Volume 15

15 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1203a

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Demand letter sent less than 30 days after insurer’s receipt of bills was premature, and prematurity cannot be cured by passage of time — Further, complaint filed before all bills were overdue and before 15-day window created by demand letter had passed was prematurely filed — Insurer has not waived right to assert premature demand letter as defense — Insurer is not required to pay for treatment rendered and is entitled to judgment as matter of law

15 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 831a

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Demand letter — Where medical provider failed to serve demand letter prior to filing suit, but corrected noncompliance by serving demand letter after suit commenced and amending complaint with leave of court when insurer ignored demand, motion for summary judgment is denied — Even if provider had not moved for leave to amend, insurer would only be entitled to order granting summary judgment with leave to amend because statute of limitations has not run

15 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 624d

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Explanation of benefits — Insurer breached policy by failing to provide EOB and failing to provide copy of policy and endorsements requested in demand letter

15 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1150a

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Demand letter — Statute requiring presuit demand letter applies to insured who received treatment prior to effective date of statute — Substantially compliant demand letter was sent to insurer, and it had implied actual notice of insured’s suit from statement in letter that it was presuit demand letter pursuant to section 627.736(11) — Because first presuit demand letter was substantially compliant, amended complaint filed on same day as amended presuit demand letter was proper, and refiling of entire action was not required

15 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1153a

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Standing — Failure to comply with condition precedent — Demand letter — Final summary judgment in favor of insurer finding insured lacked standing in action for bills incurred with two medical providers because demand letters were filed by providers after they had revoked assignments of benefits — Trial court erred in entering summary judgment concerning one provider’s bills where insured properly filed demand letter in own name for those bills before submitting second amended complaint — Further, where insured served demand letter for second provider’s bills at same time as second amended complaint, complaint should have been dismissed relative to those bills with leave to amend

15 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 336c

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Default — Vacation — Abuse of discretion to deny motion to vacate default — Mishandling that resulted in late filing of insurer’s responsive pleading constituted excusable neglect, and insurer’s answer and affirmative defenses established meritorious defense

15 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 106b

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Default entered against insurer

15 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 563b

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Independent medical examination — Failure to attend — Error to find that insurer’s act of automatically rescheduling missed IME waived its right to rely on first scheduled IME date as date of suspension of PIP benefits where insured did not notify insurer of inability to attend first IME, IME was not rescheduled to correct statutory deficiency, and insured did not attend rescheduled IME

15 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 373c

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Coverage — Claimant who resided with his brother-in-law at time of accident was not entitled to PIP coverage under policy of insurance issued to brother-in-law where uncontroverted evidence established that brother-in-law did not obtain his driver’s license until at least three months after the accident at issue and was not eligible to purchase automobile insurance prior to obtaining his driver’s license

15 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1004b

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Coverage — Medical expenses — Bill in excess of customary charges — Where medical provider charged PIP insurer amount for x-ray interpretative services in excess of what it charges other entities with which it has agreements to provide same services, provider violated statutory requirement that charges to PIP insurer not exceed amount provider customarily charges for like services — Provider is not entitled to recover disputed balance of reduced bill