A former SA National Defence Force employee – who lost her unborn child and was paralysed after an accident in a military vehicle crash in 2009 – has sworn to continue what has so far been a fruitless 15-year campaign for compensation.
Despite numerous attempts, Fikile Moeketsi (49) who was based at the Bluff military base in Durban, says her efforts to claim compensation from the SANDF have been frustrating and challenging, reports TimesLIVE.
Recruited in 2008 as a paramedic, she was injured in November 2009 when the 23-seater military vehicle in which she was travelling between Pretoria and Durban collided with a truck. Eight of her colleagues were killed. They were all returning from a paramedics’ training course.
Moeketsi was in hospital for nearly a year with head injuries, fractures to her spinal bones and injuries to her spinal cord, a rib fracture and hip dislocation, leaving her permanently paraplegic.
She had also been seven months pregnant at the time and lost the baby. She is now unable to have children.
In 2012, she was telephonically dismissed by the SANDF and her salary frozen. She wasn’t paid out any compensation.
“Superiors told me I needed to apply to the Road Accident Fund (RAF) for compensation for my injuries. However, my application was refused because RAF doesn’t approve claims from SANDF members.
“On the other hand, SANDF also doesn’t want to compensate me, saying I was still a ‘reserve’, yet I was in their vehicle at the time. No one wants to listen to my case,” she said.
In its letter to Moeketsi dated October 2013, the RAF cited liability exclusions in a section of the RAF Act that relates to passengers travelling unofficially in a military vehicle.
“This section provides that if a person makes use of any vehicle that is the property of the Department of Defence and as such is injured, no claim may be instituted against the defence force. The RAF is, therefore, not liable for the damages … and will be unable to compensate you for the reasons mentioned above,” it reads.
Moeketsi then lodged a complaint concerning her lump-sum compensation to the military ombud, who referred her to the chief human resources office for further investigation.
She said the ombud told her to follow up with the admiral’s office, but they referred her back to the military ombud for feedback.
She has also challenged the army for dismissing her and in 2013, was reinstated as an admin worker at the Bluff base. She was also given transport to take her to and from work daily (from Pinetown, west of Durban), which she said would not arrive on some days due to “unavailability of a driver”.
From 2013 to 2022 she was subjected to conditions not conducive for a disabled person. “I did not have private space to assist or clean myself whenever I had emergencies.”
She said senior officers had told her that when she wanted to change her diapers, she should place cardboard on the floor of the toilet “and clean myself lying on the floor”.
“… I was told to keep my used diapers in my bag, and take them home with me. I was charged R800 to get a private space in which to change, which was to be deducted from my monthly salary.”
Last year she was dismissed for missing work for more than 30 days.
Moeketsi said this was because her transport didn’t arrive and she couldn’t afford an alternative.
“I do not want to work for the SANDF any more… all I want now is compensation for the accident,” she told the Sunday Times.
She had approached an attorney but due to a lack of response from SANDF officials, the attorney pulled out.
Defence Department spokesperson Siphiwe Dlamini said the matter “deserved a thorough investigation” with the human resources division to answer the allegations.
“I will be consulting with relevant senior officials … I would like to request that you give us a chance to consult internally (so we can) resolve it,” said Dlamini.
Spokesperson for the Defence Minister, Amos Phago, said the matter was “indeed serious” but did not respond further.
RAF spokesperson McIntosh Polela told TimesLIVE there was a limitation clause affecting soldiers.
“Members of the SANDF are affected by section 18 of the RAF Act. The principle is that there is a duty on the claimant to first claim from the SANDF in terms of the Defence Act.
“Based on the payout, the claimant can then potentially recover from the RAF any difference between the SANDF payout and what RAF would have paid if this limitation did not exist.”
TimesLIVE PressReader article – Axed soldier’s 15-year fight for compensation (Open access)
See more from MedicalBrief archives:
RAF payment problems hit medical experts, endangering practices
Accident victim challenges RAF decision on medical aid payments
RAF revolt: Experts withdraw medico-legal opinions over non-payment