A Bucket, a Brawl, and a BMW: Why a Limpopo Man Lost His RAF Claim

It was a New Year’s Day incident that started with a simple request for a bucket and ended with a car being used as a weapon. Now, years later, a Limpopo man’s attempt to claim compensation from the Road Accident Fund (RAF) has been flatly rejected by the High Court in Pretoria, which ruled he was the victim of an intentional assault, not a traffic accident.

The case of Oscar Mashengani unravels like a late-night tavern tale. In the early hours of January 1, 2019, the festivities at Fish Point Tavern in Vleifontein were winding down. The owner switched off the music and asked Mashengani and his friends to leave. Mashengani’s only request was to borrow a bucket to carry his leftover liquor.

This mundane request ignited a argument with another patron, Tendani Edwin Ramunenyiwa. The disagreement escalated into a physical fight. After the men were separated, the situation took a dangerous turn. Ramunenyiwa got into his car and drove it directly towards Mashengani and his friends, hitting Mashengani. Bystanders had to prevent him from attempting to run him over a second time.

The Contradiction That Sank the Claim

Mashengani was taken to a clinic and an attempted murder case was openeda crucial detail that would later define the legal outcome. When he submitted his claim to the RAF, however, he presented a very different story. He described himself as an innocent pedestrian, the victim of a simple “hit and run” accident.

But in court, his own testimony, along with sworn statements from his friends that he did not call as witnesses, told a different story. Judge Graham Moshoana noted the glaring inconsistencies. Mashengani’s RAF affidavit omitted the key fact that he had just been in a physical fight with the driver.

“The court is not satisfied with the credibility of the plaintiff’s evidence,” Judge Moshoana stated. He also found it hard to believe Mashengani’s claim that he was sober, despite him testifying he had been drinking from noon until 5:30 AM.

The Legal Bottom Line: Intent Matters

The judge’s ruling hinged on a critical legal distinction. The RAF is designed to provide compensation for victims of negligent driving, not intentional criminal acts. The fact that an attempted murder case was pursued by the police was, in the judge’s words, “an inadvertent revelation that the alleged insured driver intended to hit the plaintiff with a motor-vehicle.”

Because Ramunenyiwa intentionally used his car as a weapon to assault Mashengani, the incident fell outside the scope of what the RAF covers. Mashengani’s failure to prove negligenceand his own lack of credibility in describing the eventled the court to dismiss his claim.

The case serves as a stark reminder that the truth of the event matters. What began as a squabble over a bucket ended not only with serious injuries but with a legal lesson in the fine line between a traffic accident and a premeditated attack.

{Source: IOL}

Follow Joburg ETC on Facebook, Twitter , TikTok and Instagram

For more News in Johannesburg, visit joburgetc.com