Thousands of Kenyans using M-Pesa have raised alarm over unexpected deductions from their accounts, linked to previously unbilled Fuliza overdraft charges.
The issue, which surfaced in recent hours, has triggered widespread frustration among users who say they were neither notified in advance nor given a clear breakdown of the deductions.
The controversy centres on transactions dating back to a system maintenance period between February 26 and March 20, 2026. During this time, Safaricom reportedly did not bill certain Fuliza-related charges in real time. Now, weeks later, customers are seeing lump-sum deductions from their accounts—catching many off guard.
For many users, the experience has been both confusing and frustrating. Some reported waking up to reduced balances without any immediate explanation. Others claimed the deductions affected money meant for essential expenses such as food, transport, and bills.
Among those voicing concern are customers like Muriuki and Wanjira Maina, who took to social media to express their dissatisfaction. They described the deductions as unfair and, in some cases, likened them to unauthorized withdrawals. Their sentiments were echoed by many others, with some users calling for legal action and demanding greater accountability from Safaricom.
The core of the issue lies in Fuliza, the overdraft service that allows M-Pesa users to complete transactions even when they have insufficient funds. While the service is widely used across Kenya for its convenience, it comes with daily maintenance fees on outstanding balances—charges that are typically deducted automatically.
However, during the maintenance period, it appears that these fees were not applied as expected. As a result, the accumulated charges are now being deducted in bulk, leading to the current backlash.
In response to the growing concerns, Safaricom, through its customer support platform, clarified that the deductions are legitimate and represent overdue Fuliza maintenance fees. The company explained that the system maintenance temporarily affected billing processes, but assured users that all charges being applied now are valid and reflect actual usage during the affected period.
Safaricom Care has also encouraged affected customers to reach out directly—particularly through direct messages—with their details for individual account reviews. The company maintains that it is committed to transparency and accuracy in billing, and has promised that such disruptions will be addressed to prevent similar occurrences in the future.
Despite these assurances, many users remain dissatisfied. A key concern raised is the lack of prior communication. Customers argue that even if the charges are legitimate, Safaricom should have notified users before making bulk deductions. For many, the sudden withdrawals disrupted their financial planning and daily routines.
Consumer rights advocates have also weighed in, emphasizing the importance of clear and timely communication when it comes to financial services. In a country where mobile money plays a central role in everyday transactions, even small disruptions can have significant consequences for individuals and businesses alike.
The incident has also reignited debate around the structure of Fuliza fees. Some users are questioning the cumulative impact of daily maintenance charges, especially when balances remain unpaid over extended periods. Others are calling for clearer statements and real-time updates to help users track their obligations more effectively.
This situation highlights a broader issue in digital finance: the balance between convenience and transparency. While services like Fuliza have revolutionised access to short-term credit, they also require users to fully understand the terms and costs involved. Without clear communication, even legitimate charges can appear suspicious or unfair.
For Safaricom, the challenge now lies in restoring customer trust. As one of Kenya’s most influential companies and the backbone of the country’s mobile money ecosystem, maintaining confidence in its services is critical. How the company handles this issue—both in resolving individual complaints and improving communication—will likely shape public perception in the coming weeks.
As the conversation continues online, many users are urging Safaricom to provide detailed statements outlining how the deductions were calculated. Others are calling for policy changes to ensure that similar situations do not occur again.
Ultimately, the Fuliza deduction controversy serves as a reminder of the growing importance of transparency in digital financial services. In an era where millions rely on mobile money daily, clear communication is not just a courtesy—it is a necessity.
