This post reflects my honest opinion and analysis, based on first-hand information and experiences.
Editor’s note: The CEO contact described in this post has since been confirmed in written correspondence. See Post #30 and the Case Files page for the documented record.
A Line Crossed – and Then Some
Today, I was told something almost impossible to believe:
that Iñaki Berroeta, the Chief Executive Officer of TPG Telecom Limited (ASX:TPG) – parent company of Vodafone Australia – allegedly contacted a senior board member of my workplace to ‘discuss me’ and ‘resolve the issue.’
Let’s be absolutely clear:
- This is a personal consumer dispute, relating only to my own Vodafone account.
- My workplace has nothing to do with telecommunications.
- I have never named, referenced, or involved my employer anywhere – not in emails, not on LinkedIn posts, not in public blog posts.
- I had even removed my employer from LinkedIn prior to contact to prevent exactly this sort of overreach.
And yet, allegedly, the most powerful person at one of Australia’s biggest telcos decided that instead of responding to regulators or engaging in writing, he’d pick up the phone – and call my boss.
If true, this is not customer service. It is corporate overreach – and the public response made clear that Australians recognised it as such.
Within hours of sharing this incident on Reddit, it drew over 211,000+ views, 523 upvotes and more than 179+ public comments in just six hours on a Friday evening – an extraordinary, spontaneous backlash from Australians who recognised the behaviour for what it was: an abuse of power.
Comments poured in:
“That’s textbook harassment and intimidation.”
“No one contacts a person’s employer for a personal issue unless the goal is to cause harm.”
“This isn’t customer service – it’s corporate bullying.”
“Fish rots at the head. The fact a CEO would do this says everything about the culture.”
“Go to the media and put this on blast – this behaviour is absurd.”
“If they’re listed, the ASX and ASIC should be looking at this right now.”
In a matter of hours, what began as one phone call turned into a nationwide conversation about ethics, governance, and power abuse in corporate Australia.
An Extraordinary and Unethical Escalation
If the allegation is correct, this was a deliberate choice.
It was not an accident, not a misdial, not “reaching out in goodwill.”
It was a chief executive using his position of power to insert himself into a private citizen’s workplace – a context that has zero relevance to the dispute.
There is no conceivable legitimate reason for a CEO of an ASX-listed company to contact a complainant’s employer. None.
Such behaviour, if accurate, sits somewhere between retaliation and coercion – conduct that any ethics committee, regulator, or board should find deeply alarming.
Because when a company cannot refute facts, it resorts to pressure.
The Culture Problem at the Top
If this is how TPG Telecom’s leadership responds to scrutiny, by allegedly going behind someone’s back and into their workplace, what does that say about its internal culture?
About the company’s respect for boundaries, privacy, and due process?
TPG is a public company, regulated by the ASX and ASIC. It is expected to operate with integrity, accountability, and transparency.
Instead, this alleged act shows contempt for all three.
It raises immediate questions of corporate governance and board oversight:
- How could this happen under ASX Corporate Governance Principle 3 (Act Ethically and Responsibly)?
- Was the board informed?
- Did Legal, HR, or Corporate Affairs approve it – or was it an off-the-books act of personal retaliation?
If the CEO of a listed company feels entitled to cross this line, what hope does an ordinary customer have?
Bad Faith, Not Resolution
My case has already gone through every proper regulatory and oversight avenue:
• Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman (TIO): Referred to the Systemics Team for potential escalation to the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA), citing recurring and systemic complaint patterns.
• Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC): Accepted related privacy and data-accuracy issues into formal Intake under the Privacy Act 1988 (APP 10, 12 & 13).
• ASX Compliance: Written submissions lodged regarding continuous-disclosure and potential omissions in investor reporting and public representations, in relation to Listing Rule 3.1/3.1B. The ASX has acknowledged receipt and issued a case reference number.
• Consumer and Financial Regulators: Correspondence has also been shared with the ACCC and ASIC, given potential intersections with debt-collection, disclosure, and governance standards under RG96 and ASX Corporate Governance Principles.
These actions were taken through legitimate channels, not social media outrage, and have each generated formal acknowledgements. It underscores that this is not a personal dispute, but a matter of public accountability.
Everything is documented, evidenced, and logged.
So what possible “resolution” is achieved by contacting my employer?
The answer is none.
No legitimate business purpose is served by contacting a complainant’s employer during active regulatory proceedings. The effect, regardless of intent, is to insert corporate power into a private citizen’s workplace context.
A Failure of Judgment – and Leadership
If accurate, this is one of the most staggering displays of executive misjudgment seen in recent corporate memory.
It undermines the integrity of the complaint process, betrays the company’s stated values, and exposes a leadership culture that appears to confuse power with impunity.
It is the kind of act that corrodes trust not only in TPG/Vodafone but in the entire system meant to protect consumers from corporate misconduct.
It reflects the behaviour of a company that, rather than engaging through proper channels, chose to reach outside the regulatory process entirely.
The Optics: Corporate Overreach on Full Display
No regulator or shareholder could look at this and think it’s acceptable conduct.
Because this isn’t just one phone call – it’s a signal: that whistleblowers, critics, and even ordinary customers can be hunted down, not by merit, but by muscle.
If a CEO will allegedly ring a complainant’s workplace over a billing dispute, what else is happening behind closed doors?
And who else has been quietly pressured into silence?
Accountability is not harassment, and transparency is not defamation.
When a listed corporation or its executives cross the line from communication into coercion, it stops being a dispute and becomes a question of ethics. Consumers, employees, and shareholders deserve a culture of integrity – one where complaints are resolved through proper channels rather than through contact with a complainant’s employer.
Right of Reply
Mr. Berroeta and TPG Telecom are formally invited to respond.
If this account is inaccurate, please provide verifiable evidence to info@voda.fail, and any confirmed correction will be made promptly and transparently.
Disclaimer
This publication expresses the author’s honest opinions based on available evidence and correspondence.
It does not allege criminal conduct, but examines matters of public interest, corporate ethics, and governance.
It is not legal or financial advice.
Leave a Reply