FAQ - Do the exceptions to limited tort apply in UM/UIM cases?

Question #1: How does the concept of “limited tort” relate to claims against one’s own insurance carrier for UM/UIM, or uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage?

The coverage called UM or UIM comes into play when the other driver (who caused a vehicle accident in which you were injured) lacks adequate insurance coverage to pay for your injuries. Hence, in the case, you may turn to your own insurance carrier for UM/UIM coverage, if you have it; it is not mandatory in PA). It must be offered to you, but it can be waived.

If you have UM/UIM coverage, your carrier stands in the shoes of the party who is responsible for your injuries. This means, your carrier has both all duties to pay (up to coverage limits) and all defenses that the negligent driver could have asserted against you, including the defense that your claims are barred in whole or in part by the limited tort election.

If you have limited tort, relative to your UM/UIM claim referenced above, you may recover for pain and suffering (not withstanding your limited tort election). But only if your injuries are serious.

Supreme Court of PA

In Rump v. Aetna Casualty, 710 A.2d 1093 (Pa. 1998), the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania determined that the typical exceptions to limited tort do not apply in UM/UIM cases. These include:

1. The negligent driver is convicted or accepts Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition (ARD) for driving under the influence of alcohol or a controlled substance during the accident

2. Was operating a vehicle registered in another state;

3. Failed to maintain financial responsibility (was not properly insured for the accident); or

4. Intended to inflict self-harm or injure another person

The bottom line is: if you have not already elected full tort in PA, do so ASAP. Contact a qualified Pennsylvania attorney. Err on the side of electing full tort versus limited tort.

Let’s Get Started!

Call or email for a free consultation about any limited tort subject.