michael's website
Email Michael

January 2024
February 2022
September 2020
October 2017
November 2016
November 2015
April 2014
February 2014
August 2013
October 2012
August 2012
February 2012
October 2011
August 2011
July 2011
February 2011
January 2011
October 2010

<< February 2010  | March 2010 |  April 2010 >>
Two sides to a story

There are always two sides to a story and I’ve found, over the years, that the clients that complain the most normally have the most to hide.  I’ve had two particularly interesting stories in the last two weeks, one being a client who complained that his case is taking far too long to handle and has been going on for years and threatened to contact the media if I did not give him a good enough explanation timeously.  A quick dig into the file revealed that the matter had been postponed on the previous occasion because none of our medical experts were prepared to consult with the client about his possible future loss of income claim, while he continued serving out his jail sentence for fraud in prison. 

A few days later I got a journalist from a tabloid newspaper calling me about a client who is unhappy about a R70 000,00 award that she got for soft tissue injuries of her lower back feeling that she could never work again, and that we did not adequately settle her claim and nor that the matter ever went to court.  The reporter did not seem to understand the very fact that he had a court order in his hands which was proof that she had been to court and somewhat surprisingly the advocates and attorneys who had been with her at court, all remembered the occasion quite well – probably because the case fell apart when her “retrenchment” due to the soft tissue injuries of her lower back was discovered to have taken place some 4 years after the accident and worse, she was in fact fired for stealing! 

The one thing I have learned is that the people that invariably terminate your mandate to go to another attorney, or do threaten you, are normally the clients who have been dishonest in the handling of their case or have some extreme discomfort with some of the tough questions you have to ask them about certain aspects of their story.  I was quite relieved approximately a year ago when a Pretoria attorney released me of a case of a client, who had alleged that his son was brain damaged and could not work and who my specialist had suggested was malingering, was taken off my hands and comprehensive undertakings given to me by the other attorney.  The defendant attorney subsequently revealed to us that they had devastating evidence along similar lines, in fact worse than what we had already uncovered, and the settlement that they did get in the end barely just covered my fees.  I got paid, and I think the other attorney, who I warned of the potential problems in the case, but thought I was trying to put him off the case and ignored me, probably learned a very valuable lesson in doing considerable amounts of work to basically earn nothing.

Posted by Michael de Broglio on Sunday 14-Mar-10   |  Permalink   |  0 Comments  Comments
Subpoenas, the RAF management

A Johannesburg law firm has subpoenaed Regional and Executive Management of the RAF in respect of some of it’s High Court Trials. The contention of the attorney is that her clients are being hugely prejudiced by  inter alia having to cover preparation and/or reservation fees and costs of counsel when the bulk of these costs can and should be avoided.  We all know that the majority of High Court claims against the RAF settle on the steps of Court at the eleventh hour and at substantial cost to both the RAF and the accident victim.The attorney in question believes that this issue needs to be put before the court and this can only be done so with Executive and Regional Management present.She initially served about a dozen subpoenas in respect of different matters but has now agreed to withdraw all of them except for one. She feels that a public interest issue of such importance simply must be ventilated before the court.  The matter is apparently set to go to Court in April 2010.We all experience this problem, defendant and plaintiff attorneys alike. Defendant attorneys struggle to get instructions from the RAF and plaintiff attorneys are left to explain the astronomical trial costs to their clients.

The RAF has brought an application to have the subpoenas set aside and the attorney is opposing the application. This is an excellent opportunity to voice your opinion. Why not email me your views alternatively make some comments.  We’ll keep you posted as to what transpires.

Posted by Michael de Broglio on Wednesday 24-Mar-10   |  Permalink   |  10 Comments  Comments

Click here to return to the blog home page (latest 12 items).

Johannesburg Web Design South Africa