In reflection, one might legitimately ask the question:” has the adoption of the Florida Motor Vehicle No Fault Law in 1971 really achieved the goals it was intended for?”

If we simply accept the decision to do away with what we familiarly know as “PIP” (personal injury protection), then the answer is a resounding “no”. When the hatchet was to have fallen in October 2007 on PIP it was abruptly placed way back on the back burner.

(more…)

There are few things we as people endure that are worse than losing a member of our family. The sense of loss, hurt, and anguish, however, is only magnified when a family member’s death was due to the negligence of someone else. What all-too-often causes even more heartache is the surviving family member’s discovery that the loss they have endured may not be recognized, i.e. compensable, under Florida law. Many people who have lost close family members as a result of the negligence of someone else have been surprised to learn that Florida law only allows for a financial recovery on behalf of certain surviving family members.

In Florida, the recovery of money damages by the surviving relatives for the death of a family member as the result of the negligence of another party is governed by Florida’s Wrongful Death Act (”Act”). According to the Act, the recovery of money damages is limited to the “survivors” of the deceased family member. The Act offers what would seem to be a fairly straightforward definition of who will constitute a deceased family member’s “survivors.” The Act defines survivors, in part, as “the decedent’s spouse, children, parents, and, when partly or wholly dependent on the decedent for support or services, any blood relatives and adoptive brothers and sisters.” Although the identification of a decedent’s survivors is ordinarily an easy enough task, it is critical for the lawyer representing the bereaved family to have a firm understanding of the relationship between family law principles and the Wrongful Death Act.

(more…)

The battle continues between the public and the trucking industry. In July, 2007, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia struck down the portions of final hours-of-service rule issued in 2005 by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration that permitted truck drivers to increase their driving hours. The American Trucking Association has filed a motion requesting the court to stay this decision and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration has requested a delay in the requirement by the court that would reduce the allowable driving time by 1 hour a day so the trucking industry can continue with “business as usual.”

The laws that control the hours a truck driver can operate have been created for a very specific reason, the safety of the general public. More accidents are caused by distracted or fatigued drivers than any other single reason. According to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), “Fatigue increases the likelihood that a driver will not pay sufficient attention to driving or commit other mental errors. In-depth studies of crashes have found that inattention and other mental lapses contribute to as much as 50 percent of all crashes. The agency tentatively estimates that 15 percent of all truck-involved fatal crashes are “fatigue-relevant,” that is, fatigue is either a primary or secondary factor.
(http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/spanish/english/background_index.htm/)

(more…)

Florida’s “No Fault” insurance statute is nearing expiration. Should it be renewed; should it be allowed to “sunset”; should it be modified? The Florida legislature has an opportunity to not only take the correct action, but an opportunity to improve on the no fault system altogether.

The controversy about eliminating “No Fault” is interesting. In the early ‘’70’s, when NO FAULT started in our state it was controversial. As it gained in popularity nationwide, Florida adopted it along with most states. The result was compulsory PIP (Personal Injury Protection) and compulsory PD (Property Damage liability)

PIP pays medical expenses (lost wages also) and PD pays for damages to motor vehicles. It should come as no surprise the groups that lobbied heavily for the original passage of compulsory PIP and PD? You guessed it. Medical providers lobbied heavily for PIP to get their bills paid. And who lobbied hot and heavy for PD inclusion? You probably guessed correctly again. The banks and finance companies wanted PD included to protect their collateral (motor vehicles). Although driven by there own business interests, the end result was good for the Florida consumer.

But, there was no special interest group throwing money at including compulsory BI (Bodily Injury liability) coverage. Bodily injury coverage pays damages to injured victims in auto crashes. To this day we do not have any compulsory BI liability coverage in Florida, but most states do.

I think it is clear to any thoughtful person that there should be a continuation of compulsory PIP and PD coverage, currently provided for in the No Fault statute. The legislature has an opportunity to also add compulsory bodily injury protection coverage. The required limits should be at least $10,000 per accident and $20,000 per occurrence. PIP should be increased as well. PIP was $10,000 back in 1972 and certainly medical costs charged to injured victims have since skyrocketed.

The Florida legislature can not only do the right thing by renewing the current No Fault structure; they have an opportunity to actually improve the system for both business and victim interests. I encourage them to step up to the plate and do the right thing.

A recent Maryland truck accident dramatically highlights not only the deadly consequences of poor enforcement of Federal truck safety standards, but trucking companies’ ho-hum attitudes toward compliance with these standards.

It seems that an accident in Prince Georges County, Maryland that killed one man and injured two others was caused by a tractor-trailer driver with a mind-boggling list of traffic citations: he had racked up tickets in seven states for speeding, careless driving, driving with defective brakes, and – here’s the real outrage – had his license suspended in two states.

(more…)