Volume 13

13 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 838a

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Default — Where insurer’s counsel filed notice of appearance, but insurer failed to file answer or otherwise defend action within 20 days after service of process, entry of default is appropriate

13 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 573a

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Declaratory judgment — Insurer’s obligation to provide PIP log on pre-suit request from medical provider — Error to determine that medical provider was entitled to PIP log where no provision of PIP statute dictates that insurer must provide PIP log to insured or assignee or even require that insurer keep PIP log at all — However, because provider has right to information essential to determine its status as claimant, it has right to information that would otherwise be compiled in PIP log, copy of policy and declarations page — Further, as assignee of insured, provider had right to documentation at issue since insured had right to that documentation at any time — Argument that assignment did not specifically authorize release of documentation has been waived by failure to raise issue below — Demand letter — Argument regarding alleged defects in demand letter is rejected where appeal concerns only declaratory relief action, not action for benefits requiring demand letter, and any issue with demand letter would not affect validity of summary judgment in declaratory judgment action — Further, demand letter issue not raised below has been waived — Insurer is equitably estopped from asserting position that unintentional post-suit production of documents renders action moot where insurer’s refusal to produce documents forced provider to seek counsel and file suit — Moreover, court has jurisdiction to address merits of moot action where, as here, action involves important issue capable of repetition yet evading review

13 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 996a

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Fraud — Section 627.736(4)(g), which provides that insured’s commission of insurance fraud related to PIP coverage will void coverage, is not applicable to, and does not provide remedy for, insurance fraud committed by medical provider/assignee

13 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 729b

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Coverage — Examination under oath — Failure to attend — Attendance at EUO is not condition precedent to benefits where insurer which rescheduled EUO with notation that benefits cutoff was coming effected anticipatory repudiation discharging any further obligations under contract — Further, insurer is required to pay any bills received before failure to attend EUO — Passenger in vehicle owned by insured who has no coverage herself and did not live with anyone with coverage is covered under insured’s policy — Independent medical examination — Failure to attend — Insurer is liable for medical bill for procedure that occurred prior to cutoff date based on failure to attend IME

13 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 578b

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Coverage — Non-owned vehicle — Where coverage while operating non-owned vehicle excluded vehicle owned by relative, policy clearly and unambiguously did not provide coverage for truck owned by insureds’ son — Liability of parent for minor driver — Parents’ PIP policy should not be extended to require coverage of claims against parents based on liability for son’s negligence or willful misconduct which parents assumed by signing son’s driver’s license application where such coverage was not contemplated in policy — Insurer’s motion for summary judgment granted

13 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 257a

Torts — Conversion — Insurance — Personal injury protection — Coverage — Medical provider — Unregistered clinic — If clinic fails to register, it may not collect PIP benefits for services rendered, and insurer who mistakenly pays for such services may assert claim for reimbursement — Provider’s argument that insurer is impermissibly attempting to assert a private cause of action under applicable registration statute is not supported by case law or statutory authority — Accepting allegations in complaint as true, plaintiff has alleged cause of action for compensatory damages and conversion — Motion to dismiss denied

13 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 916b

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Standing — Medical provider/assignee has no standing to recover for bill submitted under federal tax identification number of another medical provider — Coverage — Medical expenses — Lawfully rendered services — Where provider/assignee is neither registered corporation nor registered fictitious name authorized to transact business in state, provider is not entitled to maintain cause of action and is precluded from claiming PIP benefits since services were not lawfully rendered

13 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 906a

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Coverage — Unregistered medical provider — Insurer is entitled to recover PIP and Medpay benefits paid to unregistered provider

13 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 905a

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Coverage — Medical expenses — Lawfully rendered services — Licensure — Medical provider is precluded from seeking or obtaining payment of PIP and medical payment benefits from insurer or patients for care rendered when provider was not registered clinic or exempt from registration requirement — Insurer is entitled to reimbursement for all expenses paid for services rendered while provider was unregistered, even if investigation of charges did not commence within 30 days from submission of bill to insurer — Where insurer’s common law cause of action is founded on fact that provider was not licensed, reimbursement is required even after repeal of statute providing that insurer may assert claim that treatment was not reasonable, related or necessary after payment of claim

13 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 373a

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Counterclaims — Statutory cause of action for violating PIP statute — Dismissal — Motion to dismiss is granted as to count of insurer’s counterclaim asserting statutory cause of action for violation of section 627.736, alleging that medical provider violated statute by submitting bills that were not medically necessary and not coded in accordance with CPT guidelines, and bills for services not lawfully rendered due to provider’s failure to be licensed in massage therapy — PIP statute and massage therapy licensing statute do not purport to establish civil liability but merely make provisions to secure the safety and welfare of public