The Politics of Florida PIP: Industry Looks on While Pols Seek Answers

By | January 25, 2012

  • January 25, 2012 at 3:00 pm
    Danielle Harrison says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Florida no-fault law requires $10,000 in Personal Injury Protection NOT Uninsured Motorist. That is an entirely different coverage.

  • January 26, 2012 at 2:32 pm
    Susan says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Why not make PIP an option, so people who have medical insurance (or anyone else) can opt not to purchase it

    • January 26, 2012 at 3:05 pm
      Anejo says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      I’m not from Florida and we don’t have PIP in California so I don’t know all the ins and outs but wouldn’t the people who stage accidents and then visit the clinics still purchase the PIP? In California attorneys saw med pay as free money so most companies now have the auto medical as excess. It only pays what your own medical doesn’t. If medical is paid and other coverage is discovered the insured has to pay it back.

  • January 26, 2012 at 2:33 pm
    TN says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Get Rid of PIP – That is the only real solution, it’s a fraud driven antiquated coverage that has outlived it’s usefulness.

  • January 26, 2012 at 4:09 pm
    Ins Guy says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I’m not from Florida either, but is seems to me if you lower the statutory limit you would take the “unscrupulous lawyers” and their fees out of the PIP equation. They show time & time again that they are only concerned with the plantiff’s right to sue, but when the money is too low, the case isn’t worth trying.

  • January 27, 2012 at 2:46 am
    stevenpowells says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    5 years ago an experiment from Progressive in Texas where drivers voluntarily agreed to let the auto insurer put devices in their cars to essentially spy on them as they drove. The idea was that safer drivers would get lower insurance rates learn more at “Clearance Auto” on the web

  • January 27, 2012 at 8:01 am
    ECIII says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Having had some regulatory dealings with Robin Westcott, I can assure all optimists who look for major reform here, that nothing will occur.

  • January 28, 2012 at 11:23 am
    FlaInsGuy says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I’ve been in the industry for over 25 years in south florida. I have experienced “No Fault” from inception and it has never worked. Whenever there is an opportunity to defraud, unfortunately, there is always someone to take advantage. The losers in this issue is and will always be the consumer. Schemes ranging from staged accidents to clinics promising cash rewards, MRI brokers etc., only lining the pockets of the scammers, and the predominately arrested or penalized parties are the insureds themselves. It seems to me that the people receiving the most benefit from PIP are the ones who actually write the laws to begin with, the attorneys/politicians. Take away the ability to generate income from these shylocks, stiffen the penalties to the attorneys, clinicians, dotors and all who are involved and actually enforce them. Or just do away with the No Fault altogether and the insurance companies will defend themselve, just like before.

  • February 1, 2012 at 1:20 pm
    Ins Guy says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    “stiffen the penalties to the attorneys” – really? That’s like telling congress to give themselves a pay-cut…won’t happen.

    Even if they did, the appeals/supreme court justices along with the ACLU (all attorneys, by the way) will say its unconstitutional as an infringement on the right to sue.

    Have you ever noticed that the only time you hear the arguement is when you threaten the revenue stream of the lawyers involved?



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*