Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
Cell-C Hit with R500k Fine After Roaming Bill Dispute
In South Africa, Cell C, a telecommunications company, has been fined R500k (about $26,000) after losing a dispute over a roaming bill.
The issue began when a Cell C customer, Julie Williams, received an unexpectedly high bill of R11,265 (about $585) after traveling to France in 2022. Williams had contacted Cell C before her trip to set a spending limit on her account.
Although she initially requested a R2,000 ($104) limit, a Cell C agent set the limit at R3,785 ($196). Williams was later shocked to discover that using only 100MB for Google Maps had cost her almost R9,000 ($467), which also included a 25% roaming surcharge.
Cell C argued that Williams had been warned about the high costs of international roaming and that billing delays from foreign networks could make spending limits unreliable.
However, the National Consumer Tribunal sided with Williams, stating that Cell C had a responsibility to protect customers from unfair charges and could not simply blame foreign networks for the issue. The Tribunal found Cell C’s behavior to be “unconscionable” and effectively overturned the standard roaming policies used by South African mobile operators.
In addition to the fine, Cell C was ordered to cover Williams’ legal costs, a relatively uncommon outcome. The Tribunal described her case as a “David and Goliath” battle, highlighting that she had to hire a lawyer to defend herself against a large telecommunications company.
Williams was represented by Gerhard van der Merwe from Trudie Broekmann Attorneys. It is only the second time someone has won a case like this against a mobile provider.
Cell C has expressed its disagreement with the ruling, stating that it could have significant consequences for the entire telecommunications industry. The company claims it acted transparently, fairly, and in accordance with industry standards. Cell C’s legal team is currently reviewing the decision and considering whether to challenge it.
This case has the potential to significantly impact international roaming practices in South Africa. If other consumers follow Williams’ example, mobile operators may be compelled to revise their approach to roaming charges. For now, Cell C is required to pay the fine, and consumers may have a greater opportunity to challenge unexpected bills.
Was this information useful? Drop a nice comment below. You can also check out other useful contents by following us on X/Twitter @siliconafritech, Instagram @Siliconafricatech, or Facebook @SiliconAfrica.
