Is the Jamaican consumer’s “beacon of hope” truly impartial?

Last year, I came to the ineluctable conclusion that the taxpayer-funded Consumer Affairs Commission of Jamaica (CAC) is truly useless in discharging its mandate to educate, empower and inform the Jamaican consumer about their rights when certain powerful players like ATL Automotive Limited, ATL Autobahn Limited (the “ATL Motors Sub-Group”), which have been described as “highly profitable and very successful entities”, are involved.

In 2024, I collected what was represented to me as a 2024 MINI Countryman, after purchasing the same through former MINI sales agent Tamika St. John. It was one of my dream cars since I adored and preferred its classic, old-fashioned look which distinguished it from the more modern-looking Toyota units. However, less than 6 weeks after collection, the Countryman exhibited several issues, including the dangerous occurrence of shifting itself from drive to neutral, particularly when attempting to merge with traffic or when ascending an incline, etc. Despite assurances from the ATL Motors Sub-Group’s “highly trained technicians” that the transmission issue had been fixed last year, the problem has persisted. Additionally, both I and another person have witnessed the Countryman’s door pin locks opening and closing on their own, accompanied by its hazard lights flashing—without being prompted. The Countryman also unexpectedly blew its horn and folded its mirrors, again without any input from me, and has failed to start more than once, even after being inspected and "repaired" by the ATL Motors Sub-Group’s technicians last year. Most of these issues manifested at a time when the Countryman had recorded far less than 1000 km in mileage. By contrast, a 2024 Toyota SUV I procured last year due to concerns about the reliability of the Countryman has had no issues whatsoever, despite now surpassing the Countryman in mileage. This stark difference highlights the clear deficiencies with the Countryman.

Concerns around impartiality of the CAC

Despite promises from Cheryl Martin-Tracy, the CAC's Director of Field Operations, to assign a case officer and issue a case number from July 2024, the CAC has yet to do so, which raises concerns about the effectiveness, transparency and impartiality of the CAC, especially when powerful entities like the ATL Motors Sub-Group are involved. To add to this, I was stunned by an email sent by ATL Automotive Limited’s Deputy Managing Director, Stephen Hector, on April 10, 2024 following an emotionally charged back and forth between the two of us. In that email, Hector addressed CAC Director Richard Rowe, along with several other individuals such as Sloane Jackson, Khara East and Mark Dommisse copied on that email and seemed to demand an official letter from the CAC dismissing my credible statements regarding the ATL Motors Sub-Group’s handling of customer complaints. Hector wrote: “Dear Richard, As per our conversation earlier, I have attached an email from one of our MINI customers, Ms. Amanda Quest, a member of the local legal community… Below, I have pasted some very concerning comments from that email thread from Ms. Quest regarding conversations allegedly held with members of the Consumer Affairs Committee team… Naturally, having no cases in front of the CAC, nor for many years, it is very concerning that someone would imply anything differently. I will be grateful if you could provide some urgent clarity on her comments for both our and Ms Quest’s information and provide an official letter stating as such if that is indeed the case.” In response, I fired off my own email to Mr. Rowe, reminding him of the CAC’s duty to remain impartial and to mediate disputes between consumers and entitles like the ATL Motors Sub-Group in a fair and impartial manner. My email emphasized that, given my complaint with the CAC against the ATL Motors Sub-Group, it would be impossible for Mr. Rowe to transparently and honestly accede to Hector’s request. While Mr. Rowe did not respond to his request, Hector’s audacious comfortability with making such a request—particularly in a context where there are more than several complaints about cars sold by the ATL Motors Sub-Group on social media, screenshots of which I forwarded to the CAC—raises concerns around the impartiality of the CAC.

This situation paints a concerning picture of a supposed consumer protection watchdog that may be caving to corporate pressure, rather than effectively advocating for consumers—leading to legitimate questions about its impartiality. This perception of the CAC has been reinforced by its complete lack of acknowledgement of the important Supreme Court ruling in Jason Samuels v ATL Automotive Limited [2024] JMSC Civ 79, which, among other things, clarified the substance and import of crucial consumer rights under the Sale of Goods Act regarding defective vehicles. Despite the ruling’s importance, the CAC made no public statement, further highlighting its inaction in a pivotal moment for consumer rights protection in Jamaica. As well, the CAC has done nothing to bring the case to public awareness otherwise, whether by reporting, retweeting or otherwise posting it on any of its official social media accounts. In addition, I can recall having a conversation with an individual from the legal department of the CAC about my dispute with the ATL Motors Sub-Group at the CAC who informed me that the entity’s hands are effectively tied when handling certain cases. All of this, I believe, would explain the CAC's lacklustre intervention in my dispute involving the ATL Motors Sub-Group as well as its dereliction of its duty to inform consumers when it opted not to comment or otherwise engage in public education on an important court ruling handed down against ATL Automotive Limited.

Moving forward, the CAC should be more transparent, accountable, and impartial in its operations. As a taxpayer-funded organization, the CAC owes that to Jamaican consumers. Moreover, Stephen Hector’s bold request of the CAC’s Mr. Richard Rowe made me think that the CAC, as a taxpayer-funded entity, should make publicly available an annual report of the number of complaints made against named car dealerships to include a breakdown of how many complaints were resolved and how many remain pending. It is apparent that Jamaican consumers, who have been similarly affected, are afraid to speak out publicly for reasons I understand, including the fear that defamation laws may be weaponized to silence and/or punish them. However, given my experiences with the ATL Motors Sub-Group, the CAC and BMW AG—the German manufacturer of the Countryman, which has shown itself to be just as useless as the CAC in the context of this ongoing dispute—I must do my part to raise awareness among Jamaican consumers and advance the cause of consumer rights protection in Jamaica.