UM/UIM Demand Letter - Florida

UM/UIM (UNINSURED/UNDERINSURED MOTORIST) DEMAND LETTER

State of Florida

[LAW FIRM LETTERHEAD]

SETTLEMENT COMMUNICATION — FOR DISPUTE RESOLUTION PURPOSES ONLY
EVIDENTIARY USE SUBJECT TO FLA. STAT. § 90.408 IF THIS IS A DISPUTED-CLAIM COMPROMISE NEGOTIATION

VIA CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED (ARTICLE NO. [__________________________])
AND VIA EMAIL TO: [________________________________]

Date: [__/__/____]

[INSURANCE COMPANY FULL LEGAL NAME]
Attn: UM/UIM Claims Department
[________________________________]
[________________________________]
[City], [State] [Zip]

Attention: [________________________________], [Title]
Re: FLORIDA UM/UIM POLICY LIMITS DEMAND
Insured/Claimant: [________________________________]
Policy Number: [________________________________]
Claim Number: [________________________________]
Date of Loss: [__/__/____]
UM/UIM Policy Limits: $[________________________________]
Stacking Status: ☐ Stacked ☐ Non-Stacked (written rejection on file)
Tortfeasor: [________________________________]
Tortfeasor's Carrier: [________________________________]
Tortfeasor's Bodily Injury Limits: $[____] per person / $[____] per accident
Response Deadline: [__/__/____] at 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time

Dear [________________________________]:

If and to the extent this letter constitutes compromise negotiations over a claim disputed as to validity or amount, Fla. Stat. § 90.408 may limit use to prove liability, absence of liability, or the claim's value. The statute does not itself make this ordinary demand confidential or privileged.

I. INTRODUCTION AND NATURE OF DEMAND

This firm represents [________________________________] ("our client") in connection with a claim for uninsured/underinsured motorist (UM/UIM) benefits under Florida law arising from a motor vehicle collision occurring on [__/__/____] in [________________________________] County, Florida. This letter constitutes a formal demand for payment of the full applicable UM/UIM policy limits of $[________________________________].

Our client sustained serious injuries in this collision that meet Florida's "verbal threshold" under Fla. Stat. § 627.737 — specifically, [________________________________] constituting a permanent injury within a reasonable degree of medical probability / significant and permanent loss of an important bodily function / significant and permanent scarring or disfigurement. Our client's total damages far exceed both the tortfeasor's available liability limits and the UM/UIM coverage at issue.

Florida's UM/UIM statute, Fla. Stat. § 627.727, was enacted precisely to protect insureds in situations such as this. Your own insured is entitled to the full benefit of the bargain for which premiums were paid. This is a clear policy limits case and should be resolved promptly.

II. FLORIDA UM/UIM LAW — CONTROLLING LEGAL FRAMEWORK

A. Florida Statute § 627.727 — UM/UIM Coverage Requirements

Under Fla. Stat. § 627.727, no motor vehicle liability insurance policy providing bodily injury liability coverage may be delivered or issued in Florida unless uninsured motorist coverage is included, unless the named insured makes a written, knowing rejection. Key provisions:

• Default Coverage: UM/UIM limits must equal the bodily injury liability limits unless the insured affirmatively elects lower limits or rejects in writing
• Rejection Form Requirements: Any rejection or selection of lower limits must be on an OIR-approved form with 12-point bold type heading stating: "You are electing not to purchase certain valuable coverage which protects you and your family or you are purchasing uninsured motorist limits less than your bodily injury liability limits"
• Annual Notice: Insurers must notify the named insured at least annually of their UM/UIM options as part of the premium notice
• Knowing Rejection Standard: A signed rejection form creates a conclusive presumption of an informed, knowing rejection — but only if the form substantially complies with § 627.727(1) requirements

B. Stacking Rules Under § 627.727(8)

Florida law permits stacking of UM/UIM limits across multiple vehicles on the same policy, or across multiple policies, unless the insured has elected non-stacking coverage under Fla. Stat. § 627.727(8). The insurer must inform the named insured, applicant, or lessee of the limitations on an OIR-approved form. A signed form conclusively presumes informed, knowing acceptance of those limitations on behalf of all insureds. Separately, before first providing limited coverage, the insurer must file rates reflecting a premium reduction of at least 20% for policies with those limitations. The statute does not state that proof of an individual insured's reduced payment is a condition of a signed election's validity. See Travelers Comm. Ins. Co. v. Harrington, 154 So. 3d 1106 (Fla. 2014).

Stacking Analysis for This Claim:

☐ Our client has stacked UM/UIM coverage; limits of $[____] × [____] vehicles = $[________________________________] are available

☐ The purported non-stacking election is invalid because [________________________________]

☐ Non-stacked limits of $[________________________________] apply per this policy

C. Florida PIP/No-Fault Interaction — Fla. Stat. § 627.736

Florida remains a no-fault state under Fla. Stat. § 627.736. Our client's PIP carrier has paid the following amounts, which must be accounted for in the UM/UIM damages calculation:

☐ A qualifying provider determined an Emergency Medical Condition (EMC); eligible medical reimbursement may exceed the non-EMC $2,500 limit, subject to the shared $10,000 limit and other coverage terms

D. Verbal Threshold / Serious Injury Requirement — Fla. Stat. § 627.737

To maintain an action for non-economic damages (pain and suffering) against the tortfeasor — and by extension under UM/UIM coverage — our client's injuries must meet the statutory "verbal threshold." Our client satisfies this threshold:

☐ Significant and permanent loss of an important bodily function — [________________________________]

☐ Permanent injury within a reasonable degree of medical probability — [________________________________]

☐ Significant and permanent scarring or disfigurement — [________________________________]

☐ Death — (wrongful death claim; separate demand forthcoming / attached)

Supporting documentation from treating physician(s) is enclosed confirming threshold satisfaction.

E. Modified Comparative Fault — Fla. Stat. § 768.81 (HB 837, eff. March 24, 2023)

Florida adopted a modified comparative fault system effective March 24, 2023. A plaintiff whose share of fault exceeds 50% may not recover. Our client bears zero comparative fault for this collision (or, alternatively, no more than [____]% fault), and the tortfeasor's negligence is the sole proximate cause of our client's injuries.

III. COVERAGE INFORMATION

A. Policy Details

B. UM vs. UIM Coverage Trigger

Uninsured Motorist (UM) — Tortfeasor qualifies because:

☐ Tortfeasor carried no liability insurance at the time of the collision (FHSMV records enclosed)

☐ Tortfeasor's insurer has denied coverage in writing

☐ Tortfeasor's insurer is insolvent (Florida Insurance Guaranty Association notice enclosed)

☐ Hit-and-run or unidentified driver — cannot be identified; incident evidence: [________________________________]; reported to you within [____] days under the policy

Underinsured Motorist (UIM) — Tortfeasor qualifies because:

☐ Tortfeasor's bodily injury liability limits of $[________________________________] are insufficient to fully compensate our client for damages of $[________________________________]

☐ We have [obtained / will obtain] your written consent to settle with the tortfeasor's carrier for the tortfeasor's policy limits of $[________________________________]

☐ We are preserving your subrogation rights per Florida law — see Section VI below

IV. THE COLLISION AND LIABILITY

A. Facts of the Collision

On [__/__/____] at approximately [____]:[____] [a.m./p.m.], our client, [________________________________], was operating/riding in/was a pedestrian near [________________________________] in [________________________________] County, Florida, when:

[________________________________]
[________________________________]
[________________________________]

B. Law Enforcement Response

[________________________________] Police Department / Sheriff's Office responded. Traffic Crash Report No. [________________________________] reflects the following:

• Crash Location: [________________________________]
• Weather/Road Conditions: [________________________________]
• Citing Officer: [________________________________], Badge No. [____]
• Violations Cited: [________________________________]
• Fault Determination in Report: [________________________________]

C. Tortfeasor's Negligence

The tortfeasor, [________________________________], was negligent under Florida law in the following respects:

☐ Careless driving: failure to drive carefully and prudently in the circumstances (Fla. Stat. § 316.1925) — [DESCRIBE]
☐ Failure to maintain a proper lookout — [DESCRIBE]

☐ Failure to yield after a stop at a stop-sign intersection (Fla. Stat. § 316.123(2)(a)) — [DESCRIBE]
☐ Failure to yield while turning left (Fla. Stat. § 316.122) — [DESCRIBE]

☐ Following too closely (Fla. Stat. § 316.0895)

☐ Exceeding posted speed limit / traveling too fast for conditions (Fla. Stat. § 316.183)

☐ Texting/distracted driving (Fla. Stat. § 316.305)

☐ Running red light or stop sign (Fla. Stat. § 316.075)

☐ Improper lane change (Fla. Stat. § 316.085)

☐ Driving under the influence (Fla. Stat. § 316.193)

☐ [________________________________]

D. Supporting Evidence

V. OUR CLIENT'S INJURIES AND TREATMENT

A. Injury Summary

As a direct and proximate result of this collision, our client sustained the following injuries diagnosed to a reasonable degree of medical certainty:

Primary Injuries:

• [________________________________]
• [________________________________]
• [________________________________]

Secondary/Consequential Injuries:

• [________________________________]
• [________________________________]

B. Treatment History

C. Permanent Impairment Rating

Pursuant to Florida law, our client has been evaluated for permanent impairment:

Threshold Confirmation: The above ratings confirm a permanent injury within a reasonable degree of medical probability satisfying Fla. Stat. § 627.737(2)(b).

D. Future Medical Needs

[________________________________]'s life care plan / treating physician's opinion projects the following future medical needs:

VI. DAMAGES

A. Economic Damages

1. Past Medical Expenses

Note: In a later personal-injury action, Fla. Stat. § 768.0427(2) limits evidence of satisfied past medical charges to amounts actually paid and sets separate rules for unpaid and future charges. UM/UIM coverage may not duplicate PIP benefits under § 627.727(1). Reconcile these amounts in the damages schedule; billed charges are not automatically recoverable.

2. Future Medical Expenses (Present Value)

$[________________________________] (per life care plan / treating physician projection, enclosed)

3. Past Lost Wages / Earnings

Our client was employed as [________________________________] earning $[____] per [hour/week/year] at the time of the collision. Our client was unable to work from [__/__/____] through [__/__/____] — a period of [____] weeks/months — resulting in:

Past Lost Wages: $[________________________________]

Documentation: Pay stubs, employer verification letter, W-2s enclosed.

4. Future Lost Earning Capacity (Present Value)

Vocational expert [________________________________] opines that our client's permanent restrictions reduce future earning capacity by $[____] annually. Present value over [____]-year work-life expectancy:

Future Lost Earning Capacity: $[________________________________]

B. Non-Economic Damages

Our client has endured and will continue to endure significant non-economic damages that satisfy Florida's verbal threshold:

• Past Pain and Suffering: [________________________________]
• Future Pain and Suffering: [________________________________] (permanent, per treating physician)
• Loss of Enjoyment of Life: [________________________________]
• Mental Anguish: [________________________________]
• Permanent Disfigurement/Scarring: [________________________________]

Non-Economic Damages: $[________________________________]

C. Damages Summary

VII. TORTFEASOR SETTLEMENT AND CONSENT TO SETTLE

A. Settlement Status

☐ We have reached a settlement with tortfeasor's carrier, [________________________________], for the full bodily injury limits of $[________________________________]. We request your written consent to settle. Under Fla. Stat. § 627.727(6), the UM/UIM insurer has 30 days after receipt of written notice of a proposed settlement either to authorize the settlement or to preserve its subrogation rights by advancing to the injured party the amount of the tortfeasor's written offer. Failure to respond within that 30-day period permits our client to execute a full release without prejudice to the UM/UIM claim.

☐ We are actively pursuing the tortfeasor's available limits of $[________________________________] and will provide written notice before executing any settlement.

B. UIM Benefits Calculation

VIII. DEMAND FOR UM/UIM POLICY LIMITS

Based on the foregoing, we hereby demand payment of the full applicable UM/UIM policy limits of $[________________________________] within the time stated below.

Our client's damages of $[________________________________] substantially exceed the combined coverage available from all sources. This is an unambiguous policy limits case. Prompt payment will fully release [________________________________] from all UM/UIM obligations under this policy.

IX. FLORIDA BAD FAITH WARNING — CIVIL REMEDY NOTICE

[CARRIER_SHORT_NAME] owes its own insured the utmost duty of good faith and fair dealing under Florida law.

A. Statutory Bad Faith — Fla. Stat. § 624.155

Under Fla. Stat. § 624.155(1)(b), it is an unlawful insurance practice — actionable as statutory bad faith — for an insurer to not attempt in good faith to settle claims when, under all the circumstances, it could and should have done so, had it acted fairly and honestly toward its insured and with due regard for the insured's interests. Key procedural requirements:

1. Civil Remedy Notice (CRN) Required: As a condition precedent to a statutory bad faith action, our client files a CRN with the Florida Department of Financial Services (DFS). As amended by HB 837 (ch. 2023-15), the Department provides the notice to the insurer's designated e-mail address, and the 60-day cure period runs from the insurer's receipt of that notice from the Department — not merely from the date of electronic filing. See Fla. Stat. § 624.155(3)(a), (c).

2. 60-Day Cure Period: If [________________________________] pays the damages or corrects the circumstances giving rise to the violation within 60 days after receiving the Department's notice, no statutory bad faith action may be maintained. See Fla. Stat. § 624.155(3)(c).

3. Post-HB 837 Standard (eff. March 24, 2023): Under HB 837, mere negligence alone is insufficient to constitute bad faith. See Fla. Stat. § 624.155(5)(a). The insured, claimant, and their representatives also owe a statutory duty to act in good faith in furnishing claim information, making demands, and setting deadlines; the trier of fact may consider a breach of that duty to reasonably reduce damages awarded against the insurer. See Fla. Stat. § 624.155(5)(b).

B. First-Party UM Bad Faith and Third-Party Cases

Boston Old Colony Ins. Co. v. Gutierrez, 386 So. 2d 783 (Fla. 1980), concerns an insurer's handling of a claim against its insured. Its standard is the care and diligence a person of ordinary care and prudence would use in managing their own business, as quoted in Berges v. Infinity Insurance Co., No. SC01-2846 (Fla. 2004). It does not create a common-law cause of action for this first-party UM claim. QBE Insurance Corp. v. Chalfonte Condominium Apartment Association, Inc., No. SC09-441 (Fla. 2012), holds that Florida has no common-law first-party bad-faith action. Any bad-faith claim against this UM carrier proceeds under Fla. Stat. § 624.155, with UM-carrier damages addressed in § 627.727(9).

C. Statutory Cure

• Talat Enterprises, Inc. v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 753 So. 2d 1278 (Fla. 2000): Tender of policy limits within the 60-day CRN cure period cures the alleged statutory violation; cure is the statutory remedy.

D. Bad Faith Damages Available

If a statutory bad faith action is successfully maintained:

• All damages sustained as a consequence of the insurer's bad faith conduct, including damages in excess of policy limits
• Consequential damages flowing from the breach
• Punitive damages — available only where the insurer's acts are willful, wanton, and malicious or in reckless disregard of the insured's rights and occur with such frequency as to indicate a general business practice (Fla. Stat. § 624.155(8); see also § 768.72)
• Attorney's fees — the former one-way fee statute, Fla. Stat. § 627.428, was repealed in full by HB 837 (ch. 2023-15, eff. March 24, 2023) — not merely for property lines. For UM/UIM claims, however, Fla. Stat. § 627.727(9) expressly provides that damages recoverable from the UM carrier in a § 624.155 bad-faith action include reasonable attorney's fees and costs. Additional fee bases may include Fla. Stat. § 86.121 (declaratory action after a total coverage denial) and a proposal for settlement under Fla. Stat. § 768.79 (made applicable to insurance-contract actions by § 624.1552). Confirm applicability to the specific claim.

E. Warning

If the evidence supports a violation, our client may file a Civil Remedy Notice with the Florida Department of Financial Services. Any later statutory bad-faith action remains subject to the notice and cure requirements in Fla. Stat. § 624.155(3) and to favorable resolution of the underlying UM benefits claim; expiration of the cure period alone does not start that action.

X. ARBITRATION

A. Policy Arbitration Clause

The policy ☐ contains / ☐ does not contain an arbitration provision for UM/UIM disputes.

UM/UIM disputes are subject to binding arbitration only where the policy contains an arbitration provision — Florida law does not itself compel arbitration of UM/UIM claims. Any such arbitration is governed by the policy's own terms and applicable Florida arbitration law. If this demand is not accepted, we ☐ will / ☐ will not invoke arbitration per the policy's terms.

B. Arbitration Demand (If Applicable)

If [________________________________] declines this demand, this letter constitutes notice of our intent to demand arbitration under the policy and Florida law. We will designate our arbitrator as [________________________________].

XI. RESPONSE DEADLINE AND CONSEQUENCES

THIS DEMAND EXPIRES AT 5:00 P.M. EASTERN TIME ON [__/__/____].

This deadline is reasonable and consistent with Florida law. Under HB 837 (eff. March 24, 2023), the conduct of all parties, including the claimant in setting demand deadlines, is considered in evaluating bad faith. We have set a reasonable deadline of [____] days from the date of this letter to allow adequate time for investigation and decision.

Consequences of Failure to Respond

If [________________________________] fails to accept this demand by the deadline:

1. Litigation will be filed in [________________________________] County Circuit Court, Florida

2. Civil Remedy Notice may be filed electronically with the Florida Department of Financial Services; the statutory 60-day period runs from the insurer's receipt of notice sent by the Department under Fla. Stat. § 624.155(3)

3. Regulatory Complaint will be filed with:

   • Florida Office of Insurance Regulation
     200 East Gaines Street, Tallahassee, FL 32399-0326
     Tel: (850) 413-3140

• Florida Department of Financial Services, Division of Consumer Services
  200 East Gaines Street, Tallahassee, FL 32399-0322
  Tel: (850) 413-3089 / Toll-Free: 1-877-693-5236

4. Arbitration demand will be filed (if applicable under policy terms)

XII. DOCUMENT PRESERVATION NOTICE

This letter constitutes formal written notice to [________________________________] to immediately preserve all documents, electronically stored information (ESI), and tangible items related to this claim, including without limitation:

• Complete claims file in all versions
• All adjuster notes, diary entries, and reserve documentation
• All internal communications and emails regarding this claim
• Recorded statements (obtain our written consent before recording)
• Claim handling guidelines and procedures applicable to this claim type
• All correspondence with the insured or this office
• Photos, inspection reports, and appraisals
• Supervisor approvals and quality assurance materials

Spoliation of evidence in bad faith litigation is subject to adverse inference instructions and sanctions under Florida law.

XIII. CONCLUSION

[________________________________] collected premiums from its insured in exchange for a promise — the promise to protect that insured when the at-fault driver could not. That moment has arrived. The liability is clear. The injuries are permanent and meet Florida's verbal threshold. The damages far exceed the tortfeasor's available coverage. This is the precise situation for which UM/UIM coverage exists.

We urge [________________________________] to honor its contractual and statutory obligations to its insured by tendering the full UM/UIM policy limits of $[________________________________] on or before [__/__/____].

Respectfully submitted,

[________________________________]

By: ___________________________________
[________________________________], Esq.
Florida Bar No. [________________________________]
[________________________________]
[City], FL [Zip]
Tel: [________________________________]
Fax: [________________________________]
Email: [________________________________]

Counsel for [________________________________]

ENCLOSURES:

☐ Policy declarations page with UM/UIM endorsement
☐ UM/UIM stacking/rejection form (or absence thereof)
☐ Florida Traffic Crash Report No. [________________________________]
☐ Medical records and bills — all treating providers
☐ Permanent impairment rating(s)
☐ Life care plan (if applicable)
☐ Lost wage documentation (pay stubs, employer letter, W-2s)
☐ Vocational rehabilitation report (if applicable)
☐ Scene and vehicle photographs
☐ Witness statements
☐ Accident reconstruction report (if applicable)
☐ FHSMV insurance records for tortfeasor
☐ Tortfeasor's liability policy declarations (if obtained)
☐ Correspondence with tortfeasor's carrier

CC:

• [________________________________] (Client)
• [________________________________] (Tortfeasor's Carrier — re: consent to settle)

FLORIDA UM/UIM LAW QUICK REFERENCE

SOURCES AND REFERENCES

• Fla. Stat. § 627.727 (UM/UIM) — non-stacking election is subsection (8); bad-faith damages incl. reasonable attorney's fees is subsection (9); consent-to-settle/subrogation is subsection (6): https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2026/627.727
• Fla. Stat. § 627.736 (PIP): https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2026/627.736
• Fla. Stat. § 627.737 (Verbal threshold — subsection (2)(a)-(d)): https://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2024/627.737
• Fla. Stat. § 624.155 (Civil Remedy — CRN cure period runs from insurer's receipt of Dept. notice per (3)(a),(c); "mere negligence insufficient" (5)(a), as amended by HB 837/ch. 2023-15): https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2026/624.155
• HB 837 / ch. 2023-15, Laws of Fla. (repeal of § 627.428 one-way fees; § 624.155 & § 768.81 amendments): https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2023/837
• Fla. Stat. § 86.121 (attorney fees; declaratory action after total coverage denial — 2025 repeal bill HB 1551 died in committee): https://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2024/86.121
• Travelers Comm. Ins. Co. v. Harrington, 154 So. 3d 1106 (Fla. 2014) (non-stacking election by named insured binds all insureds; UM not stackable under § 627.727)
• Fla. Stat. § 768.81 (Comparative fault / HB 837): https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2023/837
• Talat Enterprises, Inc. v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 753 So. 2d 1278 (Fla. 2000)
• Boston Old Colony Ins. Co. v. Gutierrez, 386 So. 2d 783 (Fla. 1980)
• Florida DFS Civil Remedy Notice Portal: https://myfloridacfo.com/division/consumers/civilremedy
• Florida OIR: https://www.floir.com
• Holland & Knight HB 837 Summary: https://www.hklaw.com/en/insights/publications/2023/03/florida-enacts-major-tort-reform-and-bad-faith-insurance-claim
• 60-Day CRN Cure Period (Timing): https://www.chrisrussolaw.com/tender-of-um-benefits-must-occur-within-60-day-window-after-crn/
• Stacking Analysis: https://www.taylordaylaw.com/2025/06/floridas-stacking-v-non-stacking-uninsured-underinsured-motorist-coverage-and-plaintiffs-attempts-to-thwart-%C2%A7-627-727-for-additional-coverag/