On Friday, September 17, 2004, a government-owned vehicle collided with my pickup. Almost four years later, the Government decided to settle the matter.

My insurance company faxed me a 'Release and Discharge' document to be signed in the presence of a justice of the peace. It began with my name and my wife's name (we co-owned the pickup), followed by, "...do hereby acknowledge receipt of (the sum owed)", and an agreement that this was full and final payment. The second paragraph started with: "The payment of the aforesaid sum is received by us by way of compromise of our claim without any admission of liability on the part of the Government ..."

There was no accompanying cheque, so I called the insurance company only to learn that the document required us to sign for a sum not yet received, send it to the insurance company that would in turn send it to the office of the attorney general that would in turn send it to the Ministry of Finance. A cheque would eventually be prepared over a period of several months and sent to the office of the attorney general, then to the insurance company before we saw any of what was owed to us.

Refused to sign it

I was unable to sign that document. What if someone, wilfully or otherwise, misplaced the cheque? We would have no legal leg to stand on. What if we both died? Our estate could not claim on the Government. I saw the document as an invitation for fraudsters to steal money. My calls to the staff at the attorney general's office bore no fruit, so, on Wednesday, April 23, 2008, I wrote explaining the problem and petitioned the AG's help saying: "try as I might, I am unable to bring myself to sign for the receipt of funds that I have not received and may not receive for many months to come. I therefore crave your understanding and assistance in this matter. The document only needs a simple adjustment to make it accurate and legal. The phrase, '... do hereby acknowledge receipt of the sum of ...' needs to be changed to something like, '... do hereby agree to accept the sum of ...'"

Our esteemed attorney general replied with alacrity, but stated: "It is indeed the practice that in the 'Release and Discharge' document, the receipt of the sum of money is acknowledged although the funds have not at that time been received." I then petitioned the solicitor general in May and July, 2008 but both letters remain unacknowledged. About that time, my insurance company opted to follow tradition and sought my permission to sign for their portion. When last I checked (12 days ago) they had received nothing.

Everyone knows that we must never sign for receipt of monies not yet received. Yet, I am being told (by insurance supervisors and our chief government lawyer) that I must forego common sense and my principles and put all I'm owed at risk because of a long-standing, albeit illegitimate practice. This is the sort of document that disempowers us, deprives us of our rights and gives the Government the latitude to indefinitely delay payments to those it owes and put all who sign it at risk of losing funds due to them.

Wrongly worded document

I am hereby petitioning our chief servant to intervene on behalf of correctness, fairness and all Jamaicans who stand to lose time and money because of this wrongly worded, archaic document that everyone refuses to modify for reasons beyond my comprehension. I pray he doesn't disappoint us.

Garth A. Rattray is a medical doctor with a family practice. Feedback may be sent to garthrattray@gmail.com or columns@gleanerjm.com.