Vodafone franchisees raised concerns about the “massive impact” of commission cuts on their mental health four years before 62 business owners launched a £120m high court claim against the telecoms giant.
In 2020, shortly after Vodafone slashed fees paid to franchisees during the Covid pandemic, a survey revealed widespread dissatisfaction and severe stress among store operators. Many franchisees reported anxiety, depression, and fears of losing their homes and life savings due to falling earnings.
The survey, completed by 119 of Vodafone’s 167 franchisees at the time, showed deep mistrust in the company, with participants scoring just 1.75 out of 5 when asked if they trusted Vodafone’s word, and 1.67 on whether they felt valued. Nearly 80 respondents left comments describing damage to their wellbeing, with several citing sleepless nights, panic attacks, and strains on family life.
One franchisee wrote: “My mental health has become very poor as I am suffering from anxiety and spells of depression.” Another said: “The stress and worry of not hitting overheads is giving me anxiety. I think it’s disgraceful that I feel the constant threat of losing my savings, home and livelihood.”
The findings echo the claims now being brought by 62 franchisees, representing almost 40% of Vodafone’s partners, who allege the company “unjustly enriched” itself by cutting commissions at the expense of vulnerable small business owners. Some former franchisees have told of suicidal thoughts and personal debts exceeding £100,000, with MPs drawing comparisons to the Post Office Horizon IT scandal.
Vodafone has launched a fourth internal investigation into its franchising division but denies wrongdoing. A company spokesperson said: “We are sorry to any franchisee who has had a difficult experience. At Vodafone UK we encourage anyone to raise issues in the knowledge they will be taken seriously, and we always seek to resolve any issues raised. We continue to run a successful franchise operation, and many of our existing franchisees have expanded their business with us by taking on additional stores.”
The company “strongly refutes” the allegations and has pledged to defend itself in court, insisting the dispute is purely commercial.
