Is the RAF still worth it? Put safety net to good use

 Is the RAF (Road Accident Fund) still worth it? As lovely as it is to have the price of fuel dropping month on month, there’s still over R2 per litre in there going to the fund.

While that money may be beneficial to some kinds of lawyers, what’s the actual value to the victims? The whole point of the RAF is to make victims of motor vehicle accidents more secure in claiming some compensation; i.e. if they get run over by somebody who hardly has a rand to their name, suing will hardly be of any help so the RAF would step in to avoid the litigation and guarantee some compensation.

The RAF is clogging up our courts with litigation going into 2027 and its empty coffers are guarantees that not even SAA would touch. In short, every 40l top-up comes with the R100 cost for something we’re not getting. And it’s not like there isn’t quality leadership at the helm.

A look at the bios of the board members include – “registered auditor with over 18 years of experience in accounting and auditing”, “seasoned actuary with over 15 years of experience in the financial services industry”, “financial services professional with over 18 years’ experience in the field of investment and asset management” and “professional and seasoned executive with a profound business acumen with over 31 years invaluable experience in the private and public sectors”.

ALSO READ: Chaos at Bethlehem Airshow after 19 cars damaged by fire [VIDEO]

With leadership like that, what more could be wanting? The entity gets free money, has an apparently very capable board, but still sits broke and forced to litigate. Forgive me, but that does not scream “rehabilitating and compensating persons injured as a result of motor vehicles in a timely and caring manner” so its arguable that even in the best of circumstances, the RAF is unable to fulfil its mandate and is just costing motorists money for little return.

The social safety net is a vital role it should be playing. Just ask any stunt actor how valuable a safety net full of holes is and whether they’d jump into one. No matter how vital the social safety net is, it’s not worth funding if it doesn’t do its job. Perhaps the RAF is making some payouts after some difficulty. Does that warrant the cost, fight and agony in getting it… or the making of some RAF lawyers wealthier than the claimants themselves?

I’m going to go with no. I’m going to go with I want more bang for my buck or I don’t want my bucks to bang at all. As well-intentioned as the RAF is, good intentions alone are hardly worth investing in. especially when they cost the public more than they get out of it. So the difficult question must be asked, why are we still funding the RAF?

 In Latin we ask, cui bono? Who benefits? If not the bulk of people the safety net is for and certainly not the people paying the extra two bucks a litre and not the people who have legitimate claims until five years down the line after some attorneys have scalped a cut, who?

Is all this worth it for the proportion of people who do get paid out timeously? Would it not be better or more efficient to just scrap the system and let people litigate it out or fund a team of lawyers to litigate on behalf of people in accidents?

Perhaps it is snobbish to say the RAF isn’t worth it even if some do benefit from it. This isn’t a disregard of those beneficiaries. Rather it’s questioning whether there should be more of them and whether they should get more and get it quicker. If the RAF wants to survive, it should be taking the free money it’s getting so much more seriously.

ALSO READ: Medical experts seek transport minister’s intervention in RAF payment crisis