SUMMARY:If the insured transfer all his rights under the policy it is an assignment of benefits. If the insured maintains some rights then it is a direction to pay. After the insured assigned away their rights, they may not bring a suit under the policy.
CRAIG H. LICHTBLAU, M.D., P.A., (Timothy Cranston) Plaintiff, vs. PROGRESSIVE EXPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant, 11 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 570b held:
In sum, it appears from appellate case law that the test of whether an assignment exists in the PIP context depends upon whether the insured has transferred to the provider all of the insured's interest under the policy, or whether the insured has reserved some right to make a claim on the policy. The former constitutes an assignment, and the latter constitutes a mere agreement or direction to pay.
Allstate Insurance Company v. Kaklamanos, 843 So. 2d 885, 892 n.3 (Fla. 2003)
In fact, where an insured does assign PIP benefits to the medical provider, it has been ruled an unqualified assignment which removes the insured's standing to bring a direct action against the insurer, even though the insured remains liable for any medical bills not paid by the insurer. See, e.g., Oglesby v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 781 So.2d 469 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001), Livingston v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 774 So.2d 716, 717 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) ("As a general rule, if an insured has assigned her right to receive personal injury protection (PIP) benefits to a health care provider, the insured may not file a lawsuit to collect the assigned benefits.").
Schuster v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Florida, Inc., 843 So. 2d 909, 912 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)
See Oglesby v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 781 So.2d 469 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001). "[O]nly the insured or the medical provider `owns' the cause of action against the insurer at any one time." Id. at 470.
