A CAR crash victim has accused her lawyers of short-changing her on her damages claim but was unsuccessful with the high court action she brought against them.
Her former legal representatives indicated that she accepted a settlement offer from the Road Accident Fund worth far less than what she was entitled to.
When her money ran out, she challenged her lawyers legally for the balance of what she believed was owed to her, after the lump sum payout she pocketed was all spent in less than a year.
But the law firm that she is suing told the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria that Agnes Mokalapa would not listen to their legal advice at the time that she should not accept the settlement.
Her lawyer said the woman was so excited at the prospect of receiving money from the RAF that she would not listen to his advice.
Judge Annali Basson was told the woman told her lawyer that she wanted to use the money before she died. Her exact words, according to the lawyer, were “I did not want to die before spending my money”.
But Mokalapa’s version now, more than a decade after she received her money, is that the lawyer and his firm breached their duty towards her by accepting the inferior offer on her behalf.
While her initial claim was slightly more than R500,000 she accepted an offer of R218,775,90 made by the fund.
Her lawyer said he told her the offer was inadequate in relation to the injuries sustained by her during the accident, but she wanted the money immediately, instead of prolonging the proceedings by going for further medical assessments.
At that stage the fund made its offer based on only one medico-legal report which had been obtained from an orthopedic surgeon.
Her lawyers at the time said they had a list in place of the experts who would have been able to assess her and submit reports to the court, with the aim of getting a higher amount from the fund. But she insisted she wanted her money now, although she knew it was far less than what she was entitled to.
Mokalapa denied this and said she was simply told and encouraged by her lawyers to sign the settlement.
She testified that she was unaware that the funds she received were intended to provide lifelong support for her. According to her, the State had to look after her. She testified that she was surprised when she ran out of money.
Asked what she did with her money, she said she bought pills and plasters and went to doctors. But her version was frowned on by the court, as the RAF had issued her with a medical certificate whereby she received free medical care.
Her lawyer testified that Mokalapa was very excited when she heard how much money she would receive and that she was eager to accept the settlement offer. He said that she told him that she “did not want to die before eating my money”. She also told him that she did not want to undergo further assessment because it would take too long.
When asked if she knew that the money that was paid to her was not enough, she replied, “No. I did not know anything”. But the court concluded that she was not entirely truthful.
Her claim was subsequently turned down.
DAILY NEWS