Cellcom in trouble: Attempt to disconnect leads to hundreds of shekels in fines
A customer requesting contract termination faced an unexplained rate hike and bureaucratic hurdles. Upon returning her equipment, she discovered that a series of technical failures had resulted in an Execution Office file being opened against her.
Despite consumer protection regulations, customers of Israeli telecommunications companies continue to face bureaucratic obstacles when attempting to terminate their services. The case of Elena Babich, who joined Cellcom in early 2024, serves as a classic example of a failure chain, starting with a price hike and ending with questionable payment demands.
On Sunday, mako reported on a customer who attempted to disconnect from Cellcom and was hit with a massive bill. After a period of paying approximately 113 shekels per month, she discovered the rate had jumped to 155 shekels. While Cellcom claimed the increase was mentioned in the fine print, a 2023 Supreme Court ruling mandates that companies send a separate, independent notice 30 to 60 days before a discount period expires. Without such notice, a rate hike is impermissible.
After failing to reach a representative at the call center, the customer submitted a formal disconnection notice via the 'Netek' app. The company rejected the request, claiming the credit card digits provided did not match their system.
In April, Elena visited a Cellcom branch in Ashkelon to return her equipment. Instead of a printed receipt, she was promised electronic confirmation. Subsequently, she was charged a fine of 435.59 shekels for non-return of equipment, plus 366.10 shekels in current charges, despite possessing a recording of a service representative confirming the equipment had been received.
In response to mako, Cellcom expressed regret and emphasized its commitment to transparency. Regarding the price hike, the company claimed an SMS notice had been sent. Regarding the disconnection, they explained that the 'Netek' portal requires accurate credit card data for fraud prevention, and the input error prevented completion.
However, the company admitted to a glitch in updating its systems regarding the equipment return. Following the inquiry, Cellcom contacted Elena, canceled all erroneous charges, and filed a request to close the Execution Office file that had been opened against her.
Elena Babich's case serves as a reminder that consumers must remain vigilant—from monitoring invoices for quiet price hikes to strictly documenting the return of equipment to prevent erroneous fines.
