Motorcycle accident, no drivers license

[Thorium]

A friend of mine who drives a motorcycle was recently involved in a nasty collision with a taxi and he sustained critical injuries, broke several bones. The taxi was empty and the driver did not sustain any injuries, however there was extensive damage to the taxi, the bike was a write-off. Long story short, the accident was probably a 50/50 responsibility for both drivers (as per the medical team who extricated him from the wreckage, as well as dashcam footage).
He survived the accident and has made a remarkable recovery. He is now out of hospital but has huge medical bills, loss of income, pain and suffering and will without a doubt face huge medical bills for the rest of his life, especially when older (he is currently 28 years old). Although he has recovered, he is confined to a wheelchair and will have many months of physio and other treatments before he can move his hands and possibly even walk again.
Now the problem: He was not in possession of a valid drivers' licence at the time of the accident. I know that this was irresponsible of him. At the same time, he is a friend. Would this factor alone make him ineligible to claim from the Road Accident Fund (i.e fully negligent as per section 25 of the RAF Act)?

 

[B-1]

Do you mean he never had a licence or learners for a bike or he just didn't have it with him or it was expired?

 

[Gordon_R]

I cannot see any interpretation in which the driver is entirely responsible, though any claim might be reduced pro-rata if he did not have a license.

 

[Sinbad]

No license, so probably no insurance, no medical aid

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

Sorry, hard to have sympathy for people so self destructive

 

[Thorium]

Do you mean he never had a licence or learners for a bike or he just didn't have it with him or it was expired?

He had a learners' license, but that was several months ago, well expired. Basically an unlicensed driver.

 

[Thorium]

No license, so probably no insurance, no medical aid

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

Sorry, hard to have sympathy for people so self destructive

Yep, he is learning the hard way.

Edit: I hope that this serves as a lesson to those who drive without proper drivers' licenses that there are serious consequences, even if there is no fault.

 

[B-1]

He had a learners' license, but that was several months ago, well expired. Basically an unlicensed driver.

Within the end march 2020 to Dec 2020 extension? Then its valid till August I believe.

 

[maumau]

Who had the dashcam?

 

[Thorium]

I cannot see any interpretation in which the driver is entirely responsible, though any claim might be reduced pro-rata if he did not have a license.

That's what I am hoping for, but the Act isn't clear on this and I cannot find any history of similar cases. He is a nice guy though, apart from this silliness.

 

[Thorium]

Within the end march 2020 to Dec 2020 extension? Then its valid till August I believe.

Mmm, I don't think so, expired several months before that

 

[Thorium]

Who had the dashcam?

A kind old lady supplied the footage, wrong angle, but sufficient to ascribe a 50/50 blame.

 

[Heisenborg]

Gonna assume lane splitting and a taxi driving like a taxi

Did the taxi driver have a license? Did the taxi itself have a license? All valid questions but the only thing that matters is your friend didnt have a license so good luck with that. As jy dom is moet jy voel

 

[Former member 61586]

That's what I am hoping for, but the Act isn't clear on this and I cannot find any history of similar cases. He is a nice guy though, apart from this silliness.

Said every serial killer's friend/family member. No offense, but you are trying to excuse the inexcusable by looking for a loophole to your friend's fckup.

 

[Wut]

Now the problem: He was not in possession of a valid drivers' licence at the time of the accident. I know that this was irresponsible of him. At the same time, he is a friend. Would this factor alone make him ineligible to claim from the Road Accident Fund (i.e fully negligent as per section 25 of the RAF Act)?

My brother took my motorbike when he was in primary school (definitely unlicensed) and got hit by a car. He was in hospital for months and now still walks with a limp. The Road Accident Fund did payout to my parents for the accident.

 

[skeptic_SA]

If he did not have a licence - he is 100% responsible for the accident. He had no legal right to be on the road. Sucks for him, but play stupid games...

 

[Tman*]

No license, so probably no insurance, no medical aid

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

Sorry, hard to have sympathy for people so self destructive

Hi, welcome to Jackass and this is riding a bike in SA with no licence, no insurance and no medical aid

 

[KleinBoontjie]

Long story short, the accident was probably a 50/50 responsibility for both drivers

A kind old lady supplied the footage, wrong angle, but sufficient to ascribe a 50/50 blame.

No drivers license = he is 100% to blame. No way around this and looking for outs. Can also forget about RAF.

 

[rietrot]

My brother took my motorbike when he was in primary school (definitely unlicensed) and got hit by a car. He was in hospital for months and now still walks with a limp. The Road Accident Fund did payout to my parents for the accident.

Being a minor would make a difference legally.

 

[Wut]

If he did not have a licence - he is 100% responsible for the accident. He had no legal right to be on the road. Sucks for him, but play stupid games...

No drivers license = he is 100% to blame. No way around this and looking for outs. Can also forget about RAF.

Actually false. Not having a license means that insurance won't pay out, but liability still remains the same and the vehicle in the wrong is still responsible. In a situation like the OP mentioned where fault is 50/50 it's going to be extremely difficult and will probably result in a civil case to recover costs to repair the taxi while the OPs friend will have little option to recover costs for his bike. Driving without a license doesn't mean that all the blame falls on the unlicensed driver unless he was driving recklessly which still would need to be proven.

 

[maumau]

If he did not have a licence - he is 100% responsible for the accident. He had no legal right to be on the road. Sucks for him, but play stupid games...

Taxi probably wasn't licensed either.