UM/UIM Demand Letter - Florida

UM/UIM (UNINSURED/UNDERINSURED MOTORIST) DEMAND LETTER

State of Florida

[LAW FIRM LETTERHEAD]

PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL
SETTLEMENT COMMUNICATION — FOR DISPUTE RESOLUTION PURPOSES ONLY
PROTECTED UNDER FLA. STAT. § 90.408 (F.S.E. 408 EQUIVALENT) AND FLORIDA RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

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 [________________________________]:

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(9)

Florida law permits stacking of UM/UIM limits across multiple vehicles on the same policy, or across multiple policies, unless the insured has validly elected non-stacking coverage in writing using an OIR-approved form. A non-stacking election is valid only where the insured received a reduced premium in exchange for the election.

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:

☐ Our client's treating physician has confirmed an Emergency Medical Condition (EMC), making the full $10,000 PIP benefit applicable

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 driver — cannot be identified; physical contact confirmed per police report; reported to you within [____] days per policy requirements

☐ Tortfeasor's limits are below Florida's minimum financial responsibility requirements ($10,000/$20,000 bodily injury)

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:

☐ Failure to maintain proper lookout (Fla. Stat. § 316.1925)

☐ Failure to yield right-of-way (Fla. Stat. § 316.123 / § 316.151)

☐ 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: Florida follows the collateral source rule as modified by Fla. Stat. § 768.76. PIP payments and health insurance payments may be subject to reduction; however, UM/UIM damages are assessed at full economic value.

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 within [____] days. Failure to consent within a reasonable time may affect your subrogation rights and will be considered in any subsequent bad faith analysis.

☐ 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: Before filing a statutory bad faith action, our client must file a CRN with the Florida Department of Financial Services (DFS). The 60-day cure period runs from the date the CRN is electronically filed with DFS — not from actual receipt by the insurer. See Fla. Stat. § 624.155(3)(d).

2. 60-Day Cure Period: If [________________________________] pays all damages or corrects the circumstances giving rise to the violation within 60 days of the CRN filing, no statutory bad faith action may be maintained.

3. Post-HB 837 Standard (eff. March 24, 2023): Under HB 837, mere negligence is insufficient to constitute bad faith. The insurer's conduct must constitute intentional misconduct or reckless disregard for the insured's rights. See Fla. Stat. § 624.155 as amended.

B. Common Law Bad Faith

Florida recognizes common law bad faith in third-party contexts. See Boston Old Colony Ins. Co. v. Gutierrez, 386 So. 2d 783 (Fla. 1980) (insurer must investigate, evaluate, and negotiate with same degree of care it would use if no policy limit existed).

C. Talat and Macola Standards

• 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.

• MacOla v. Government Employees Ins. Co., 953 So. 2d 451 (Fla. 2006): Common law bad faith does not support a first-party action; statutory remedy under § 624.155 is the exclusive vehicle for first-party claims.

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 (where insurer's conduct constitutes intentional misconduct or gross negligence under Fla. Stat. § 768.72)
• Attorney's fees (note: Fla. Stat. § 627.428 one-way fee provision was eliminated for most first-party property lines by SB 2-A eff. March 24, 2023; UM/UIM claims may retain separate fee basis — confirm with current authority before relying)

E. Warning

Any attempt by [________________________________] to deny, unreasonably delay, or undervalue this claim will be met with immediate filing of a Civil Remedy Notice with the Florida Department of Financial Services, followed by a statutory bad faith action upon expiration of the 60-day cure period.

X. ARBITRATION

A. Policy Arbitration Clause

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

Under Fla. Stat. § 627.727(9), UM/UIM disputes are subject to binding arbitration where the policy so provides. 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 will be filed electronically with the Florida Department of Financial Services, initiating the 60-day cure clock under Fla. Stat. § 624.155

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): https://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2024/627.727
• Fla. Stat. § 627.736 (PIP): https://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0600-0699/0627/Sections/0627.736.html
• Fla. Stat. § 627.737 (Verbal threshold): https://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0600-0699/0627/Sections/0627.737.html
• Fla. Stat. § 624.155 (Civil Remedy): https://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2024/624.155
• 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)
• MacOla v. Government Employees Ins. Co., 953 So. 2d 451 (Fla. 2006): https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/fl-supreme-court/1148219.html
• 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/