The Promise Of Cheap Smartphones Meets The Reality Of Daily Repayment

In many parts of Nairobi, a smartphone sits at the centre of the workday. Orders arrive through it. Payments move through it. Customers call, suppliers respond, and accounts live inside messaging threads and mobile money prompts. When access disappears without warning, work stops immediately.

Over the past year, complaints linked to BNPL phone financing have surfaced with increasing frequency. Customers describe devices locking despite recent payments or remaining unusable while disputes are resolved. What began as individual frustration has grown into a wider argument about responsibility, transparency, and the limits of digital credit.

The model itself is familiar. Hire purchase has long existed in Kenya. What changed is the importance of the device being financed. A smartphone is no longer discretionary spending. For many users, it functions as infrastructure.

Access first, understanding later

Smartphone adoption has accelerated rapidly, reaching 83.5 percent penetration by June 2025. The expansion reflects necessity more than aspiration. Mobile money transactions, delivery work, online marketplaces, and customer communication increasingly depend on continuous connectivity.

BNPL phone financing entered this environment as a practical workaround. Deposits reduced the initial barrier. Daily or weekly payments allowed buyers to acquire devices that would otherwise require months or years of saving. For first-time smartphone users, the arrangement often felt less like borrowing and more like catching up.

Yet instalments reshape how cost is perceived. Buyers tend to focus on what leaves their wallet each day rather than the total repayment over time. Financing charges and transaction fees accumulate gradually. The full price becomes visible only later, usually when most of the contract has already been completed.

That mismatch between expectation and outcome sits behind many disputes now emerging.

When software enforces repayment

Modern BNPL arrangements rely on software embedded in the device itself. Payments are tracked automatically. Missed or delayed instalments can trigger temporary lockouts until accounts are reconciled. For lenders, this reduces exposure to default. For users, it introduces uncertainty into daily routines.

Payment systems do not always align perfectly. Mobile money transactions fail, delays occur, or amounts reflect incorrectly across platforms. Automation reacts immediately. Customer service rarely moves at the same speed.

For traders and riders working in the informal economy, interruptions translate directly into lost income. A locked phone means missed transactions and unreachable customers. The enforcement mechanism is instantaneous, while dispute resolution remains slow.

Credit, in this form, becomes inseparable from access.

Small payments, larger obligations

The attraction of BNPL phone financing lies in affordability measured in short intervals. A weekly payment of Sh640 feels manageable compared with paying Sh25,000 upfront. Over the duration of the contract, however, total payments can rise several thousand shillings above retail price once fees and transaction costs are included.

Consumer advocates argue that the structure encourages decisions driven by immediate affordability rather than long-term cost. Instalments blend into daily spending patterns. The overall obligation becomes abstract.

This dynamic is not unique to Kenya. What makes it more acute locally is income volatility. Many borrowers earn inconsistently. Repayment schedules remain fixed.

The companies behind the phones

The BNPL smartphone market in Kenya has evolved into a parallel distribution system. Financing providers are no longer just lenders. In practice, many function as handset retailers, credit assessors, and software operators at the same time.

Companies such as M-KOPA, Watu Simu, Onfon, and partner-led smartphone financing programmes operating through telecom networks have built business models around entry-level and mid-range Android devices. The phones are selected not only for price but for durability, battery performance, and compatibility with device management software used in repayment enforcement. Hardware decisions are shaped as much by repayment risk as by consumer preference.

This structure has reshaped how smartphones reach lower-income buyers. Traditional electronics shops rely on upfront payment. BNPL providers expand access by absorbing credit risk, but they also retain control over the device until repayment ends.

Competition between providers has largely centred on deposit size and daily instalment amounts rather than total cost transparency. Advertising often highlights how little a user needs to pay per day. The cumulative price receives less attention during purchase conversations.

At the same time, scale has become central to profitability. Financing millions of devices spreads risk, but it also places pressure on customer service systems. When technical failures occur, large numbers of users can be affected simultaneously.

Expansion ahead of regulation

Hire purchase accounts in Kenya increased from 579,242 in 2021 to more than 1.7 million in 2024, according to FinAccess data. Device financing accounts for a significant portion of that growth. Oversight has struggled to keep pace with the hybrid nature of the model.

BNPL providers operate across retail, lending, and technology sectors simultaneously. Responsibility becomes blurred. When disputes arise, customers often struggle to determine whether the problem lies with payment processing, software enforcement, or financing terms.

Parliament’s Finance Committee has begun examining whether existing consumer protection and lending frameworks adequately cover these arrangements. The discussion increasingly centres on proportionality. At what point does disabling a device over a small payment discrepancy become excessive?

Inclusion and dependency at the same time

Industry executives argue that financing programmes expand opportunity. Access to smartphones enables participation in digital markets, online learning, and mobile banking. Many users experience tangible benefits.

Yet dependency grows alongside access. Once income flows through a financed device, interruptions carry consequences beyond inconvenience. The relationship between borrower and lender becomes continuous rather than occasional.

Public frustration reflects this tension. Users accept repayment obligations. What they contest is losing functionality while payments remain under dispute or nearly complete.

Ownership in the digital economy

The disputes surrounding BNPL phone financing point toward a broader question. When does ownership begin in practical terms rather than legal ones?

A financed device may technically belong to the lender until the final instalment is paid. In everyday use, however, it functions as the borrower’s primary economic tool from the first day. Control and responsibility sit in different places.

Kenya’s digital economy has often expanded through improvisation, with regulation following later. Mobile money followed that path. BNPL phone financing appears to be moving along a similar trajectory.

The outcome will depend on whether safeguards evolve alongside adoption. For now, the system continues to grow, carrying both opportunity and friction. Across markets and transport stages, the calculation remains ongoing. A phone opens doors. Until the last payment clears, it can also close them without warning.

[Secure Your Seat at Africa Tech Summit Nairobi 2026 | February 11–12 here] Use code TTRENDS10 at checkout to save 10% on your pass and join the leaders building Africa’s $1 trillion cross-border payment future.

Go to TECHTRENDSKE.co.ke for more tech and business news from the African continent.

Follow us on WhatsApp, Telegram, Twitter, and Facebook, or subscribe to our weekly newsletter to ensure you don’t miss out on any future updates. Send tips to editorial@techtrendsmedia.co.ke