AA
adeola A
Active since Apr 2015
4
Reviews
0
Industries
Reviews
4 reviews126 months ago
Got Gas keeps my payment
I am renting a unit in an estate called Mulberry Lane Fourways. <br> <br> Sometime in July/August 2015, i offered 2 x empty 19kg cylinders to Got Gas through Nash for sale. I phoned and spoke to Nash before handing over the cylinders to staff of Got Gas. Nash accepted responsibiltiy and requested my banking details. <br> <br> Till date i have neither been paid for the 2 cylinders nor have the cylinders returned to me. Each time i phone and speak to Nash he acknowledges the agreement and then asks me for my banking details afresh. I have obliged Nash more than 3 times yet i have still not been paid. I have requested proof of payment once made yet have received nothing from Got Gas. It is now a frustrating experience and i will be taking this matter forward if Hellopeter does not yield the necessary result.<br> <br> I will like either payment for the 2 x cylinders or the 2 x cylinders returned to me. <br> <br> Thank you<br> <br> adeola
0 replies
126 months ago
Exploitative Multichoice
It has taken 24 days after the first complaint for Multichoice to address my complaint. I thought i had some hope when someone replied to say they will be in touch with me within 24 hours!!! That is obviously not Multichoice practice. They say one thing and do another. <br> <br> Now to the substance of your reply. While i acknowledge that you do not enforce however i note that you simply make it impossible to make a choice to keep my same old decoder by not servicing it any longer and who knows maybe altered the signal such that it no longer receives on my SD PVR so that i have no choice but to come to Multichoice to swop or repair. On getting there i am told i have no alternative but to buy an explorer at a cost of R1500 because as i was told i did not buy insurance!!!! My point is that this is exploitative. Also it takes away the power of choice from us the consumers because we are left with no other choice but to buy the decoder because we want to keep watching DSTV. That practice is exploitative and is anti-competitive behaviour because DSTV has monopoly.
75 replies
127 months ago
Exploitation by DSTV
I was forced to buy an SD PVR a few years ago when my single view decoder stopped working. Multichoice/DSTV said at the time that they were phasing out the single view decoders and no longer servicing them so we need to migrate to the SD PVR. I did and it was at a cost.<br> <br> A few years down the line after having the SD PVR which gives me access to view 2 channels independently of each other I am now being told to forcefully again buy the Explorer because they do not repair the SD PVR decoders anymore. Why should we be forced to buy a product at a very alarming cost without being given a chance to make a choice? Again the cost of installation is unpredictable and is for my account. This is exploitative. This seems to be a pattern with DSTV and i fear that within the next 9-months we will be forced yet again to buy new decoders for whatever reason. The broadcasting complaints commission needs to assist the public and look into this matter. <br> <br> Thankk you<br> <br> Adeola
75 replies
133 months ago
Zets refuses payback
I booked a holiday in December 2014 as part of my guest's visit to SA and received a call from a lady at Zest asking for a deposit payment. I explained that i was reluctant to make a deposit payment because the holiday was dependent on my guest getting a visa to visit me in SA in December 2014.<br> She insisted that if i did not pay she could not reserve the holiday even though i said repeatedly that if my guest did not get a visa then there was no holiday. She told me that if he did not get a visa then they could cancel the holiday. Unfortunately my guest did not get a visa in December and therefore could not visit us in SA.<br> Despite repeatedly explaining this to Zest holidays, my money was not refunded.
0 replies
Review Distribution
5 Star
0 (0%)
4 Star
0 (0%)
3 Star
0 (0%)
2 Star
4 (100%)
1 Star
0 (0%)