Today and two weeks ago, I wrote to Petro-Canada to complain that their Petro-Canada App (designed for use in paying for fuel and washing/cleaning one’s car) did not work at two different gas stations; and, that as a result – by events too tedious to recount – I suffered minor consequence (damage to my car and loss of my walking stick).

From my first complaint to Petro-Canada I received a prompt reply which however was wildly inflated from my initial suggestion for moderate compensation. The Customer Service representative turned the matter into a full-blown damage claim, exacting trifling proofs and photos, neither of which were either available or relevant.  I chose to ignore the matter entirely – that is, until today when the second Petro-Canada gas station did not function properly for either fuel payment or car wash.

Years ago one summer – after my second year of law school – I worked for the Judge Advocate General in Ottawa. JAG is the legal department for National Defence – the only other legal contingency in the federal government aside from the Department of Justice (which handles everything else).

The JAG office received notice of an impending claim against Her Majesty in right of the Dominion of Canada from lawyers in the United States.  Their clients (a group of tourists in a Cadillac driving about Jamaica) were killed by the eradicate driving of a Canadian military serviceman from a nearby base. The American lawyers, instead of recounting details of their clients, simply sent photos of the homes in which they had each lived. Their clients were evidently exceedingly well-to-do.

What however complicated the matter is that the delinquent Canadian serviceman – who was discovered to have been hopelessly drunken – was in addition at the time of the fatal crash off-duty and AWOL (“away without leave”).  In other words, when the serviceman left the base he was not acting in the performance of his duties to his employer (Her Majesty).  Accordingly, Her Majesty was at liberty to deny vicarious liability on behalf of the AWOL chap.

Because the amount of the claim by the American lawyers was significant (in the multiple millions) there were lengthy reviews of the matter by the Judge Advocate General and his subalterns. Eventually – no doubt with approval of the Privy Council – the decision was made by the Judge Advocate General to make an ex gratia payment to the family of the deceased Americans as a gesture of good faith.

An ex gratia payment is a payment made out of grace or favor, meaning it’s made without any legal obligation or admission of liability. It’s a voluntary payment, often made as an act of goodwill, to compensate for a loss or expense where there’s no legal requirement to do so.

The Privy Council formally advises the sovereign on the exercise of the royal prerogative. The King-in-Council issues executive instruments known as Orders in Council. The Privy Council also holds the delegated authority to issue Orders of Council, mostly used to regulate certain public institutions.

In my own act of inflationary conduct, I wrote to Petro-Canada today suggesting an ex gratia settlement of my petty claims (on the theory that, when you want something from an adjudicator, you tell him what you want then show him how to get there). It will at the very least be entertaining to hear their response (if any).  I have willingly abandoned the stick which I inadvertently left at the uncooperative pump today because it would cost me more to drive back to the station and to return home than the stick is worth. As for the prior damage to the rim of my automobile wheel, that too has been abandoned as both fruitless and relatively inconsequential in the overall scheme of things.

Meanwhile earlier today – on a whim – I reignited a longstanding relationship with friends whom I have not seen for a considerable time.  When I called upon them at their home, they were just getting out of bed.  The inopportune visit did not however disturb or dampen our collective gusto. We instantly lapsed into a buoyant conversation touching upon many old and new details, prolonging the exchange of tales approaching two hours.

To my credit I spared my friends the account of my Petro-Canada losses, the insignificant details of which I have so manifestly burdened upon you. Granted when I met with my friends earlier today I had not yet ventured into the city to the second gas station (though admittedly the sting of the first complication lingered). My 50-year union with Petro-Canada is not immune to at least some emotional response in spite of the trifling nature of the faulty ingredients.