'PIP' Repeal on Fast Track Toward House Floor
An attempt to end the state's no-fault auto insurance system is on the fast track in the Florida House.As in past years, the legislation, which…
November 08, 2017 at 02:39 PM
7 minute read
An attempt to end the state's no-fault auto insurance system is on the fast track in the Florida House.
As in past years, the legislation, which has been projected to save motorists an average of about $80 a year, faces opposition from some insurers, business groups and medical providers.
Meanwhile, the House and Senate are comparing different models to change the system.
The House Commerce Committee voted 18-7 on Tuesday to back a measure (HB 19) by Rep. Erin Grall, R-Vero Beach, that would end the no-fault system, which requires motorists to carry personal-injury protection, or PIP, coverage to help pay for medical care after accidents.
Under the bill, motorists would instead be required to carry bodily-injury coverage.
The change would fully open drivers at fault in accidents to liability for damages and could shift some costs to health care premiums.
“I understand that it's going to be difficult and that change is hard,” Grall said. But she added that “we will have more adequate levels of coverage for the severity of accidents on our roads.”
Grall, an attorney, did not want to add issues to the bill, such as increasing enforcement of uninsured motorists and making changes in the state's bad-faith laws.
Bad-faith lawsuits typically involve allegations of misconduct by insurers that handle claims and can be costly.
Grall said a number of interests are trying to make the proposal “more complicated than it needs to be.”
The Personal Insurance Federation of Florida, the Florida Justice Reform Institute and the Institute for Legal Reform, an offshoot of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, are among those that want a no-fault repeal to also address changes in the bad-faith laws.
“Florida's third-party insurance bad-faith laws create a perverse incentive for persons injured in auto crashes to game the system in order to set up an insurer for a bad-faith claim that could greatly exceed the amount of coverage purchased by the insured,” said Michael Carlson, president of the Personal Insurance Federation of Florida.
With approval Tuesday from the Commerce Committee, Grall's bill is positioned to go to the House floor when the 2018 legislative session starts in January.
The House has considered bills annually since 2013 that would have repealed PIP, with the House passing a Grall bill during the 2017 session. The bill died in the Senate.
Under no-fault, motorists must carry $10,000 in PIP coverage, an amount that essentially hasn't changed since 1979. The system is designed to help limit lawsuits stemming from traffic accidents.
Lawmakers in 2012 passed a package of changes, championed by Gov. Rick Scott and then-state Chief Financial Officer Jeff Atwater, that were considered a last-ditch effort to maintain the system after rates increased due to an increase in fraudulent claims.
Repealing PIP would eliminate the system's limits on lawsuits. Drivers at fault in accidents would be fully liable for damages, with the minimum bodily injury coverage under Grall's proposal being $25,000 for damages for injury or death of one person and $50,000 for injury or death of two or more people.
In the Senate, Thonotosassa Republican Tom Lee is sponsoring a measure (SB 150) that differs in the way it would revamp the system. Among the differences are in the levels of required bodily injury coverage.
With the House bill ready for the floor, Grall said she hopes to have time to talk with Lee about their conflicting proposals.
Jim Turner reports for the News Service of Florida.
An attempt to end the state's no-fault auto insurance system is on the fast track in the Florida House.
As in past years, the legislation, which has been projected to save motorists an average of about $80 a year, faces opposition from some insurers, business groups and medical providers.
Meanwhile, the House and Senate are comparing different models to change the system.
The House Commerce Committee voted 18-7 on Tuesday to back a measure (HB 19) by Rep. Erin Grall, R-Vero Beach, that would end the no-fault system, which requires motorists to carry personal-injury protection, or PIP, coverage to help pay for medical care after accidents.
Under the bill, motorists would instead be required to carry bodily-injury coverage.
The change would fully open drivers at fault in accidents to liability for damages and could shift some costs to health care premiums.
“I understand that it's going to be difficult and that change is hard,” Grall said. But she added that “we will have more adequate levels of coverage for the severity of accidents on our roads.”
Grall, an attorney, did not want to add issues to the bill, such as increasing enforcement of uninsured motorists and making changes in the state's bad-faith laws.
Bad-faith lawsuits typically involve allegations of misconduct by insurers that handle claims and can be costly.
Grall said a number of interests are trying to make the proposal “more complicated than it needs to be.”
The Personal Insurance Federation of Florida, the Florida Justice Reform Institute and the Institute for Legal Reform, an offshoot of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, are among those that want a no-fault repeal to also address changes in the bad-faith laws.
“Florida's third-party insurance bad-faith laws create a perverse incentive for persons injured in auto crashes to game the system in order to set up an insurer for a bad-faith claim that could greatly exceed the amount of coverage purchased by the insured,” said Michael Carlson, president of the Personal Insurance Federation of Florida.
With approval Tuesday from the Commerce Committee, Grall's bill is positioned to go to the House floor when the 2018 legislative session starts in January.
The House has considered bills annually since 2013 that would have repealed PIP, with the House passing a Grall bill during the 2017 session. The bill died in the Senate.
Under no-fault, motorists must carry $10,000 in PIP coverage, an amount that essentially hasn't changed since 1979. The system is designed to help limit lawsuits stemming from traffic accidents.
Lawmakers in 2012 passed a package of changes, championed by Gov. Rick Scott and then-state Chief Financial Officer Jeff Atwater, that were considered a last-ditch effort to maintain the system after rates increased due to an increase in fraudulent claims.
Repealing PIP would eliminate the system's limits on lawsuits. Drivers at fault in accidents would be fully liable for damages, with the minimum bodily injury coverage under Grall's proposal being $25,000 for damages for injury or death of one person and $50,000 for injury or death of two or more people.
In the Senate, Thonotosassa Republican Tom Lee is sponsoring a measure (SB 150) that differs in the way it would revamp the system. Among the differences are in the levels of required bodily injury coverage.
With the House bill ready for the floor, Grall said she hopes to have time to talk with Lee about their conflicting proposals.
Jim Turner reports for the News Service of Florida.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTragedy on I-95: Florida Lawsuit Against Horizon Freight System Could Set New Precedent in Crash Cases
2 minute readSecurities Claims Against Lilium N.V. for Electric Plane Production Delays Fail to Take Flight, Federal Judge Holds
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Uber Files RICO Suit Against Plaintiff-Side Firms Alleging Fraudulent Injury Claims
- 2The Law Firm Disrupted: Scrutinizing the Elephant More Than the Mouse
- 3Inherent Diminished Value Damages Unavailable to 3rd-Party Claimants, Court Says
- 4Pa. Defense Firm Sued by Client Over Ex-Eagles Player's $43.5M Med Mal Win
- 5Losses Mount at Morris Manning, but Departing Ex-Chair Stays Bullish About His Old Firm's Future
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250