Following on from the letter "Ire over MTN bill" (January 9), by Abduljalil Adebesin, I would like to bring the following matter to your attention.

This time, Vodacom is the offender and, like MTN, I believe that what it is doing is unethical and unacceptable:

My wife and I were travelling in Mozambique for four weeks in August without our cellphones. When we returned home and switched on our phone, we received three SMSes (or MMS-type messages) spaced over a short period, suggesting "soft porn". The messages did not allow me to establish where they had come from (that is, there was no sender's number), so I deleted them.

A few days later I received my account from Vodacom, reflecting three charges for "content services" at R42. I called their help line and was told this related to the SMSes and that I had requested them. I told the consultant this was not the case and was then told that if I wanted to query the charge I should call a company called Opera Interactive.

Opera Interactive insisted I had requested the communications and e-mailed me so-called proof. On receiving it, I called them back and pointed out that nowhere on this document could I find proof that I had requested this. The consultant then told me the request had been made via the web, which I emphatically denied and pointed out that anyone was able to do this by entering a bogus number.

The assistant finally said she would request a refund, which would take about 14 days and that my number would be removed from their system.

Much to my amazement I have received a letter, posted in the UK, from a company called Cell Media containing two R20 notes.

The amount is not a major issue, but the principle is. Vodacom, Opera Interactive and/or Cell Media wait for complaints before taking any action. Think how much money they make from the many thousands who don't check their accounts. How can a reputable organisation like Vodacom partner with companies like Cell Media & Opera Interactive, who deliberately set about taking people's money without their permission. - Peter West, Modimolle (Nylstroom)

Nicolene Visser, Vodacom executive head of corporate communications: business, industry & technology responds:

Vodacom suspended the service of the Wireless Application Service Provider (WASP) in question on October 13 2009, because it did not adhere to the Wireless Application Service Provider Association (WASPA) Code of Conduct. We can confirm that content was requested by Mr West, when he clicked on a WAP link from his cellphone to view free content on a website. However this means of opting in for content services is against the WASPA code. After the service provider received the complaint it refunded Mr West and removed his cellphone number from its database.

MY husband and I decided that it would be sensible to give each other power of attorney in case either of us became incapable of conducting our financial affairs. We spoke to our financial adviser who made inquiries and then told us that we could arrange the power of attorney, but added that if we became incapable the power of attorney would become invalid and we would have to go through the courts to appoint a curator. Please could you clarify the situation. - Penny Roberts, Port Elizabeth

Fiduciary Institute of South Africa member Renette Hendriks and Lorraine White of Personal Trust International respond:

A power of attorney can be very useful. When it comes to incapacity it is worth distinguishing between physical and mental incapacity. If someone is physically incapacitated (for example, frail care) the power of attorney can be very useful.

The problem is when the individual is mentally incapable of making decisions. In terms of South African common law the power of attorney is not valid in these circumstances, but anecdotal evidence suggests the power of attorney is often still used in practice. Yet this action carries risk as there could be personal liability.

Currently the only option for someone who becomes mentally incapacitated is to have a curator appointed by the High Court. This process is generally time consuming, costly and an administrative nightmare.

From a planning perspective, one of the benefits of a trust is that the trustees have the obligation to act in the beneficiaries' best interests. Where beneficiaries have reduced capacity (such as mental incapacity, being minors and so on) there is no impact on the control, management or utilisation of the assets of the trust.

Trusts are usually formed for broader estate planning reasons than incapacity alone and there are associated ongoing costs, so this would need careful consideration.

The South African Law Reform Commission has been looking into the issue of assisted decision making. Other countries have the concept of an "enduring power of attorney" that is still valid after incapacity has taken place, but there do not seem to be any moves afoot yet to make changes.