be exempted from the CPA, on the grounds that they are already regulated by the Independent Communication Authority (Icasa). Fat lot of good Icasa would be. Writing in Business Report a few months ago, economic empowerment strategist Thabo Masombuko outlined a stinging assessment of ICASA’s consumer policing abilities, which have made the sector “a haven for tariff looting, exorbitant charges and ridiculous costs … While costs have ballooned, cellular and landline services have become an out-of-reach pie in the sky for millions of users.”
There is an established pattern to this. When cellular licences were first issued to Vodacom and MTN, part of their obligation was the rolling out of rural coverage as a development of national infrastructural that it was hoped would improve the countryside’s potential to create jobs. Unfortunately, it was an obligation only scrappily met, given the lure of lucrative urban rollouts — and the lovely tax from the resultantly dazzling profits — with the result two decades later of unreliable, low-speed rural coverage.
Nor has state entity Telkom, met its statutory obligation to provide countrywide communication systems. Faced with endemic cable theft, the Telkom’s outrageous solution has been simply to cut off both telephone and landline broadband services in rural areas, in favour of a wireless voice service that verges on the useless, in the view of its critics. By the Telkom example, this week’s theft of cabling serving the Gautrain would be dealt with by mothballing the service and suggesting that passengers use taxis instead.
The opportunity costs of these failures are enormous. The World Bank estimates that a 10% increase in broadband penetration delivers a 1.3% rise in economic growth. Is is however an unpalatable fact that in SA, just a dozen or so kilometres outside of the major cities and towns, broadband access is virtually unobtainable. And when available, SA’s mobile broadband remains prohibitively expensive, among the dearest in the world. This inertia and indifference by both the private sector and the state, impacts directly on government’s objective of providing the infrastructural backbone that will allow local communities to grow local jobs, instead of encouraging a growing flow of job seekers to the cities.
When Roy Padayachie took over the long-neglected Communications portfolio he set as his ministerial goal to partner with the private sector to harness telecommunications technology to economic growth. It’s a laudable but unrealisable dream, unless he can get the cellular providers to take their developmental responsibilities a little more seriously.
Source: Mail & Guardian Thought Leader: William Sauderson-Meyer
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
Cellphone companies still selling hot air
The cellphone networks, which do rather well out of our collective obsession with staying connected via our ever-more-clever handsets, have been disappointingly slow to embrace aspects of the Consumer Protection Act which don’t suit them. Chief among these is the stipulation that all pre-paid vouchers must be honoured for up to three years. That means that any goods or services you pay for in advance – from a bus coupon to a facial to cellphone airtime – must be redeemed within three years of the date of purchase, and companies no longer have the right to tell you one or three months down the line “sorry, it’s expired, you forfeit”.
The cellphone companies appear to be carrying on regardless, in this and other respects, while promising the National Consumer Commission that they’ll get their act together within three months. Jerry Buirski told Consumer watch as he approached the Cape by sea last week that he noticed he had Vodacom’s 3G signal, so he powered up his laptop and prepared to send a month’s worth of e-mails. “However, I found I’d lost all my unused data on June 30. This does not seem right at all.”
National Consumer Commissioner Mamodupi Mohlala has recently publicly repeated the commission’s stance that all pre-paid airtime and data must be redeemable for up to three years in terms of the CPA. Asked to respond to Buirski’s experience, Vodacom’s chief officer of corporate affairs, Portia Maurice, said: “The commissioner has requested us to investigate this aspect of the act and present further submissions in support of our current business practices. We are currently reviewing this and will provide a response to the commissioner.”
Last month, when questioned on the premature expiry of pre-paid data, Vodacom told Consumer Watch: “When customers purchase data bundles, funds are deducted from their airtime in return for access to data bundles. So they are deemed to have exchanged the value of their prepaid airtime for access to data bundles. “There’s a difference between a voucher and a product bought by that voucher. The three-year expiry rule refers to vouchers and not to products purchased by vouchers.”
But Mohlala doesn’t agree with this interpretation, insisting that pre-paid data may not “expire” within three years of purchase. “We’ve had long discussions with the industry and I’ve made it clear that if they are not willing to come to the party on this and other issues of compliance with the act, we have the power to issue a compliance notice,” Mohlala said.
The ultimate sanction, in terms of the CPA, is a fine of R1 million or 10 percent of annual turnover. But subscribers continue to be deprived of cell products they’ve paid for a few months previously. Gary Cousins told Consumer Watch that he bought R300 of airtime for his teenage son in early March which was loaded on to his (son’s) number. But by early June, three months later, despite having used only about half that amount, his son was unable to send SMSes. “I suspected that the remaining airtime had been ‘removed’, so I sent him another R50 on July 10, and his phone immediately started sending SMSes,” Cousins said. “A balance enquiry showed R50 airtime remaining.”
So I asked Cell C: “Is it true that by early June the unused portion of that R300 airtime ‘expired’? “If so, how is this justified?” This was the response I got: “Icasa (the Independent Communications Authority of SA) is in the process of applying to the National Consumer Commission for an exemption with regards to this aspect of the act. Until the process is complete, Cell C cannot comment on the matter.”
Interestingly, Icasa’s concern about the CPA’s provision that pre-paid vouchers be redeemable by consumers for up to three years has to do with the recycling of numbers. But Icasa is not in favour of consumers losing out on pre-paid airtime and data. Icasa councillor Fungai Sibanda told Consumer Watch: “Icasa is of the view that consumers must be protected with respect to unused credit, whilst at the same time allowing inactive numbers to be recycled.” But right now pre-paid cellphone users are continuing to be “robbed” of their unused airtime and data – almost four months after the CPA came into effect.
Source: IoL
The cellphone companies appear to be carrying on regardless, in this and other respects, while promising the National Consumer Commission that they’ll get their act together within three months. Jerry Buirski told Consumer watch as he approached the Cape by sea last week that he noticed he had Vodacom’s 3G signal, so he powered up his laptop and prepared to send a month’s worth of e-mails. “However, I found I’d lost all my unused data on June 30. This does not seem right at all.”
National Consumer Commissioner Mamodupi Mohlala has recently publicly repeated the commission’s stance that all pre-paid airtime and data must be redeemable for up to three years in terms of the CPA. Asked to respond to Buirski’s experience, Vodacom’s chief officer of corporate affairs, Portia Maurice, said: “The commissioner has requested us to investigate this aspect of the act and present further submissions in support of our current business practices. We are currently reviewing this and will provide a response to the commissioner.”
Last month, when questioned on the premature expiry of pre-paid data, Vodacom told Consumer Watch: “When customers purchase data bundles, funds are deducted from their airtime in return for access to data bundles. So they are deemed to have exchanged the value of their prepaid airtime for access to data bundles. “There’s a difference between a voucher and a product bought by that voucher. The three-year expiry rule refers to vouchers and not to products purchased by vouchers.”
But Mohlala doesn’t agree with this interpretation, insisting that pre-paid data may not “expire” within three years of purchase. “We’ve had long discussions with the industry and I’ve made it clear that if they are not willing to come to the party on this and other issues of compliance with the act, we have the power to issue a compliance notice,” Mohlala said.
The ultimate sanction, in terms of the CPA, is a fine of R1 million or 10 percent of annual turnover. But subscribers continue to be deprived of cell products they’ve paid for a few months previously. Gary Cousins told Consumer Watch that he bought R300 of airtime for his teenage son in early March which was loaded on to his (son’s) number. But by early June, three months later, despite having used only about half that amount, his son was unable to send SMSes. “I suspected that the remaining airtime had been ‘removed’, so I sent him another R50 on July 10, and his phone immediately started sending SMSes,” Cousins said. “A balance enquiry showed R50 airtime remaining.”
So I asked Cell C: “Is it true that by early June the unused portion of that R300 airtime ‘expired’? “If so, how is this justified?” This was the response I got: “Icasa (the Independent Communications Authority of SA) is in the process of applying to the National Consumer Commission for an exemption with regards to this aspect of the act. Until the process is complete, Cell C cannot comment on the matter.”
Interestingly, Icasa’s concern about the CPA’s provision that pre-paid vouchers be redeemable by consumers for up to three years has to do with the recycling of numbers. But Icasa is not in favour of consumers losing out on pre-paid airtime and data. Icasa councillor Fungai Sibanda told Consumer Watch: “Icasa is of the view that consumers must be protected with respect to unused credit, whilst at the same time allowing inactive numbers to be recycled.” But right now pre-paid cellphone users are continuing to be “robbed” of their unused airtime and data – almost four months after the CPA came into effect.
Source: IoL
Monday, July 18, 2011
Cellphone operators told to amend contracts
South Africa's four primary cellular network operators and two fixed-line providers will have new customer contracts that are compliant with the Consumer Protection Act in place within the next three months.This came as national consumer commissioner Mamodupi Mohlala prepared to sign consent order agreements this week with each of the companies, Business Report reported on Monday. These agreements were legally binding and a fine of R1 million or 10 percent of annual turnover could be imposed if they were breached.
Mohlala said that over the past two weeks the commission had reviewed all contracts provided by the individual companies and none of the contracts were compliant with the act. This, despite the fact that it had been in the pipeline for the past five years and its implementation was postponed from September last year to April this year. She said that in most cases about 75 percent of the cellphone contract terms and conditions would have to change.
Companies would have to change their billing systems, marketing approach and their staff would have to be educated and more skilled, which would require more spending on human resources, she said. "There is nothing untoward… we are aligning South Africa with international best practice."
Mohlala said Cell C, Telkom and 8.ta would have their contracts amended by the end of September, Neotel by next month and MTN and Vodacom both expected to have amended their contracts by the end of October.
Source: Times Live
Mohlala said that over the past two weeks the commission had reviewed all contracts provided by the individual companies and none of the contracts were compliant with the act. This, despite the fact that it had been in the pipeline for the past five years and its implementation was postponed from September last year to April this year. She said that in most cases about 75 percent of the cellphone contract terms and conditions would have to change.
Companies would have to change their billing systems, marketing approach and their staff would have to be educated and more skilled, which would require more spending on human resources, she said. "There is nothing untoward… we are aligning South Africa with international best practice."
Mohlala said Cell C, Telkom and 8.ta would have their contracts amended by the end of September, Neotel by next month and MTN and Vodacom both expected to have amended their contracts by the end of October.
Source: Times Live
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)