RAF bosses get another whipping in court, ordered to explain medical bill rejections

In another adverse judgment against the beleaguered Road Accident Fund (RAF), the Mpumalanga High Court has ordered the entity’s CEO Collins Letsoalo and the board to explain why they rejected medical expenses claims.

The latest saga emanated from RAF’s internal policy implemented last year, directing that all claims lodged towards reimbursing medical aid schemes for covering accident victims’ medical costs be rejected.

According to the transport entity, if the medical aid scheme already paid medical costs for an accident victim, RAF had no duty to reimburse the scheme.

Although the policy was successfully challenged in court and was declared invalid, RAF stuck to its guns.

Mpumalanga High Court Judge President Francis Legodi’s latest order follows a January ruling in which he ordered Letsoalo and the board to pay costs from their own pockets for wasting the court’s time.

The entity has since lodged an appeal against last month’s ruling.

RAF ignored the court’s letter seeking information

Advocate Ferdinand Kehrhahn, who represented a vehicle accident victim trying to get RAF to pay his past medical expenses, said the matter was first heard before Legodi in December last year.

“Nothing happened on that day because RAF’s attorney said he didn’t have any instructions and couldn’t proceed. The case was postponed to this month.

“The court also sent a letter to the fund asking what they plan to do with RAF accident victims in the meantime. The fund never replied, making the judge very angry,” he said.

ALSO READ: RAF appeals personal costs order, blames previous directors, graft

Medical scheme Discovery last year took RAF and the Department of Transport to court over its policy. In a subsequent judgment, North Gauteng High Court Judge Mandla Mbongwe declared it unlawful and further interdicted RAF from continuing with the directive.

RAF brought an application for leave to appeal before Judge Mbongwe, which failed.

They have indicated they will petition the Supreme Court of Appeal, said Kehrhahn.

What happens to victims in need of medical care?

In the court order, Legodi asked what RAF plans to do with accident victims while it appeals the ruling.

“Does the Fund have any workable suggestions to accommodate the victims of vehicle accidents and save lives whilst waiting for the finalisation of the appeal process?

“What implications will the long waiting for the finalisation of the appeal likely have on road accident victims, particularly where there is an urgent need for medical care and possible refusal by medical aid companies to foot the medical expense bills incurred by such victims?” asked Legodi.

RAF bosses were also ordered to file their papers by 24 February.

Legodi further invited all medical schemes and other interested parties affected by RAF’s policy to join and file their own affidavits in the matter.

The case was postponed to 30 March.

RAF spokesperson Linda Rulashe said management was studying the court order and will comment at a later stage.

NOW READ: RAF CEO, board ordered to pay costs from own pockets, for wasting court’s time