MTN Nigeria: When Unexplained Deductions Become a Customer Trust Problem
By Ikem Okuhu
A customer recounts repeated experiences with airtime deductions and raises concerns about value-added services, accountability and consumer protection.
The views and experiences expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the editorial position of GMTNewsng.
Editor’s Note
This opinion article by Ikem Okuhu details the author’s personal experiences and concerns regarding airtime deductions, value-added services and other MTN Nigeria services. The opinions and allegations expressed are those of the author, based on his personal experiences as described in this article. GMTNewsng has not independently verified every allegation contained herein. MTN Nigeria is entitled to respond to the issues raised, and this publication will be updated to reflect any response received.
There comes a point when a customer can no longer simply shrug off what appears to be a recurring problem.
I believe I have reached that point with MTN Nigeria.
Over the years, I have experienced deductions and service-related issues on my MTN line that have left me frustrated and deeply concerned. My grievance is not merely about the amount of money involved. It is about what I consider the troubling ease with which customers can sometimes find themselves charged for services they insist they never requested.
If it eventually requires taking my complaints to the Nigerian Communications Commission to seek answers, I am prepared to do so.
This latest incident reopened wounds from an experience dating back many years, when I had a major dispute involving deductions from my line. That earlier matter was eventually resolved after I publicly challenged what I considered irregular billing. But today, I find myself once again asking whether enough is being done to protect telecommunications customers from unauthorised or unexplained charges.
The VAS Question
MTN, like other telecommunications companies, provides access to a range of Value Added Services, or VAS, including caller tunes, entertainment content, educational services and other subscription-based products.
My concern is with how customers sometimes become subscribed to services they insist they never knowingly requested.
I understand that many of these services may be operated by third-party providers working within the telecommunications ecosystem. However, from a customer’s perspective, the distinction between a network operator and a third-party service provider can become blurred when deductions are made directly from the customer’s airtime balance and notifications arrive through recognised network channels.
The result is that the customer sees one thing: money has left the account.
And when the customer did not knowingly request the service, questions inevitably arise.
The pattern, as I have experienced and observed it, is that a customer receives an SMS indicating that a subscription has been activated or renewed and that a certain amount has been deducted. If the customer does not immediately notice the message or take steps to cancel the service, further deductions may occur when the subscription cycle is renewed.
That was the concern that triggered my latest outburst.
The ₦200 Deduction That Raised Fresh Questions
I was driving home at about 8 p.m. when an alert on my phone caught my attention.
On checking the message, I discovered that ₦200 had been deducted from my airtime balance for what was described as an Edu-Digi Mathematics Exclusive subscription.
The message informed me that I had successfully subscribed to the service and that it would be renewed on September 3, 2026.
My immediate reaction was simple: When did I subscribe?
I had no recollection whatsoever of subscribing to such a service.
The notification also directed me to dial *305# to cancel active services.
That was particularly troubling to me because the message appeared to suggest that I was already subscribed to—and was now expected to cancel—a service I do not recall ever requesting in the first place.
I am not currently preparing for a WAEC mathematics examination, nor can I attribute the subscription to my children.
From the time my first child was a curious and restless toddler, I deliberately established a simple rule in my home: my phone is not a toy.
The children can use their mother’s device for games and other activities, but my own phone has always been off-limits.
I make this point because, after I complained publicly, some people suggested that I may have inadvertently subscribed to the service or that one of my children may have done so while using my phone.
That, to the best of my knowledge, did not happen.
When Being a Customer Feels Like the Only Offence
I have had other frustrating experiences with MTN services, and sometimes I have wondered whether my only mistake is simply remaining a customer.
A few months ago, I needed broadband internet service at home. I concluded that having a dedicated broadband device would be useful for my family.
A cousin later came across an MTN agent installing broadband services in our neighbourhood and obtained both a flyer and the agent’s contact details for me.
I contacted the agent, and within a few days, the service was installed.
However, after the first month, the service stopped functioning as expected, and I encountered difficulties recharging it.
At one point, a staff member suggested an alternative arrangement that involved loading ₦30,000 airtime onto my phone and transferring the value to the broadband service.
I followed the instruction.
The transfer did not go through as expected.
I eventually used the airtime for data and exhausted the ₦30,000 balance in less than two weeks.
After that experience, I stayed away from the broadband router for some time until I later discovered that I could physically visit a service centre to have the device recharged.
The broader issue for me is trust.
Telecommunications services have become deeply embedded in our personal and professional lives. Phone numbers are tied to banks, businesses, government platforms, professional contacts and countless other essential services.
Changing networks is therefore not always as simple as it sounds.
Customers often remain where they are because their numbers and services have become part of their personal and professional identities.
That places an even greater responsibility on major telecommunications brands to protect customer trust.
A Flashback to 2008
My current frustration also took me back to an incident from around 2006 to 2008.
At the time, I was working in the Corporate Communications Division of the United Bank for Africa.
Mobile communication was very different then.
Smartphones were not as sophisticated or widespread as they are today, and WhatsApp did not exist. SMS was an important tool for both personal and professional communication.
For that reason, many professionals relied heavily on contract telephone lines.
My own line was on a monthly contract arrangement involving approximately ₦10,000 in recharge value. Once the available balance was exhausted, additional recharge options were limited.
Then came an incident that left me stunned.
I had just paid ₦10,000 into the line for the monthly recharge cycle. A few hours later, I attempted to make a call and was informed that I had no airtime left.
More surprisingly, the system indicated that I was owing money.
I was shocked.
I visited an MTN service centre on Saka Tinubu Road, hoping to understand what had happened, but my experience there only added to my frustration.
I returned to my office and contacted my late friend, Tumise Adekunle, who was then handling the Brands and Marketing desk at ThisDay.
He advised me to put my experience in writing.
I did.
The story was eventually published prominently, and senior MTN officials subsequently contacted me.
During the dispute, I pointed to what I considered a particularly unusual billing pattern: the same amount appeared to have been deducted as call charges on more than 1,000 consecutive calls.
I argued that it was highly improbable that I could have spent precisely the same duration on more than 1,000 different telephone calls.
Following the matter, I received a letter acknowledging that there had been an issue, along with some corporate gifts.
The matter was resolved, and life moved on.
But the recent experience with the value-added service subscription has brought back the same questions.
Who Is Ultimately Responsible?
MTN may argue that some value-added services are provided by third-party operators.
That may be true.
But from my perspective as a customer, the network operator cannot simply distance itself from every complaint involving a service that is activated, billed or communicated through its network.
The customer does not always know the internal relationships between a telecommunications company and its VAS partners.
What the customer knows is this:
An alert arrives.
A service is mentioned.
Money is deducted.
And the customer is left asking questions.
That is why I believe telecommunications companies must take greater responsibility for ensuring that customers are not enrolled in services without clear, informed and verifiable consent.
A customer should not have to discover an unfamiliar subscription only after money has already been deducted.
The burden should not primarily be on the customer to prove that they did not subscribe.
The system itself should be transparent enough to show clearly when, how and through what process a subscription was authorised.
Trust Is a Brand Asset
MTN is one of Nigeria’s biggest and most recognisable brands.
That is precisely why customer trust should be treated as one of its most valuable assets.
Large brands enjoy loyalty built over years. For telecommunications companies, that loyalty is often reinforced by the difficulty of changing numbers and moving interconnected services from one network to another.
But customer loyalty should never be interpreted as customer helplessness.
The fact that a customer has remained with a network for years should be a reason to protect that relationship—not an excuse for the customer to feel ignored when questions arise.
The recent message that triggered my complaint came through a recognised MTN communication channel.
Ironically, I also receive legitimate service reminders through the same channel, including notifications relating to my broadband subscription and expiry dates.
So, when one communication channel is used to provide legitimate service information and another message through that same ecosystem informs a customer about an unfamiliar subscription and deduction, it becomes difficult for the customer to simply dismiss the matter as someone else’s responsibility.
Customers Deserve Clear Answers
My complaint is not about ₦200 alone.
It is about accountability.
It is about consent.
It is about whether telecommunications customers can be confident that the money on their lines will not be deducted for services they did not knowingly request.
And it is about whether major brands are doing enough to ensure that third-party service providers operating within their ecosystems do not undermine the trust customers have built over decades.
I am not asking for special treatment.
I am asking for what every customer deserves: transparency, accountability and a clear explanation when money disappears from an account.
As the saying goes, whatever the molars are chewing, the ears can hear the sound.
Customers are paying attention.
And major brands should be paying attention too.
About the Author: Ikem Okuhu is a communications professional and commentator who writes on media, technology, business and public affairs.
GMTNewsng Right of Reply
GMTNewsng is willing to publish MTN Nigeria’s response to the concerns and experiences raised in this opinion article. Any response received will be reflected in an update to this publication.
Visit GMTNewsng for more news stories.
