'Cell C could've handled banner debacle better'

CEO José Dos Santos says the company will ensure it provides its customers with better service.

FILE: George Prokas erected a scathing banner in response to Cell C's service on Beyers Naude Drive in Johannesburg. Picture: Twitter via @ThisJustinGuy.

JOHANNESBURG - Cell C chief executive officer José Dos Santos says he is angry with the lack of administration within his company which lead to a customer erecting a scathing banner on Beyers Naude Drive in Johannesburg.

George Prokas put up the banner last week after he received bad service from the Sandton City branch.

Yesterday, the court found that the Johannesburg businessman did not act unlawfull y and that although the banner was his opinion it was fair.

Dos Santos admitted his company could have handled the situation better.

"I always think to myself, the lesson is learnt, fix the problem and move on. We will come out of this stronger and we make sure we support the consumers out there to actually provide a better service."

However, he said Prokas should have approached him.

"I find it quite amazing that I didn't get an email, I didn't get a letter. There were other forms and channels he could have used."

On Thursday, Lawyers representing Prokas said the Johannesburg High Court's decision to have an urgent application by the service provider dismissed, will serve as a warning to other companies in dealing with their customers.

Judge Sharise Weiner told the court Prokas gave sufficient facts and his views were honest and therefore, Cell C failed to convince the court why the application had to be urgent.

Prokas's attorney, Raymond Druker, said companies owe it to their customers to deliver good service.

"The level of service which you extend to those people must be commensurate with your size."

Druker said the action by his client was a warning to big businesses to stop taking their customers for granted.

"They must tread carefully, they can't bully people anymore."

The company has criticised Judge Weiner's handling of the case, saying the judgment contains fundamental errors that have wide-reaching implications.