Drivers in South Africa have been warned that exceeding the speed limit can have severe consequences when attempting to claim insurance following an accident.
This is according to Edite Teixeira-McKinon, Lead Ombud of the Non-life Insurance Division at the National Financial Ombud Scheme South Africa (NFO).
Teixeira-McKinon said motorists underestimate how insurers factor speed into car accident claims in South Africa.
Notably, insurers typically follow the “20km/h” rule, which states that exceeding the speed limit by 20km/h may result in the denial of insurance claims for car accidents.
She explained that South Africa has one of the highest road fatality rates in the world, and that every crash ultimately leads to higher repair costs and insurance premiums for all policy holders.
If speeding is determined to be the cause of an accident, she noted that insurers will often invoke the ‘due care’ exclusion to reject the claim outright.
This clause requires that policyholders take reasonable steps to prevent losses and damage. However, this clause is not always correctly applied.
Teixeira-McKinon highlighted a recent case handled by her office, where a driver claimed he lost control of his vehicle while swerving to avoid a pothole.
The incident occurred on a road bend, and the car mounted the pavement. The insurer rejected the claim, citing a standard policy clause requiring motorists to take reasonable steps to avoid accidents.
An accident reconstruction expert found no evidence of a pothole, and determined that the vehicle had accelerated from 61km/h to 71km/h around the bend, exceeding the critical speed for the curve.
Based on these findings, the insurer argued that the driver had demonstrated reckless behaviour.
Teixeira-McKinon’s office disagreed, arguing that while the individual had been speeding, this did not automatically amount to reckless driving.
“To prove recklessness, the insurer had to show the driver deliberately or intentionally caused the accident,” she said.
In practice, this would mean the driver foresaw the possibility of losing control around the bend while speeding and recklessly proceeded.
Insurers have “speed limits”
Teixeira-McKinon said that, in this case, the driver’s conduct amounted to negligence rather than recklessness.
“Speed alone does not equate to recklessness,” she said.
She noted that exceeding the speed limit by 11km/h was insufficient to justify a full rejection under the ‘due care’ clause.
The insurer was advised to settle the claim, which it did.
However, she warned that not all cases will have the same outcome, as most insurers have a stricter provision – the 20km/h rule.
This excludes cover entirely if a motorist exceeds the speed limit by more than 20km/h.
Unlike the general ‘due care’ clause, insurers must clearly disclose this exclusion to clients before they take out a policy.
She highlighted another case where a driver was travelling at 114km/h in a 60km/h zone, and had his claim rejected under this rule.
The insurer relied on vehicle tracking data to prove the vehicle’s speed at the time of the incident.
The driver disputed the accuracy of the tracking data and claimed he swerved to avoid an object in the road. However, he could not provide evidence to support his version of events or recall exactly what happened.
“The insurer needed to only demonstrate what the speed limit on the road was and that the complainant exceeded the speed limit by more than 20km/h,” Teixeira-McKinon said.
Given the available evidence, her office found that the insurer had met this requirement.
“Considering the speed limit on the road and the speed at which the complainant had travelled before the accident, the Non-life Insurance Division was satisfied that the insurer had discharged its onus in respect of the rejection reason,” she said.
Loading ...
