The High Court in Nairobi has been asked to determine whether Safaricom PLC’s policy on M-Pesa reversals involving Fuliza loans is unconstitutional and unlawful.
In a petition filed before the court, Eunice Nganga is challenging what she describes as an unfair and arbitrary policy that allows Safaricom to retain money mistakenly sent to customers with outstanding Fuliza balances.
According to the court documents, the dispute arose on September 4, 2024, when Nganga accidentally sent KSh 2,700 to the wrong mobile number. She immediately initiated the standard M-Pesa reversal process, but the request was declined.
She was informed that the recipient’s line had an outstanding Fuliza loan and that the money had automatically been applied to offset the overdraft.
Nganga argues that the funds were not accessed or used by the unintended recipient but were instead automatically appropriated to settle the Fuliza facility. She maintains that she did not consent to her money being used to clear another customer’s debt.
After visiting a Safaricom shop in Nairobi and issuing a formal demand letter, she was allegedly told that the money could not be refunded and was advised to report the matter to the police.
In her petition, she claims the policy violates several constitutional provisions, including the right to property, consumer rights, and the right to fair administrative action. She also argues that her contractual relationship with Safaricom does not extend to settling third-party debts.
Nganga says the issue goes beyond her individual case and affects many Kenyans who lose money when mistaken transfers are applied to Fuliza balances.
She has moved the court seeking declarations that the policy is unconstitutional and unlawful, an order quashing its implementation, a refund of KSh 2,700, general and punitive damages amounting to KSh 50 million, and restitution for other affected customers who demand refunds.
