Beame / Matrix Tracker Cancellation Dispute

The worst tracking company to ever have. The dispute between myself and Beame / Matrix Tracker, which has resulted in an alleged debt being escalated to a third party and poses a material risk to my credit profile.

I have maintained a vehicle tracking contract with Beame / Matrix Tracker since 09 January 2019, following the purchase of my Renault Clio. On 14 August 2025, I was involved in a motor vehicle accident, after which the vehicle was declared written off.

Upon notifying the service provider and requesting cancellation of the tracking contract, I was informed that a cancellation fee of R2,000 would be charged. This fee was never disclosed at the inception of the contract, nor was it adequately explained or contractually substantiated.

In terms of Section 22 and Section 48 of the South African Consumer Protection Act (CPA), consumers are entitled to plain, transparent disclosure and protection against unfair, unreasonable, or unjust contract terms. I submit that the retrospective imposition of an undisclosed cancellation fee constitutes an unfair contractual practice.

Furthermore, when I disputed the charge, I formally requested call recordings and contractual agreement of my interactions with the service provider, as these recordings were cited as the basis for enforcing the cancellation fee. Despite repeated assurances that the recordings would be retrieved and shared, they were never provided, despite multiple follow-ups over several months.

This failure raises concerns regarding:

- Procedural fairness,

- Transparency of record-keeping, and

- The provider’s obligation to substantiate a disputed charge, particularly where enforcement action is pursued.

Instead of resolving the dispute or providing the requested evidence, I received repeated communications from the provider’s finance department threatening negative credit reporting. On 10 February 2026, I received confirmation via SMS and telephone call that the account had been handed over to Risima Shared Services for further action.

In terms of credit reporting principles under the National Credit Act (NCA) and industry credit-bureau standards, I understand that:

- A disputed debt may not be reported or enforced while the dispute remains unresolved; and

- Consumers must be afforded a reasonable opportunity to investigate and resolve disputes before adverse credit actions are taken.

For reference, below is a summary of my documented follow-up attempts, all of which failed to yield resolution:

- 20 August 2025 | 12:49 – Follow-up with Romaine Maduramuthu

- 22 August 2025 | 10:40 – Follow-up with Ayanda Thembani

- 02 September 2025 | 16:05 – Follow-up with Busisiwe Nyembezi

- 12 September 2025 | 14:05 – Follow-up with Romaine Maduramuthu

Commitment made to escalate the request for call recordings and provide written feedback

02 October 2025 | 12:58 – Follow-up with Busisiwe Nyembezi

Undertook to escalate to her supervisor and revert by 06 October 2025

No feedback, recordings, or resolution were provided after this date.

I respectfully request assistance in:

- Assessing the fairness and enforceability of the cancellation fee under the CPA;

- Compelling disclosure of the requested call recordings and contractual evidence;

- Ensuring that no adverse credit listing or enforcement action occurs while the dispute remains unresolved; and

- Facilitating a fair and lawful resolution of this matter.

I have written follow-up correspondence to the service provider, who received no response as evidence if required.

I trust that this matter falls within your mandate and look forward to your guidance and intervention.

Kind regards,