Garvin Law Firm Blog Posts Tagged ‘Medical Bills’

$10,000 for Anyone Involved in a Car Accident ?

Friday, August 12th, 2011

PIP (No-Fault) insurance in Florida

Sound too good to be true? Well it probably is…We’ve all heard the catchy jingles on our favorite radio stations announcing that after a car accident, we may be entitled to $10,000 in lost wages and benefits. DJ’s and “attorney spokesmen” encourage us to call one of these hot-lines from the scene of the accident—but is what they’re selling us for real?

The long and short answer is: Yes and No (answered like a true lawyer…I know.), but we realize, you probably already knew that. Many people, especially in South Florida, come to personal injury attorneys after even a minimal car accident looking for the $10,000 check that they’ve been hearing about on the radio or billboards.
What all these advertisements are referring to is your PIP (or Personal Injury Protection) Insurance, also referred to as No Fault Insurance. This insurance, which has long been the center of fierce debate in Florida, is the only type of mandatory auto insurance that Floridians are required to purchase. You may have even heard about this insurance from news reports of fraud, staged accidents, and Florida lawmakers constantly trying to regulate it in one direction or another.

According to this article on My Fox Tampa Bay, “Florida leads the nation in questionable insurance claims, which leads to you to paying more for car insurance.” And although an insurance coverage reform bill was presented in early May 2011, it was voted down by the Florida House Subcommittee on Health Care and Human Services.Fort Lauderdale Injury Lawyer

So what about my 10 grand and what is all this talk about PIP Insurance? The state of Florida is known as a “no fault” state for automobile accidents. This means if you are in an auto accident in Florida, regardless of who is at fault for the collision, you first look to your own automobile insurer to pay a portion (up to $10,000) of your medical expenses and wage loss under your PIP (Personal Injury Protection) coverage for any injuries you received in the accident. This coverage protects you against losses you sustain as a result of personal injuries from an automobile accident and pays 80% of reasonable, necessary, and related medical expenses, as well as, 60% of your gross wage loss resulting from your accident-related injuries and mileage costs for transportation to and from doctor appointments.

The only way you can become eligible for any direct PIP cash is if your doctor states that you are unable to work, and even then, you will only get 60% of your lost wages. If you can’t work, that means that you are probably really hurt and will need this PIP money to help pay your medical bills

After the $10K is exhausted,you may have the right to recover your damages from the other driver. If the negligent driver has insurance you can recover your medical expenses and lost wages and, if you meet the threshold requirements of Florida Statute 627.737 which include a permanent injury, significant scarring or death, you can pursue a claim for your pain and suffering.

Fort Myers Car Accident AttorneyThe insurance laws of the State of Florida are complicated and if your claim is not pursued correctly most insurance companies will deny (or offer a very small amount to settle) your claim. According to this investigation by Anderson Cooper and CNN; Insurance companies actually spend billions each year denying claims. To make sure that you recover all of your damages you should hire an attorney with significant experience in the field.

If you have any questions regarding Personal Injury Protection Insurance, or have recently been injured in a car accident, feel free to call our office to address any concerns you may have at 954.524.2424 in Fort Lauderdale or our Fort Myers office at 239.277.0005.

Florida reinstates parental waivers, but are children protected?

Wednesday, August 11th, 2010

Back in 2008, the Florida Supreme Court ruled against parent liability waivers for a minor participating in activities at a commercial venue.

The wrongful-death case, Scott Corey Kirton v. Jordan Fields, involved 14-year-old Christopher Jones, killed in 2003 while riding an all-terrain vehicle at Thunder Cross Motor Sports Park in Okeechobee. His father had signed a risk and liability waiver as the facility required.

The high court’s ruling said the state had no statute supporting the waivers – and that wider public concerns cannot allow parents to waive the rights of minors to legal recourse when injury occurs. The releases served commercial interests more than the child, the court ruled, and the boy’s family was allowed to sue the track despite his father having signed the waiver.

The ruling set off a two-year battle between business venues, agitating to restore the waivers, and injury lawyers representing Florida’s children. Businesses, including Disney Florida Child Injury LawWorld, argued that the waivers were necessary to prevent frivolous negligence claims.

The Florida Justice Association, trade group for the state’s trial lawyers, countered that companies were shielded at the expense of innocent victims who might have to pay medical bills, and if they couldn’t, the cost would be passed on to taxpayers.

“Are we going to be a state that, public-policy-wise, says that we excuse negligent, harmful acts against children? That’s what it boils down to,” FJA President Michael Haggard told the Orlando Sentinel in 2009.

Last year the FJA’s opinion prevailed, successfully blocking legislation.

Not so this year. The Florida Senate and House unanimously passed SB 2440, reinstating parental waivers of liability for businesses, although neither side could claim outright victory.

The initial legislation, which would have allowed theme parks and various sports facilities to waive gross negligence, was replaced by a weaker measure that protects against “inherent risk,” a much lower legal standard.

It has been standard practice for recreational activity providers such as amusement parks and sports leagues to require waivers, who claim that absence of protection from liability could reduce the activities available to children and potentially affect tourist attractions.

But what about adequate protection for kids who play sports, go to water and theme parks, ice-skating and roller rinks, motocross tracks? When a child is injured, who bears the burden of proving what constitutes “inherent risk” could be put to the test and ultimately lead to another legal challenge of waivers.

To read the bill and its analysis, click here.

.