16 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 456a
Online Reference: FLWSUPP 165RODRI
Insurance — Personal injury protection — Accord and satisfaction — Where in response to demand letter insurer sent explanation of benefits listing reduced amounts it was allowing for charges and check for reduced amounts which conspicuously contained language indicating that payment was in full and final payment of PIP benefits, and medical provider negotiated check and had no further contact with insurer about reduced amounts paid, accord and satisfaction of charges at issue occurred
SPINE REHABILITATION CENTER, INC., a/a/o BRYANT RODRIGUEZ, Plaintiff, v. UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. County Court, 13th Judicial Circuit in and for Hillsborough County, County Civil. Case No. 07-CC-26058-J. March 3, 2009. Gaston J. Fernandez, Judge. Counsel: Timothy A. Patrick, for Plaintiff. Michael P. Liebgold, Luks, Santaniello, Perez, Petrillo, Gold & Jones, Tampa, for Defendant.
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO ACCORD AND SATISFACTION
THIS CAUSE came before the Court for hearing on September 22, 2008 upon Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment as to Accord and Satisfaction, Motion for Fla. Stat. 57.105 Fees and Memorandum of Law, and the Court having been otherwise duly advised in the premises, it is hereupon, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
1. Plaintiff, a healthcare provider, demanded an amount be paid for its services provided to the Defendant PIP insurer’s insured via PIP pre-suit demand letter.
2. The Defendant responded with an explanation of benefits (“EOB”) form listing reduced amounts it was allowing for the Plaintiff’s charges and with payment based on the reduced amount allowed.
3. The Defendant’s EOB requested the Plaintiff contact the Defendant if the Plaintiff believed the Defendant did not fully respond to the Plaintiff’s demand. Plaintiff’s counsel admitted that no other contact was made between the parties pertaining to the reduced amount paid.
4. It is undisputed that the Defendant’s check for the reduced amount conspicuously contained language indicating that the payment was in full and final payment of PIP benefits.
5. It is undisputed that the Defendant’s aforementioned EOB and payment were sent to Plaintiff’s own counsel.
6. It is undisputed that the Plaintiff negotiated the Defendant’s payment and did not return the proceeds.
7. This Court finds that an accord and satisfaction of the charges at issue in this suit occurred pursuant to Fla. Stat. 673.3111.
8. The Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment as to accord and satisfaction is hereby GRANTED.
9. The Defendant’s Motion for Fla. Stat. 57.105 fees is DENIED however.
10. Plaintiff’s counsel has represented to the Court that issues remain as to its allegation of non-production of an EOB and therefore this Order covers only accord and satisfaction.
