Discovery in insurance company is a ****

Discovery Insurance company defending a reckless driver. Below is the details 1). My name is Mahlale Masemola Claim number#*** I am very, very disappointed with Discovery Insurance On the 06/05/2023, and feel like I am a victim of a reckless driver. I was driving at Moloto road R573 towards Pretoria, A Polo driver, knocked my car driving at a higher speed, it is clear even in the statement that a Polo driver even wrote in the AR that he was wrong and driving at a higher speed, trying to overtake me he lost control of the car, and knocked my car whilst i was driving at a prescribed speed. I have all the evidence the driver confirming that he was wrong, today discovery insurance company wanna treat me like I am that one who is wrong whilst i am a victim, my car is badly damaged, Discovery Insurance is fixing their client's car, at the value of what the penalbeater has qouted them but they offering me who was not wrong half what the Panelbeaters quoted. I have evidence that shows that indeed they wanna rip me off, that they're paying full amount for their clients who was wrong but however, wanna rip me off: TO MY GREATEST SURPRISE THIS IS WHAT DISCOVERY INSURANCE COMPANY HAD TO SAY

We refer to the above matter and more specifically a motor vehicle collision involving our insured dated 06 May 2023.

We have validated the claim accordingly,

Firstly please take some time to understand the legalities regarding a third party claim, which is explained below:

Third party claims are legal in nature. Hence any offer, if warranted, will be made in terms of the principles as governed by the law of delict, which regulate motor vehicle collisions. Both driver’s contributory negligence will be taken into account and app**** to the offer that follows. Negligence on a driver is measured against a driver’s failure/neglect to act as a “reasonable person”. What this means is that where a driver failed to keep a proper look-out and/or maintain a reasonable speed, he/she will be deemed to have acted negligently. Where a driver could have but failed to take evasive action to avoid a collision, he/she would be deemed to have acted negligently and thus contributed to his/her own loss.

Preventability and foreseeability are not measured at the time of impact but what was done prior. Had you been keeping a proper look-out, you would not have failed to see our clients vehicle, had a reasonable speed been kept, evasive action could have been taken to avoid or possibly minimize the damages. In accordance thereof, we hold you contributory negligent and consequently, based on the legal principles of the law of apportionments, we may apply a 70/30% apportionment to this claim. What this means is that we should pay 70% of your damages after deducting 30% of our client’s damages, for which we hold you accountable and for reasons explained in detail above.

Settlement Calculation:

TP Quantum - R ‪31 652.11‬ x 70% = R 22,156.47

OD Quantum – R 26,311.47 x 30% = R 7,893.44

TP R 22,156.47 - OD R7,893.44 = R 14,263.03

As this is a legal matter, should you dispute our decision on this claim, you have the prerogative to obtain the assistance of legal counsel to have the claim adjudicated in Court and for the Court to make a decision on the matter.

We now await the signed settlement along with proof of banking in order to successfully process your payment.

Trust the above is in order.

“ The above is written on a without prejudice basis”

Kind Regards;

Nonhlanhla Sinthumule

Liabilities Advisor Legal Department

Email: ***

Office: +27 11 ‪***‬ | Cell: + ‪***8‬

1 Discovery Place, Sandton, 2196

A picture containing icon

Description automatically generatedA picture containing text, wheel, gear

Description automatically generated Icon

Description automatically generated Icon

Description automatically generated

Discovery Limited is the licensed controlling company of the designated Discovery Insurance Group. Registration number: ***. Companies in the Group are licensed insurers and authorised financial services providers. The information in this email is confidential and may have legal privileges. We intend it only for the use of the individual or entity we've addressed the communication to. If you have received this email by mistake please delete it and tell the sender. We forbid any unauthorised use, change, disclosure or sending of the contents of this email (including its attachments), whether in part or as a whole, unless consented to in writing by the sender, as it may be ********. We cannot guarantee this email has no malicious coding. We reserve the right to check, intercept and block emails or take any other action according to our email etiquette. Discovery will not be liable for any delivery delay, loss, harm, disruption or data *******ion that may arise from this email. A full list of company directors is available on our website at: https://www.discovery.co.za/corporate/investor-relations - or to get this list by email, please email ***

Below is my respond: M.M MASEMOLA P.O BOX 75086 KWA-MHLANGA 1022 07 June 2023 Nonhlanhla Sinthumule 1 DISCOVERY PLACE SANDTON 2196 The declination the offer by discovery This email bears reference to the email, dated: 07/06/2023: Time: 11:46, Subject: Claim number #***. Firstly, I would like to acknowledge the receipt of the email, and confirm that indeed I read the content of the email with clear understanding, as such I would like to state that I reject the offer as I find it unfair, unjust and improper to arrive to such a gruesome inference, this is based on facts which are tabled below. 2.1 Both driver’s contributory negligence According the Accident Report (AR) Case No: 18/05/2023 your client has declared in his statement that he was driving at a high speed at the time of the accident, hence he failed to control the vehicle he was driving. Moreover in a wrong lane, which is tantamount to gruesome negligence and reckless driving. As such your client must be held accountable for failing to comply with the National Traffic Act 93 of 1996: Speed limit. “Third party claims are legal in nature. Hence any offer, if warranted, will be made in terms of the principles as governed by the law of delict, which regulate motor vehicle collisions. Both driver’s contributory negligence will be taken into account and app**** to the offer that follows. Negligence on a driver is measured against a driver’s failure/neglect to act as a “reasonable person”. What this means is that where a driver failed to keep a proper look-out and/or maintain a reasonable speed, he/she will be deemed to have acted negligently. Where a driver could have but failed to take evasive action to avoid a collision, he/she would be deemed to have acted negligently and thus contributed to his/her own loss.”

In considering reckless and risky driving of your client, a sober decision from discovery will have considered to all the circumstances of the case, including the nature, the condition and use of the public road upon which the contravention is alleged to have been committed, the amount of traffic which at the relevant time upon that road and the speed at and manner in which the vehicle was driven. Thus declare that your client was reckless and negligent. 2.2 Preventability and foreseeability: The below inference is spurious, in such that, even if I would have attempted to avoid the accident your client was driving recklessly/negligently which is ******** to drive a vehicle on a public road recklessly or negligently. As such, any person who drives a vehicle in wilful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property shall be deemed to have driven that vehicle recklessly/ negligently. The below statement is unfortunate and inconsiderate as you client should have considered the safety of other road users in my view he should have been charged with serious contravention of National Traffic Act 93 of 1996. In accordance thereof, the contributory negligent is consequently baseless and has no legal bearing and principles of the law of apportionments as per your client statement kindly refer to the documents attached page 2 and the Accident sketch:

“Preventability and foreseeability are not measured at the time of impact but what was done prior. Had you been keeping a proper look-out, you would not have failed to see our client’s vehicle, had a reasonable speed been kept, evasive action could have been taken to avoid or possibly minimize the damages. In accordance thereof, we hold you contributory negligent and consequently, based on the legal principles of the law of apportionments, we may apply a 70/30% apportionment to this claim.” Your client must be held accountable for cost of repair and access, under no circumstances can any sober court would be hold me accountable.

The general speed limit in respect of every public road situated within an urban area, every public road or section thereof situated outside an urban area and every freeway is prescribed accordingly. Thus, your client disregarded such prescript. It should be noted that an appropriate road traffic signs were displayed at what speed a driver must drive in a public road indicating a speed limit other than the general speed limit which applies in respect of that road. The National Traffic Act 93 of 1996 state that No person shall drive a vehicle on a public road at a speed in excess of the general speed limit or an alternative speed limit as indicated, your ignored such I was driving at prescribed speed, in the correct lane, it your who was driving recklessly who colluded with my vehicle even if I would have tried to avoid your client vehicles it was not feasible otherwise I would have endangered my life. I HAVE A STRONG THAT YOUR INFERENCE ESPECIALLY YOUR CHOICE OF WORDS DECLARES ME AS A RECKLESS, INCONSIDERED AND NEGLEGENT DRIVER, WHILST I AM A VICTIM. In light of these facts, I request that you reconsider your decision. I greatly appreciate you taking the time to read this and the attached document, I am happy to meet with you any time to discuss this further.

Respectfully,

MR M.M MASEMOLA This was their final respond : Good day

Contents in your email noted.

Kindly be advised that if the offer is not favorable to yourself , kindly appoint a legal counsel.

Any legal action against our client will be defended vigorously.

Regards;

NS I have a strong feeling that this is an unfair offer,