12 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1172b
Insurance — Personal injury protection — Standing — Assignment — Demand letter served by insured who has assigned benefits to medical provider and has not obtained revocation of assignment is invalid and does not satisfy condition precedent to suit
CARLOS HOBBS, Plaintiff, vs. PROGRESSIVE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. County Court, 4th Judicial Circuit in and for Duval County. Case No. 16-2004-SC-007646, Division E. September 19, 2005. John A. Moran, Judge. Counsel: David G. Candelaria, Farah & Farah, P.A., Jacksonville, for Plaintiff. Glenn S. Banner, Rinaman & Associates, P.A., Jacksonville, for Defendant.
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR FINAL SUMMARY DISPOSITION
THIS CAUSE, having come before the Court on September 7, 2005, on Defendant’s Motion for Final Summary Disposition, and the Court having heard arguments of counsel, reviewed the pleadings and motions and being otherwise advised in the premises, it is,
ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows:
1 Defendant’s Motion for Final Summary Disposition is GRANTED.
2. Carlos Hobbs assigned his rights and benefits under the subject policy of insurance to PT First Rehabilitation on January 6, 2004. The assignment stated, “This is a direct assignment of my rights and benefits under any such policy of insurance, and may only be revoked with express written consent of PT FIRST REHABILITATION.”
3. On August 6, 2004, the Defendant received a demand letter dated August 4, 2004, seeking payment for unpaid no-fault benefits for services rendered by PT First Rehabilitation.
4. That on September 8, 2004, PT First Rehabilitation revoked the previous assignment, reassigning benefits and rights under the subject policy back to Carlos Hobbs.
5. That the assignment was not revoked in writing prior to the Plaintiff submitting the demand letter dated August 4, 2004.
6. The Plaintiff did not have any right or authority to serve the presuit demand letter dated August 4, 2004, because at that time, PT First Rehabilitation “owned” the cause of action. Oglesby v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co., 781 So. 2d 469 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001). Once an insured assigns his rights to PIP benefits in exchange for medical services, the assignor has no right to make any claim on the contract. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Ray, 556 So. 2d 811 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990).
7. A demand letter served pursuant to Florida Statute § 627.736(11) (2004),by an insured who has assigned his rights and benefits and has not obtained a revocation of that assignment is an invalid demand letter.
8. There remain no genuine issues as to any triable facts, the Plaintiff did not “own” the cause of action at the time he served Defendant with its presuit demand letter. The Plaintiff is an invalid claimant resulting in the demand letter at issue being an invalid demand letter and not satisfying the statutory conditions precedent of Florida Statute § 627.736(11) (2004).
IT IS HEREBY ADJUDGED that Plaintiff, CARLOS HOBBS, take nothing by this action and Defendant, PROGRESSIVE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, shall go hence without day and the Court retains jurisdiction for the purpose of determining any motion by Defendant to tax attorney’s fees and costs.
* * *
