OPPO Reno13 Marketing Disconnect & Persistent Telkom Systemic Delays – NCC Case Active

I am deeply disappointed with the corporate deflection and severe administrative bottlenecks from Telkom and OPPO South Africa regarding my premium business device, the OPPO Reno13 (Job No: TRJ204489).

As a loyal brand advocate who has brought multiple family members to OPPO, I upgraded specifically based on the heavily marketed water-resistance features of the Reno13 series. Well before the 6-month mark, the device suffered a baseline failure from standard environmental exposure. OPPO and Telkom are now attempting to hide behind a generic "liquid damage" exclusion to void the warranty, offering a token "goodwill" gesture to pay a portion of an insurance excess. This is a direct violation of the imp**** warranty of quality and fitness for purpose under the Consumer Protection Act (CPA). If a product is explicitly sold on the strength of a specialized feature, that protection must persist as a core function of its lifespan.

Furthermore, the service infrastructure at Telkom has been highly unprofessional. This week, my backup device was left at a branch for a basic log entry, which took an astronomical 52 hours to process due to ongoing systemic backlogs, leaving my business entirely stranded without an operational asset or a loan phone. This is a pattern; when I initially tried to log the defective Reno13 in January, their systems were down then too, forcing me into an exhausting warranty repair loop.

I have formally rejected their repair proposal and their "goodwill" framing. I have demanded a full contract cancellation or a brand-new replacement device, along with a refund of handset fees paid while the device was out of commission. A formal case is active with the National Consumer Commission (NCC) under case number CC2026/05/0242, and all email trails are being forwarded as supplementary evidence. Large corporations cannot leave small business clients to absorb the costs of defective manufacturing.