![]() |
||
A period of approximately 8 weeks has since elapsed and still no offer of settlement has been submitted. We are told by the attorney that her hands tied and she cannot receive instructions The Road Accident Fund had recently held a meeting with attorneys who act for road accident victims, and had stated that if they are matters which require urgent settlement their litigation manager could be approached to expedite finalisation of the matter. In response to this invitation we contacted the manager concerned. We explained the situation to him, and he agreed that it would be senseless to waste further legal costs on this matter and that a settlement should be forthcoming immediately. He undertook to attend to this aspect of the matter as one of urgency. We are in possession of several e-mail letters which have exchanged hands between us and this manager over the past 10 days. The manager has himself "passed the buck" onto his claims manager, who in turn has passed the matter over to someone else and still no offer has materialised. We guess that no offer will materialise until the matter comes before court again which due to the present backlog of cases will not occur until the end of 2010. Perhaps an offer of settlement will materialise at the 23rd hour after both sides have incurred further unnecessary legal costs and after Mr P who needs his compensation urgently would have had to wait an additional 20 months to receive his entitlement. We decline to comment further at the event quote the famous Latin maxim of res ipsa loquitur which means "The facts speak for themselves." ……………………………………………………………………………… The second incident occurred just this past week. The required Government Department failed to deliver to us as requested a copy of a taxi permit we needed in a matter proceeding to Court in time for the hearing. In fact, on the day in question we were expecting the permit to arrive but in true bureaucratic style, this did not occur. As a consequence we requested a postponement to which the attorney acting for the Fund had no difficulty consenting. How ever a bureaucratic official who is employed at the fund and who spends much of her time parading the corridors of the Magistrates Court giving her attorney's final instructions on matters they have, when such attorneys encountered difficulty in obtaining these instructions from the claims handler with whom they had been liaising from inception interposed and gave the Attorney instructions. In this particular case she instructed her attorney to decline the request because she asserted that we had more than enough time to ensure that "our ducks are in a row". Without any difficulty the postponement was granted. However on the same day we were informed by one of the other attorneys acting the Fund of the frustration they encounter on a daily basis because of the fact that a very large percentage of their current files have been taken off the desks of the claims handlers and had been archived, resulting in them being compelled to request Plaintiffs Attorneys such as us to furnish them with copies of documentation supporting the claims lodged. Perhaps this official who arrogantly, condescendingly, acrimoniously, and needlessly accused us of not having our house in order should be made aware of the comings and goings in her office, before throwing stones out of the Glass house she occupies. DATED AT JOHANNESBURG ON THIS 15TH DECEMBER 2008. BOVE ATTORNEYS
|
||