TBO.com - TBO is Tampa Bay Online

PIP Transition Period Concerns House Panel

ADVERTISEMENT

By JEROME R. STOCKFISCH, The Tampa Tribune

Published: October 3, 2007

TALLAHASSEE - It was described as compromise legislation that could resurrect Florida's no-fault auto insurance system, but committee hearings on Tuesday suggested that advocates for the recently expired system still have their work cut out for them.

A key state senator said he still had concerns with a bill reinstating mandatory personal injury protection, or PIP. A House committee also was hung up on the transition period between Monday, when PIP expired and Floridians no longer had to carry it, and its potential reauthorization into state law in the next two weeks. The panel was uncertain about what would happen in the interim.

Rep. Ellyn Bogdanoff, R-Fort Lauderdale, the key House negotiator on PIP, described that transition period this way: 'It's chaos.'

The debate came on the eve of today's special session originally called solely to trim $1.1 billion from the state budget.

At issue is mandatory PIP, which was the law in Florida from 1972 until Monday. Under that system, drivers were required to carry $10,000 in personal injury protection as part of their auto insurance portfolio. If there was an accident, the driver was covered by his or her own policy.

A side effect of that system has been rampant fraud, fueling a cottage industry of unscrupulous medical service providers running up treatment and bills, and even staging accidents or submitting false accident reports.

Florida has tried for years to fix the system, but lawmakers instead allowed it to expire. As of Monday, the state defaulted to the traditional at-fault system, in which a party considered to have caused an accident can be held responsible for damages.

Gov. Charlie Crist on Monday ordered the Legislature to revisit its decision to let PIP lapse. Both Crist and House Speaker Marco Rubio, R-West Miami, indicated there was 'substantive compromise legislation,' as Rubio put it. But on Tuesday, it appeared there was a lot of work ahead.

'It's a very difficult bill with a lot of interlocking positions,' said Sen. JD Alexander, R-Lake Wales. 'There are still some areas I'm concerned with.'

Alexander previously had proposed competing legislation allowing PIP to expire, while making other coverage mandatory.

Sen. Bill Posey, R-Rockledge, is a co-sponsor of the PIP legislation. The Bogdanoff-Posey bill would:

•Allow PIP insurers to cap payments to doctors at certain levels, typically double the amount of the Medicare fee schedule. There are exceptions: Emergency care providers would be able to charge more, for example.

•Limit who can treat PIP patients to health care providers such as hospitals, emergency medical technicians, chiropractors, and accredited health care clinics or those that have a licensed doctor in charge.

Also notable was what did not appear in the bill.

It does not address 'utilization,' or procedures doctors must follow. For example, a utilization schedule might limit the number of consecutive MRIs or X-rays a physician may order, which under the old PIP law were not limited. There is no money to fight fraud, although Posey said that could be accomplished during next year's regular legislative session. There also is no cap on attorney fees.

Bogdanoff acknowledged there was much work to do on the transition period. 'The average consumer is going to get a little whiplash,' she told a pair of House committees meeting jointly on the PIP issue. 'It's going to be a little confusing.'

Reporter Jerome R. Stockfisch can be reached at (850) 222-8382 or jstockfisch@tampatrib.com.

Share this:

Loading Comments...

Email Print

ADVERTISEMENT