CB
Christian B
Active since May 2019
16
Reviews
0
Industries
Reviews
16 reviews3 months ago
Discovery Medical Aid: when “Smart” starts to look like “Sorry, not covered”.
I am a Discovery member on the Essential Smart Plan. While visiting my parents over the December 2025 holiday period, my glasses broke and I needed an optometry consultation. I went to my longstanding optometrist in Oudtshoorn, who is registered with Discovery, and the consultation was charged at a rate below Discovery’s tariff. Discovery nonetheless declined payment on the basis that, on my plan, optometry is effectively restricted to a single branded provider (Mellins). The nearest Mellins practice was approximately 57 km away. In plain terms, the “choice” offered is a long drive or paying out of pocket, even where the optometrist is registered and the rate is reasonable. What made this worse was not only the decision, but the way it was handled. For a time, Discovery had no difficulty corresponding with me via my Gmail address, and the email thread shows that this address was used in the communications. When my questions became more pointed and I requested a proper written explanation grounded in the plan rules, an “email address not on our system” issue suddenly surfaced. I was told, in effect, that my query could not proceed unless I corresponded from a different email address said to be on their records. I had previously asked (via my agent) for my email address to be updated years ago, and there had been no difficulty communicating with me at this address until this point. The timing did not inspire confidence. It read less like security and more like a convenient brake pedal. I also asked that Discovery communicate by email so that the information is properly recorded in writing, rather than pushing telephone calls. If a benefit is declined, a member is entitled to a clear, written explanation. That should be routine. Instead, I experienced generic responses and administrative hurdles, with the substantive question left sitting in the waiting room. This is not my first encounter with this pattern. In 2023, I underwent a tonsillectomy at a network hospital (Cape Gate) and the procedure was pre-approved. Discovery initially refused to pay the anaesthetist on the basis that the doctor was “not on my network”. Only after repeated queries over a period of time did Discovery ultimately pay. Discovery appears to treat “network” as a moving target that the patient must somehow police in the middle of medical treatment. That is not realistic. It is not patient-centred. It is a paperwork trap. Discovery then later used the “wrong code” excuse, but ultimately they did pay as I did not let the issue go. I am not asking for special treatment. I am asking for transparent, coherent rules that match real life, and for fair dealing when a member uses a registered provider at a reasonable rate. If Discovery’s model is that you must use one specific chain regardless of geography, then say so plainly — and accept that many members will experience it as a restriction designed to avoid paying legitimate claims. In my experience, Discovery has become increasingly clever with exclusions and increasingly reluctant to provide straightforward accountability when challenged.
616 replies
9 months ago
Extremely Disappointed – False Advertising and No Accountability from Takealot
I ordered a pack of printer cartridges that were clearly advertised as being compatible with HP 106A printers on the Takealot website. However, the product I received was clearly labelled 107A, which is incompatible with my device. Upon discovering the discrepancy, I immediately contacted Takealot’s customer service, provided photographic evidence, and indicated I would gladly accept the correct item. However, I was informed the item is “non-returnable,” and that the incorrect item would simply be sent back to me. This is wholly unacceptable. Whether the error lies with Takealot or their supplier, the customer should not bear the burden of a mistake they did not make. The product was falsely advertised, and it is evident either the product listing is incorrect, or the warehouse dispatched the wrong stock. Yet, despite the clear evidence of error, Takealot has refused to refund or replace the item. To make matters worse, I was told to escalate the matter myself—without being given any direct contact details to do so. The responsibility for resolving Takealot’s mistake was conveniently shifted onto me, the paying customer. This kind of service failure undermines trust and reflects a serious disregard for consumer rights. In summary: The product I ordered and the one delivered do not match. The website advertises 106A compatibility; the box says 107A. Takealot has refused a return, refund, or replacement. The burden of correcting their mistake has been unfairly offloaded onto me. I expected much better from a company of Takealot’s size. This experience has made me question whether I can trust their product listings or their commitment to resolving customer issues fairly. (MRRN-Z8QWQ-DAXQ)
0 replies
13 months ago
*****ed to the Core
I am extremely disappointed with both MTN and MONDO's misleading practices and atrocious customer service. On 1 March 2025, I requested cancellation of my supposed month-to-month contract due to the exceptionally poor internet quality, which consistently hindered my ability to game online, as demonstrated by the poor ping results provided to MTN. MTN staff member Jacobeth Mabotja responded on 2 March requesting account details, which were promptly provided. Subsequently, MTN’s Kholofelo Seloma informed me on 3 March that my supposed month-to-month contract was, in fact, a 24-month fixed contract expiring on 30 November 2025, which was not what I agreed to. When questioned about this discrepancy, Akhiwekahle Owethu Makhaye (MTN) bluntly stated there was "no active month-to-month" on my account, without providing any clarification. On 7 March, MTN’s Philani Makhoba confirmed an investigation (ref: RCO628294) to verify the disputed sales call, promising feedback within 3-5 working days. Eventually, MTN responded by falsely claiming that the recordings indicated I had agreed to a 24-month contract, which is a blatant lie. Regarding call recordings, MTN redirected me to MONDO. On 18 March, I requested these call recordings from MONDO. MONDO’s Snakhokonke M persistently refused to send recordings directly to me, initially requesting an email address for the MTN store despite it being an online transaction. When informed there was no physical store involved, MONDO insisted I visit an MTN store in person to listen to the call. After further insistence, MONDO reverted to requesting the store's email address again, even though it should have been within their capability to acquire it directly from their partner MTN. MONDO's contradictory instructions deliberately complicated a straightforward request. On 25 March, after unnecessary persistence, MTN finally provided the Durbanville store email, which MONDO initially refused to source themselves. Both MTN and MONDO demonstrated shocking incompetence, a blatant disregard for customer rights, and a clear intent to mislead. Their combined evasive tactics, conflicting responses, and bureaucratic hurdles are disgraceful and *********. Prospective customers are strongly advised to avoid engaging with MTN and MONDO to spare themselves considerable frustration and deception.
0 replies
13 months ago
*****ed to the Core
I am extremely disappointed with both MTN and MONDO's misleading practices and atrocious customer service. On 1 March 2025, I requested cancellation of my supposed month-to-month contract due to the exceptionally poor internet quality, which consistently hindered my ability to game online, as demonstrated by the poor ping results provided to MTN. MTN staff member Jacobeth Mabotja responded on 2 March requesting account details, which were promptly provided. Subsequently, MTN’s Kholofelo Seloma informed me on 3 March that my supposed month-to-month contract was, in fact, a 24-month fixed contract expiring on 30 November 2025, which was not what I agreed to. When questioned about this discrepancy, Akhiwekahle Owethu Makhaye (MTN) bluntly stated there was "no active month-to-month" on my account, without providing any clarification. On 7 March, MTN’s Philani Makhoba confirmed an investigation (ref: RCO628294) to verify the disputed sales call, promising feedback within 3-5 working days. Eventually, MTN responded by falsely claiming that the recordings indicated I had agreed to a 24-month contract, which is a blatant lie. Regarding call recordings, MTN redirected me to MONDO. On 18 March, I requested these call recordings from MONDO. MONDO’s Snakhokonke M persistently refused to send recordings directly to me, initially requesting an email address for the MTN store despite it being an online transaction. When informed there was no physical store involved, MONDO insisted I visit an MTN store in person to listen to the call. After further insistence, MONDO reverted to requesting the store's email address again, even though it should have been within their capability to acquire it directly from their partner MTN. MONDO's contradictory instructions deliberately complicated a straightforward request. On 25 March, after unnecessary persistence, MTN finally provided the Durbanville store email, which MONDO initially refused to source themselves. Both MTN and MONDO demonstrated shocking incompetence, a blatant disregard for customer rights, and a clear intent to mislead. Their combined evasive tactics, conflicting responses, and bureaucratic hurdles are disgraceful and *********. Prospective customers are strongly advised to avoid engaging with MTN and MONDO to spare themselves considerable frustration and deception.
0 replies
17 months ago
Just fix it
The search options are terrible. Just the sme things on repeat. Would be great if one could actually search the wole database properly.
0 replies
21 months ago
"online" order
I app**** for a contract online. All was going well until I received a call from the approval department. Ms Moona seemed terribly keen to demonstrate her reading skills. So much so that she forced me to listen to her read the contract and phone specs twice, after which she proceeded to the terms and conditions. When I informed her that we had already gone through this information, she became annoyed and snotty with me, stating that she won’t release the phone unless I listen to her read the scriptof info I already knew, and is readily available online. What is the point of doing an online order if I still have to waste my time on the phone with Vodacom representatives? Furthermore, I was unable to approve the DebiCheck order due to a technical issue. When I called them, they were unable to assist. In any case, the debit order was totally incorrect in terms of the amount and debit date. I am therefore actually quite glad that I was unable to approve it. I decided to rather go into the shop and take out a contract there. The person who assisted was very helpful. However, he was unable to cancel the pending contract due agents not picking the phone, or answering but not responding. Vodacom should really be more careful with the third parties they employ, as this whole debacle has raised so many red flags that I’ll likely just use another company, lest I be saddled with their poor service for the next 36 months.
212 replies
39 months ago
Samsung is not sh*t
Really regret purchasing a Samsung. My WhatsApp is super laggy, my Spotify randomly stops, and my weather app needs to be manually updated. It won't even sync my contacts with WhatsApp properly. The common demoninator is the phone. All my apps don't work properly since getting this pos Can't wait to move back to xiomi
192 replies
41 months ago
Corporate psychopaths
Been waiting for WhatsApp customer services for almost two hours. They are using my monthly data (expires end Jan) instead of the 16gb top up which expires in a week. Also, it's next to impossible to cancel your service. They just constantly transfer you to another agent until you give up. This is not the WebAfrica I signed up with. Something is terribly wrong with their current management. Corporate psychopathy at its worst.
0 replies
42 months ago
When greed impedes progress
It's unfortunate, but money is all they care about. Not about training chefs. Some of their lectures are so young, with no experience. I would caution against this institution.
132 replies
43 months ago
WhatsApp is not sufficient
This WhatsApp-only customer service does not work at all. Would be great if they could switch back to emails. Also, why is the cancelation button on the website inactive? The only way to cancel now is through WA and even that does not work. Guess I'm a customer for life now, lol.
0 replies
Review Distribution
5 Star
0 (0%)
4 Star
0 (0%)
3 Star
0 (0%)
2 Star
1 (6.25%)
1 Star
15 (93.75%)