'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The House has considered bills annually since 2013 that would have repealed PIP, with the House passing a Grall bill during the 2017 session.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
© 2024 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 AllSecurities Claims Against Lilium N.V. for Electric Plane Production Delays Fail to Take Flight, Federal Judge Holds
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Considering the Implications of the 2024 Presidential Election for Jurors in White Collar Cases
- 22024 in Review: Judges Met Out Punishments for Ex-Apple, FDIC, Moody's Legal Leaders
- 3What We Heard From Litigation Leaders in 2024
- 4Akin and Simpson Create New Practice Groups With Integrated Teams
- 5Thursday Newspaper
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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