Written By Jeanette Chabalala | Published on 4 May 2026 | Sowetan
The cash-strapped Road Accident Fund (RAF) is facing a daunting task of re-rolling hundreds of claims it rejected from four years ago based on information claimants provided on the RAF1 form, which has now been declared unlawful.
This will be in addition to the 430,000 claims backlog the RAF is grappling with.
Claimants who previously used the RAF1 form and were rejected for noncompliance had been given until September 30 to resubmit their claims. The resubmissions stand to give the RAF a financial headache that could run into billions, as it is estimated that 600,000 claims were rejected as a result of the RAF claim form, which it unlawfully introduced in 2022.
The Supreme Court of Appeal last week declared the form unlawful and ordered the RAF to revert to the older form it introduced in 2008.
The ruling means previously rejected claims that met the minimum statutory requirements under the RAF Act will also be accepted for re-onboarding. Prescription is waived for all claims previously rejected due to the relevant board notice.
Chairperson of parliament’s standing committee on public accounts, Songezo Zibi, said the ruling means claims that are in the system would be reopened, and those that were turned away must now be assessed.
Zibi said the RAF already had a backlog of more than 430,000 claims, adding that the claims, whatever the number, would join the queue.
He said the RAF might not have enough cash to process the resuscitated claims.
“The Road Accident Fund would be able to say how long it would take [to process the rejected claims]. It is unlikely to be enough money to process all of those claims because the RAF already does not get enough. It is going to need preparation, and the RAF may need additional funds that may need to run into tens of billions of rand.”
Adding to this financial pressure are the losses that the RAF will experience in the near future after the recently reduced fuel levy.
ActionSA MP Alan Beesley has now requested an urgent meeting with finance minister Enoch Godongwana before parliament to explain where the estimated R180bn for the estimated 600,000 claims would come from.
“Beyond the fiscal implications, the operational consequences for the RAF are equally severe. The fund lacks the administrative capacity to register, process, and investigate the anticipated influx of claims. This will likely overwhelm an institution already struggling to manage its existing caseload,” said Beesley.
He said there could be delays in processing claims, which could lead to increased litigation against the RAF.
“With limited resources to defend these cases, the RAF faces a growing risk of default judgments, which in turn will drive up the cost per claim well beyond reasonable levels,” said Beesley.
A partner at DSC Attorneys, Kirstie Haslam, said there is a potential for chaos, and previous claimants might miss this opportunity.
“I am concerned about those claimants who submitted claims directly, and whose claims have been rejected for noncompliance and then given up on those claims and may not be aware of this ruling now.”
She said she was concerned that the public may not be aware of the SCA ruling and may miss the opportunity to resubmit.
“Another concern is that where claims were submitted, incorrectly rejected, and then court action ensued, and were now far down the litigation process, the court order implies that claims must now be resubmitted where they have previously been rejected.
“Does that mean that after years of litigation and waiting in line to be heard, does that mean that those summons have to be withdrawn and that you have to start the process all over again? We are carefully considering our position and preparing our clients as far as that is concerned.”
CEO of Gert Nel Incorporated, Gert Nel, said he had claims in excess of about R100m that he has court orders that he had secured in terms of default judgments.
He said the act does not make provision for him as a legal practitioner or a victim to relodge a claim that had a court order on it. He said the fund should make a provision for that.
“Unfortunately, the SCA did not direct how the fund should deal with these matters; they only said these matters could be relodged.”
Mandatory documentation for claim submission
- Completed RAF 1 form
- Certified copies of identified documents (claimant/injury party/deceased)
- Affidavit or statement
- Officer’s accident report or case docket
- Unabridged birth certificate (for minor claimants)