RAF Loss of Earnings Evidence: A South African Claim Checklist

Key takeaways

• A Road Accident Fund loss-of-earnings claim needs more than proof that an accident happened or that an injury affected work. Build an evidence chain showing the probable financial position without the accident, the bodily injury caused by the accident, the injury-related change in work capacity, the actual post-accident income position and the resulting patrimonial loss.
• For an employee, the core file commonly includes contracts, job descriptions, payslips, employer confirmations, leave and attendance records, bank entries, tax records and evidence of overtime, commission or promotion prospects. A business owner, freelancer or informal earner needs contemporaneous trading records suited to the way income was actually earned. Medical records and properly instructed expert reports must then connect the injury to functional and occupational consequences. Keep evidence of work attempts, accommodations, other payments and every calculation assumption.
• Do not manufacture a neat history by altering source records or filling gaps with estimates presented as facts. Preserve the authentic pre- and post-accident record, identify gaps, and explain genuine inconsistencies. An actuary can calculate scenarios; an actuarial report cannot prove an unsupported employment history, business profit, medical limitation or career path.
• Do not delay prescribed claim and prescription advice while waiting for a perfect quantum file. The RAF's public checklist is useful evidence guidance, but not every item on it is automatically a threshold condition for valid lodgement. The prescribed form position also changed through litigation: the Supreme Court of Appeal held on 30 April 2026 that the 2008 RAF 1 is treated as prescribed from 6 May 2022 until lawfully amended.

Understand what the evidence must prove

Loss of earnings is a patrimonial claim. In Rudman v Road Accident Fund, the Supreme Court of Appeal explained that reduced earning capacity does not by itself establish a loss to the claimant's estate. Road Accident Fund v Kerridge likewise requires the fact of income loss or diminished earning capacity to be proved before difficulty in calculating the amount can be addressed.

Organise the file around five separate propositions:

1. Pre-accident position: what the claimant probably would have earned but for the collision.
2. Accident-related injury: which bodily injuries arose from the collision.
3. Functional and occupational effect: how those injuries affected the work actually done or the probable career path.
4. Post-accident position: what the claimant did earn, could earn or is likely to earn after reasonable treatment, recovery and work adjustment.
5. Financial difference: the proven past loss and the evidence-based future scenario, subject to applicable law and contingencies.

Keep facts, opinions and calculations separate. A payslip is a source record. An employer's explanation of missed promotion is factual or predictive evidence whose foundation must be tested. A medical opinion addresses clinical issues within the practitioner's expertise. Vocational or industrial-psychology evidence addresses occupational implications. An actuarial model applies stated assumptions to figures; it does not decide whether those assumptions are true.

The loss-of-income glossary explains the terminology. This article focuses on building and reconciling the evidence, not valuing a claim.

Start with a loss chronology

Create a dated chronology before assembling totals. It should identify:

• the collision and first treatment;
• the last ordinary workday before the collision;
• every period of paid or unpaid absence;
• sick leave, annual leave or another leave category used;
• partial returns, reduced hours and changed duties;
• workplace accommodations and who authorised them;
• employment termination, resignation, retirement or retrenchment events;
• business closures, cancelled work or staff changes;
• treatment, rehabilitation and material medical changes;
• applications for work, training or alternative income;
• grants, compensation, insurance or employer payments; and
• each date on which an earnings schedule or expert assumption changed.

For every entry, link the source document and name its issuer. If a date comes only from the claimant's recollection, label it as such. Do not make an employer record and a later personal note look equivalent.

The chronology should show changes, not force a simple story. A claimant may return to work, earn the same amount for a period and still face a later supported risk; or may earn less for reasons unrelated to the accident. Preserve both favourable and unfavourable facts so that causation can be assessed honestly.

Build a controlled evidence index

Use the RAF loss-of-earnings evidence pack as the reusable folder structure. Give every record a stable index number and record:

• neutral document title;
• issuer or creator;
• period covered;
• date obtained;
• whether it is an original, certified copy, ordinary copy or download;
• source location and custodian;
• proposition it may support;
• known gap or inconsistency;
• version and submission history; and
• confidentiality or access restriction.

Keep source files read-only. Work from copies and preserve original file names, email headers and export information. If a spreadsheet is used, retain its formulas, inputs, version date and the documents behind every entry.

Create three linked schedules rather than one unsupported total:

1. a pre-accident earnings and career baseline;
2. an actual post-accident earnings and work-history schedule; and
3. a difference schedule that identifies assumptions instead of hiding them.

A schedule is an index and calculation aid. It is not a substitute for the underlying evidence.

Employee evidence

For an employed claimant, collect records covering a representative period before and after the accident. Depending on the employment, these may include:

• signed employment contracts and amendments;
• job title, description, grade and physical or cognitive demands;
• payslips and payroll histories;
• bank statements showing actual deposits;
• income-tax returns, assessments and relevant tax certificates;
• ordinary hours, shift, overtime, commission and bonus records;
• leave balances and attendance records;
• performance reviews, disciplinary records and warnings relevant to work continuity;
• promotion applications, outcomes, training and qualifications;
• pensionable pay, allowances and employment benefits where legally relevant;
• medical certificates and workplace health assessments;
• accommodation, incapacity or return-to-work records; and
• termination, resignation, retrenchment or retirement documents.

Ask the employer for a factual certificate or affidavit that identifies the writer, their role, the records used and the period covered. It may address employment dates, remuneration, duties, absence, changed performance, accommodations and prospects. Avoid a generic letter that merely repeats the claimant's allegation.

Reconcile employer, payroll, bank and tax evidence. A payslip may show an amount due; the bank record may show what was paid. Tax records may cover a different period or accounting basis. A difference does not automatically disprove the claim, but it needs a documented explanation.

Do not assume that using paid sick leave means no relevant loss occurred, or that receiving the same salary proves a future loss. Equally, do not count leave, salary, benefits and a claimed loss twice. A qualified reviewer must analyse the legal treatment of each payment and the evidence supporting any future risk.

Variable pay, overtime and promotion prospects

Variable earnings require a longer and more careful baseline. Preserve:

• commission rules and sales statements;
• overtime rosters, approvals and payments;
• shift allowances and call-out records;
• bonus policies and historical awards;
• production, billing or performance measures;
• team or market data used for comparison; and
• evidence of changes that affected all workers, not only the claimant.

Do not select only the strongest pre-accident months. Record seasonality, downturns, strike periods, business changes and other factors. A promotion or career progression scenario should be supported by objective facts such as qualifications, performance, vacancies, prior applications, organisational structure and evidence from a person able to explain the process.

Describe a chance as a chance. Do not turn a possible bonus, promotion or contract renewal into guaranteed income.

Business owners and self-employed claimants

In Bee v Road Accident Fund, the Supreme Court of Appeal considered the financial affairs and performance of a business before and after the accident when assessing the claimant's alleged loss. That illustrates why business turnover, company loss and personal patrimonial loss must not be treated as interchangeable.

For a sole trader, partner, company owner, freelancer or platform worker, preserve records appropriate to the real business model:

• registration and ownership records;
• partnership, shareholder or member agreements;
• management accounts and annual financial statements;
• general ledgers and trial balances;
• business and personal bank statements;
• tax returns, assessments and VAT records where applicable;
• invoices, receipts, quotations and accepted orders;
• customer contracts and work schedules;
• stock, supplier and production records;
• platform earnings and transaction exports;
• payroll and contractor records;
• drawings, salary, dividends and loan-account entries;
• cancelled bookings or lost contracts with contemporaneous communications;
• costs of replacement labour or management; and
• evidence of market, seasonal or business-wide changes.

Keep the legal entity separate from the individual. A company's reduced turnover is not automatically the shareholder's personal loss, and replacement-labour cost is not automatically equal to lost earnings. Identify how the claimant extracted value before the accident, what work they personally performed, what changed, and whether the business or another person absorbed the work.

An accountant may explain records and business performance. The accountant should state the source material, accounting basis, assumptions and limitations. A later reconstruction unsupported by invoices, bank activity, tax records or independent customers should be identified as a reconstruction.

Informal and cash income

The absence of conventional payslips does not justify inventing evidence. Build the most authentic contemporaneous record available. Possible sources include:

• dated customer messages and bookings;
• receipts and receipt books;
• mobile-money, bank or platform entries;
• supplier and stock-purchase records;
• route, delivery or appointment logs;
• photographs or lawful records of the trading setup;
• municipal, market or platform permits where applicable;
• regular customer or supplier statements based on personal knowledge;
• tax records or official confirmation of tax status; and
• household records that can be independently reconciled without overstating what they prove.

Separate gross receipts from profit. Record the costs required to earn the income. Explain cash deposits, shared accounts and mixed personal-business expenditure. A witness should describe what they personally observed, the period and the basis for any figure rather than sign a template conclusion.

The RAF's current public page asks for proof of other income, tax records and, in a stated circumstance, bank statements for the three years before the accident. Treat that as current operational guidance and obtain advice on the claimant-specific statutory and evidential position.

Children, students and early-career claimants

A young claimant may have little or no established earnings history. Do not create certainty that the evidence cannot support. Preserve:

• school and tertiary records;
• qualifications and completed training;
• attendance and performance history;
• bursary, apprenticeship or learnership records;
• accepted offers and applications;
• part-time or vacation-work history;
• career plans recorded before the accident;
• teacher, lecturer or employer observations; and
• medical, educational and vocational evidence about the accident-related change.

Family earnings may provide context in a properly supported expert assessment, but they do not mechanically determine the claimant's future. Experts should identify alternative scenarios and the facts underlying them.

Medical and functional evidence

The income file should link to, not duplicate, the complete medical file. Preserve provider-issued records from first treatment through recovery, including diagnoses, treatment, rehabilitation, sick notes and restrictions.

For work-related analysis, identify the actual demands of the pre-accident role and the specific function affected. Useful evidence may address:

• mobility, standing, sitting, lifting or dexterity;
• pain, fatigue and medication effects;
• concentration, memory, communication or decision-making;
• emotional or behavioural effects supported by appropriate evidence;
• reliability, pace, attendance and endurance;
• treatment and recovery expectations;
• reasonable workplace accommodations; and
• residual capacity for the same or alternative work.

Do not ask a medical practitioner to decide an accounting question or an employer to diagnose an injury. Each source and expert should stay within a defined role. Contradictory restrictions or changing diagnoses should be preserved and addressed, not deleted from the chronology.

Actual post-accident work and income

Record what happened after the accident with the same care as the pre-accident baseline. Include:

• actual earnings by pay period;
• dates and terms of return to work;
• reduced hours or duties;
• productivity or attendance evidence;
• accommodations and assistance;
• failed work attempts and the recorded reason;
• new employment or self-employment;
• retraining and job applications;
• medical changes affecting work; and
• non-accident events affecting the employer, business or labour market.

A gap between expected and actual income is not automatically caused by the injury. Record retrenchment, business closure, economic change, disciplinary action, family choice, relocation and pre-existing health conditions where relevant. The purpose is to test causation, not to edit the history into a preferred result.

Document reasonable attempts to return, adapt or find suitable work without putting health or safety at risk. Keep applications, responses, accommodation discussions and professional advice. Do not perform work contrary to medical restrictions merely to create evidence.

Other payments and possible overlap

Disclose employer payments, insurance benefits, disability grants, pension or income-protection payments, Compensation Fund awards and other compensation connected to the period or injury. Preserve:

• the policy, scheme or legal basis;
• application and decision;
• gross and net amounts;
• payment dates;
• payer correspondence;
• repayment or subrogation terms; and
• tax treatment if authoritatively established.

Do not decide privately that a payment must always be deducted or ignored. The legal treatment can depend on the source, purpose and applicable rules. The evidence file should make the payment visible so that a qualified reviewer can prevent omission or double counting.

Expert reports and the assumptions register

Loss-of-earnings matters may involve treating practitioners, medico-legal specialists, occupational therapists, vocational or industrial psychologists, accountants and actuaries. The required disciplines depend on the disputed issues; a long list of reports is not proof of a stronger claim.

For every report, record:

• expert and discipline;
• instruction and question asked;
• examination or valuation date;
• source documents supplied;
• factual assumptions;
• scenarios modelled;
• limitations and missing records;
• draft, final and addendum versions; and
• later event that may require reconsideration.

Maintain one assumptions register. For each assumption, state its source, whether it is agreed, disputed or unverified, and which calculation uses it. Examples include pre-accident salary, retirement age, promotion timing, business profit, recovery period, residual work capacity and future earnings path.

Road Accident Fund v Guedes confirms that actuarial computation can be useful in assessing future loss, while the court retains a wide discretion. Kerridge warns against expert conclusions that lack a proper factual basis. Do not present an actuarial output as an invoice or guaranteed award.

Separate past and future periods

Freeze the calculation date and separate:

• pre-accident history;
• past post-accident earnings up to the calculation date; and
• future scenarios after that date.

Past loss should reconcile actual periods and payments. Future loss is necessarily predictive and should identify alternative paths, risks and assumptions. Avoid counting the same period in both schedules.

Section 17(4)(c) of the RAF Act places a statutory annual cap on loss-of-income compensation and provides for quarterly adjustment. Do not copy a stale figure from an old article or apply the cap without current legal and actuarial review. Apportionment, contingencies, tax treatment, other payments and the precise legal head can also affect the calculation.

Keep form validity separate from quantum completeness

The RAF claim document checklist covers the broader claim pack. This specialised income file should connect to the claim without becoming a substitute for prescribed-form advice.

Section 24 of the RAF Act governs the prescribed claim and medical report, completion, delivery and validity objections. The RAF's current public page lists extensive loss-of-earnings records. In Maarman and Others v Road Accident Fund, the High Court distinguished material relevant to later quantum assessment from documents whose absence automatically makes a claim invalid at the threshold.

In April 2026, the Supreme Court of Appeal upheld the invalidation of Board Notice 271 of 2022 and the revised RAF 1, and ordered that the 2008 RAF 1 be treated as prescribed from 6 May 2022 until lawful amendment. Check for any later lawful change before acting.

The practical rule is twofold: collect the income evidence thoroughly, but do not postpone deadline protection merely because every expert report or future-loss calculation is incomplete. Equally, do not assume that an earnings spreadsheet cures a defective form, medical component, authority or delivery method.

Use the RAF legal-service route when the applicable form, prescription, cap or evidence dispute requires advice. The RAF-claim lawyer directory is the focused provider-discovery route.

Preserve the file as circumstances change

Update the chronology and schedules when the claimant returns to work, changes jobs, receives a pay increase, loses employment, starts a business, undergoes material treatment, receives another benefit or obtains a new expert opinion.

Never overwrite a prior schedule. Use dated versions and a change log. Reconcile the new version to the old one and explain:

• new source records;
• corrected errors;
• changed medical or work facts;
• changed assumptions; and
• amounts moved between past and future periods.

Keep the exact version supplied to each expert, the RAF, a legal representative or a court process. A later correct spreadsheet does not show what an earlier report relied on unless the versions are linked.

Protect financial and health information

The pack can contain identity records, special personal information, medical history, tax material, bank statements, employment data and information about children. Apply POPIA purpose limitation, access control and appropriate security.

Verify recipients and destinations. Share only the material required for the defined task, through a controlled method. Keep a disclosure log recording who received which indexed version, when and why. Redact only a working or public copy; preserve the authorised complete source and label every redaction.

Do not email an unencrypted full bank-and-medical bundle to an unverified address or place it behind a public link. Remove passwords and access links from covering schedules that will circulate widely.

Common evidence failures

Avoid these recurring problems:

• treating injury or work difficulty as proof of patrimonial loss;
• starting with an actuarial total instead of the factual chain;
• selecting only favourable payslips or business months;
• presenting gross business turnover as personal earnings;
• mixing company and claimant losses;
• ignoring ordinary business costs;
• reconstructing cash income without identifying the basis;
• turning a possible promotion into a certainty;
• relying on an employer letter that cites no underlying records;
• failing to reconcile payroll, bank and tax information;
• hiding a return to work, later income or another benefit;
• deleting inconsistent medical or work evidence;
• giving experts different factual versions without a register;
• counting the same period or payment twice;
• applying a stale statutory cap;
• treating every RAF website checklist item as an automatic validity condition;
• waiting for perfect quantum evidence while prescription may run; or
• keeping calculation files without the source documents and formulas.

Eighteen checks before review

1. What exact earning activity existed immediately before the accident?
2. Which records establish the representative pre-accident period?
3. Are salary, variable pay, benefits, drawings, dividends and business profit separated?
4. What bodily injury is alleged to have affected work?
5. Which provider records and opinions support the functional limitation?
6. What were the real physical, cognitive and reliability demands of the work?
7. What income was actually received after the accident?
8. Were leave, employer payments and other benefits recorded without double counting?
9. Did the claimant return, adapt, retrain or seek other suitable work, and what evidence exists?
10. Which non-accident events may explain part of the income change?
11. For a business, is entity performance separated from personal patrimonial loss?
12. For informal income, what independent contemporaneous corroboration exists?
13. Are employer, payroll, bank and tax records reconciled?
14. Does every expert identify instructions, sources, assumptions and limitations?
15. Are past and future periods separated at one calculation date?
16. Is the current statutory cap and its application still to be checked?
17. Which prescribed-form, prescription or delivery issue needs immediate advice?
18. Can every schedule version be matched to its sources and recipients?

Use the lawyer consultation preparation guide to present the chronology, index and open questions efficiently.

Source position and review limits

This checklist uses the Road Accident Fund Act and Regulations, the RAF's current claim pages, the April 2026 Supreme Court of Appeal form ruling, Rudman, Bee, Guedes, Kerridge, Maarman and a May 2026 High Court application of the patrimonial-loss principles. The RAF public document list is treated as operational evidence guidance, not an uncontested expansion of statutory validity requirements.

A qualified South African reviewer must still determine liability, causation, prescription, identified or unidentified vehicle rules, the current prescribed form, medical-report requirements, valid delivery, cap, apportionment, contingencies, tax, overlapping payments, expert need, admissibility and the facts required for each claimant type. This checklist does not establish valid lodgement, proof, claim value, settlement or payment.

FAQs

Related Lexuno paths