A JOHANNESBURG law firm and its director are personally facing a R1-million in damages claim by a road accident victim, earmarked for the Road Accident Fund. The attorney and the firm never did their work by lodging the claim and will now have to dig into their own pockets.
The amount of damages owed to him has not yet been adjudicated upon, but the Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg, ordered that the firm had to pay James Tsotetsi the amount of damages he can prove that he had suffered.
He claimed that he had suffered R1-m in damages.
Tsotetsi was involved in a hit-and-run accident in August 2019 when a vehicle being driven by an unknown driver collided with him from behind while he was a pedestrian in Heidelberg.
The collision was caused solely by the negligence of the unknown driver and which caused severe bodily injuries to the plaintiff, including a purported head injury.
Tsotetsi told the court that in November 2019 - about two months after the accident, he was approached by the attorney, on behalf of the law firm, to handle the claim from the RAF.
He was promised that the attorney would investigate the circumstances relating to the accident and subsequently lodge the claim.
Tsotetsi said that the attorney breached this agreement, as it had emerged that he had failed to lodge the claim and it has now lapsed.
He cited the attorney and law firm as the defendants in his claim against them to hold them accountable for the payment. The attorney did note his intention to oppose, but on the day of the hearing, did not pitch-up at court. Their opposition consisted of a blank denial of all the facts.
Acting Judge A Berkowitz noted that all attempts to get hold of the attorney also failed. The hearing proceeded without the law firm being present.
Tsotetsi meanwhile testified that after he was discharged from hospital following the accident, he was approached by an attorney who explained to him that his firm could assist him in lodging a claim for damages against the RAF.
Tsotetsi was adamant that it was not he who had approached the attorney, but the latter who sought him out.
He then filled in and signed the necessary documents and was told by the attorney that he would inform him on the progress of his claim.
Judge Berkowitz said it is not sure what documents Tsotetsi had filled in, as the attorney never left a copy behind, but it is assumed that it is for power of attorney and a contingency fee agreement.
After the attorney left Tsotetsi’s home, he did not hear from him or anyone on his behalf for more than a year and a half. He then phoned the law firm to hear how his claim was progressing.
The attorney told him that his claim against the RAF was not progressing because of the Covid pandemic. This was the last time Tsotetsi heard from him.
He then approached another attorney to assist him, who checked-up with the RAF regarding the claim. He was told that no claim was ever lodged on behalf of Tsotetsi.
In terms of the Road Accident Fund Act, a claim lapsed after two years, thus leaving Tsotetsi in the cold.
The argument advanced in support of the special plea was that since the provisions of the Road Accident Fund Act did not permit the granting of an extension of the prescriptive period for lodging of claims, had become prescribed and unenforceable.
“ In the absence of the defendants, who I am satisfied were aware of the date which had been allocated for the hearing of trial, I have been furnished with only one version upon which I am reliant to make a finding,” the judge said.
The court found that, upon a balance of probabilities, an agreement of the type contemplated was concluded between the plaintiff and the attorney and that the latter did not do his job and must now face the consequences.
Pretoria News
zelda.venter@inl.co.za