Garth Rattray | ‘Release and discharge’ confusion

In 2004, right after Hurricane Ivan, I was driving through an intersection on my way to buy drinking water. The intersection had a two-way stop sign, and I was on the right of way. Someone disobeyed the stop sign and no sooner had my passenger shouted, “He’s not going to stop!!” he struck the left rear wheel of my pickup with such force that it went into the air and landed on the right front and rear wheels only.

I was certain that we were going to roll over, but we spun around on those two wheels and ended up back on all four, but facing the direction from which we came. The driver backed up and eventually stopped. I alighted from the pickup and began taking pictures of the damage to both vehicles.

What ensued was a string of bullyism. The offender called his police friends and they threatened to arrest me. He refused to exchange papers, so we both hobbled along to the Half-Way Tree Police Station. They confiscated my documents and handed them to him to copy whatever he wanted. My plaintive words were met with repeated, “Don’t worry about that sir!”.

He repeatedly claimed that he had stopped at the sign and that I came along at one million miles per hour, struck him and attempted to flee the scene. However, the evidence of his front licence plate firmly embedded into my left rear tyre and the damage to the left rear panel of my pickup told a different tale. Nonetheless, they threatened to impound my vehicle.

INSPECTOR OF POLICE

I eventually discovered that he was a popular inspector of police! I made several official complaints and wrote letters to all his superiors, including the commissioner of police and the minister of national security at that time. He broke the law, and lied in his report, but this is Jamaica, so he was never reprimanded or prosecuted.

My pickup was out of use for five months, but I only received three days of ‘loss of use’. It was several years before I received a package from the insurance company. There was no settlement cheque inside. To add insult to injury, I was instructed to sign the ‘Release and Discharge’ document within it.

The Release and Discharge document read: I …… of…….. in the parish of….. do hereby acknowledge receipt of the sum of….. from the Government of Jamaica which I agree to accept in full and final settlement of all claims, costs and expenses in respect of all injuries, loss, and damages suffered ….. The payment of the aforesaid sum is received by me by way of compromise of my claim and without any admission of liability on the part of THE GOVERNMENT OF JAMAICA and its servants and agents and in consideration thereof I hereby RELEASE and DISCHARGE the said GOVERNMENT of JAMAICA and its servants and its agents from all claims and demands whatever arising directly or indirectly out of said accident.”

Having read the words “… do hereby acknowledge receipt of the sum of….” and “The payment of the aforesaid sum is received by me…” I could not, in all conscience, sign that I have already received the payment without the payment. Who in their right mind would sign such a thing? But worse yet, who in their right mind would tell anyone to sign such a thing?

NO FURTHER ACTION

I was told that, I needed to sign that I already received the money, and that I would take no further action. I was told to sign for the receipt of the sum in the presence of a justice of the peace. Then, the document would go back to the insurance company, then to the Ministry of National Security, then to the Ministry of Finance, and then, after an indeterminate time, a cheque would eventually be prepared and make its way to me along the aforementioned route in reverse.

It seemed ridiculous and illegal. After exhausting several other channels to explain that a simple adjustment in the document to state that the signatories agreed to accept (instead of already accepted the money owed to them), I contacted the minister of justice who explained that the practice had always been in place and that she would refer it to the Attorney General’s Chambers, but nothing came of it.

Every other ‘Release and Discharge’ document is clearly and carefully worded so that the person who agreed to settle, and not pursue the matter any farther, is either signing the document as he/she is receiving the payment, or that he/she is signing the document as an agreement that he/she will accept the settlement.

As it stands, the Release and Discharge document is a relic of a past where ‘the Crown’ was so supreme, so incorruptible, so far beyond reproach, and so trustworthy that people would sign before being remunerated and the money held safely ‘in trust’ until it is disbursed. But this is modern-day Jamaica where corruption and fraud are commonplace. This is Jamaica where we are preparing to be free of the old colonial trappings. Yet, we cling to things like this absurd document and defend its existence by stating that “the practice had always been in place”.

No other jurisdiction bullies its citizens to lie on themselves and have a justice of the peace certify to it. Why are we doing this?

Garth A. Rattray is a medical doctor with a family practice. Send feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and garthrattray@gmail.com