Critics slam government's 'unfair' new Road Accident Fund bill

John Tempus

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2017
Messages
2,593
The real problem is that the payouts aren't related to seriousness of the injuries. Some people got hundreds of thousands for a few scrapes. But going from one broken system to the next won't solve anything.


The issue as I understand it is that it's become a pyramid scheme. So they may not be in debt but if they stop operating today they wouldn't have enough to cover the pending cases.
Thats just it, there is no such thing as RAF pending cases.

If there is no funds in the RAF, nothing is paid out and pending cases is meaningless.

There has been cases in the past where the fund got depleted due to just a few cases draining it down to zero and "pending" cases received no settlements/payouts.

It just so happen that over the years with the fuel levies that just keeps going up the collected tax on fuel is much higher now and thus the RAF fund have received massive influx of funds and now the government sees that influx of funds as a nice treasure chest to loot.

I agree that payouts should be balanced according to each individual case but by no means is this change in the rules at all meant to protect the fund from looting by lawyers.
 

lumeer

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2018
Messages
552
Oh the irony! The ambulance chasing attorneys are accusing government of wanting to get its hands on the RAF billions.
 

The Trutherizer

Expert Member
Joined
May 20, 2010
Messages
2,573
Well the RAF was already f'd last time I heard. Right now it's probably all one big fight for the scraps, and even when it completely falls apart I'm sure the levy contribution will be continued. So yeah ultimately the government will just divert it all into their pockets. Big surprise! lol I try not to be too negative, but sometimes there's just no other answer.
 

supersunbird

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 1, 2005
Messages
48,646
It has always been my opinion that there must be a cap on this funds payouts. I recall a payout to a foreigner in excess of a Billion rand. Is that OK with us taxpayers?
No it isn't. And the R280 000 a year and the R53 000 a year caps are reasonable to you?
 

Quicks

Senior Member
Joined
May 29, 2017
Messages
546
They must just make everyone pay TAX on their salaries even if it only R50 for entry level earning R3500. They are the one's that voted for this crap.

But the problem is it will only be more money to loot, must bring back death sentence, and if you a caught steeling cut of a hand and stuff like that will make people think twice before they do stupid things...
 

krycor

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
15,103
Thats just it, there is no such thing as RAF pending cases.

If there is no funds in the RAF, nothing is paid out and pending cases is meaningless.

There has been cases in the past where the fund got depleted due to just a few cases draining it down to zero and "pending" cases received no settlements/payouts.

It just so happen that over the years with the fuel levies that just keeps going up the collected tax on fuel is much higher now and thus the RAF fund have received massive influx of funds and now the government sees that influx of funds as a nice treasure chest to loot.

I agree that payouts should be balanced according to each individual case but by no means is this change in the rules at all meant to protect the fund from looting by lawyers.
If I remember correctly there are weird cases where people try and claim vs potential earnings.. Ie my kid is a genius and would have studied uhm actuarial science so need to get paid out for that entire career.

Lawyers are incentivized via % of case winnings which is where the failure of them comes in ie legislatively they could have just capped it but lawyers would likely not stand for that.

This reminds me of the Discovery crap.. they incentivize the sales (now qualified financial planner) to sell u the best product albeit his salary heavily depends on selling you the most profitable. Yes this is gonna work for the customers benefit!!
 

krycor

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
15,103
Again.. I think the state limiting the max amount drastically vs what it is currently which end the stupidity slightly.

And this may be a good thing as it forces people to be more responsible ie you get into a dodgy taxi, over take on a blind incline.. well hope you have life insurance..

I hope that medical aids and life insurers have a you cause accident we consider it a suicide event
 

Swa

Honorary Master
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
21,506
It has always been my opinion that there must be a cap on this funds payouts. I recall a payout to a foreigner in excess of a Billion rand. Is that OK with us taxpayers?
The cap should be a person's injuries.
 

access

Executive Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2009
Messages
9,080
And this may be a good thing as it forces people to be more responsible ie you get into a dodgy taxi, over take on a blind incline.. well hope you have life insurance..
if its out of your control and the fault of the state?

when a cap is implemented for negligence at public healthcare facilities, those people should have known better not to go there.. right
 
Top