Publications
Partners
Johannesburg - Businessman George Prokas has issued Cell C a deadline to remove his name from a bad payer list after a court this week dismissed an urgent application to remove a banner slamming the mobile network’s services.
Judge Sharise Weiner on Thursday in the South Gauteng High Court dismissed Cell C’s urgent application to remove the banner on a WorldWear Mall wall on Johannesburg's Beyers Naude Drive. The banner described the mobile operator as “the most useless service provider in SA as experienced via Cell C Sandton City”. The banner also listed a Cell C employee’s phone number.
The judgment dismissed Cell C’s application with costs on grounds that it was not urgent and that Prokas issued fair comment, as he believed he received poor service.
And following this judgment, Prokas’ attorney, Raymond Druker, wrote to Cell C's lawyers at Webber Wentzel on Friday saying the mobile network has until 5pm 18 November 2014 “to procure the removal of my client’s name from the records of TransUnion Credit Bureau, and to expunge an alleged ‘debt’ of R5 754,00.”
This is according to documents in Fin24’s possession in which Druker further wrote that Prokas’ listing as a “bad payer” is “defamatory of my client, and has caused and is causing prejudice to him”.
The documents also allege that Cell C, in an e-mail to Prokas dated 24 October 2014, said it would move to remove Prokas’ name from the records, but that the mobile operator then repudiated on this “undertaking”.“In the premises I am instructed by my client to demand of your client (Cell C) through you, as I hereby do, that your client complies with its undertaking and takes steps forthwith to procure the expungement of my client’s name from the records of TransUnion, as also to expunge the said ‘debt’,” Druker wrote.
“Failing receipt by me of written confirmation by 5.00 pm on 18 November 2014 that your client has complied with the demand set forth in 5, my client will have no option but to, and will, take appropriate steps which are available to him at law for the exercise of his rights and the safeguarding of his reputation,” Druker said.iPhone 6 offered amid standoff
Both the mobile network and Prokas, though, are standing their grounds regarding the dispute surrounding the R5 754 unpaid bill.
"In an effort to resolve the matter, Cell C has offered to replace Mr Prokas’ handset with an iPhone 6 and waive the outstanding handset fees on the basis that he pays amounts owing to Cell C in terms of valid usage. Mr Prokas rejected this offer," Cell told Fin24 in an email on Friday night.
Prokas’ dispute with Cell C stems from his allegation that his phone accumulated the R5 754 bill while being repaired by the mobile network. The court heard how Prokas said the phone's number turned out to belong to and was being used by a different person.
Prokas then discovered in early 2014 that he was then blacklisted.
But Cell C disagrees with Prokas’ version of events.
“A handset cannot rack up a bill without a SIM card. However, a SIM card can be used in a different handset,” Karin Fourie, executive head of communications at Cell C, told Fin24.
“Our forensic investigation confirmed that while the handset was sent in for repairs, the SIM card was still being used but in a different handset,” Fourie added.
Fin24 asked Fourie about whether the investigation revealed whether Prokas handed in both the SIM card and phone for repair or if he kept the SIM card.
“It appears to be exactly the same person who used the SIM before the handset was sent in for repairs because the usage pattern was the same,” Fourie answered.
Fin24 has also sent questions to Prokas’ attorney asking this same question, but has not received a response.
Prokas, to date, has not directly spoken to media regarding his slam banner.
Other details emerge
Cell C told Fin24 that the exact total amount outstanding is R5 754.23.
“This includes the handset fee which we offered to waive. However a portion of the total outstanding fee is for subscription and usage,” Fourie told Fin24.
The handset at the centre of the dispute is also an iPhone 4S, Cell C said. On Thursday night, Cell C sent Fin24 a statement saying it is considering appealing the South Gauteng High Court judgment on the banner as it disagrees with the ruling.
YOUR VOICE: Big brand bullies have no place in consumer minds
* Follow @GarethvanZyl on Twitter. For more tech news, follow Fin24tech @Fin24_Tech.
