Tracker refusing to cancel contract despite CPA dispute – escalation forced

I am posting this only after giving Tracker ample opportunity to resolve this matter privately and amicably.

I entered into a vehicle tracking agreement linked to the purchase of a vehicle on 4 March 2025. I later discovered that the contract was for 36 months, with an early termination fee — a material term which I dispute was not properly disclosed or specifically drawn to my attention at inception, as required by the Consumer Protection Act (CPA).

I raised this formally with Tracker and engaged in multiple rounds of correspondence, clearly setting out my concerns and referencing the CPA. I also advised that the vehicle in which the Tracker unit was installed has since been sold, meaning the original service can no longer be rendered in its intended form.

Despite this:

Tracker relies solely on a signed transaction schedule and refuses to consider the disclosure obligations imposed by the CPA.

Tracker has attempted to shift responsibility to the dealership, even though the contract is with Tracker, not the dealership.

Tracker has refused to cancel the contract without penalty.

I made it clear to Tracker that I wished to resolve this without escalation or public complaint, but they have declined to engage meaningfully or offer a reasonable resolution.

As a result, I am now:

Escalating the matter to the Consumer Goods and Services Ombud (CGSO) and, if necessary, the National Consumer Commission (NCC); and

Posting this review to place the issue on public record.

I am still open to a fair resolution, namely cancellation of the contract without penalty, in line with the CPA.

This post is not made lightly — it is made because all reasonable attempts to resolve the matter privately have failed.