When purchasing auto insurance in Pennsylvania you have a choice: you can select the Limited Tort option or the Full Tort option. Choosing the Limited Tort option results in a cheaper premium, but it may prevent you from recovering any money after a car accident, even if you are injured. Your choice of coverage impacts you, as well as any family members residing in your household.
With Limited Tort coverage, you will not be able to make a claim for non-economic damages (i.e. pain & suffering or loss of life’s pleasures) unless you can prove one of several limited exceptions, or that you suffered a “serious impairment of a body function.” Even if you have a serious injury, the law does not clearly define which injuries qualify as a “serious impairment of a body function.” This means that either a judge or jury will decide if your injury fits into that category, and it is subjective.
Insurance companies know it is difficult to prove that your injury is a “serious impairment of a body function,” and they will often argue that your injury does not meet the threshold. They will also offer a smaller settlement than you deserve, because they know that you may or may not convince a judge or jury that your injury meets this standard. If you decide to pursue a lawsuit, you will have to wait, sometimes years, for the case to be decided before you receive any payment.
Damages associated with car accidents can include economic damages and non-economic damages. Economic damages are compensation for monetary losses, like medical bills, property damage, and lost income.
If you choose Full Tort, you will be able to make a claim for non-economic damages as soon as you are injured in a car accident. However, if you choose Limited Tort, you may not be able to recover any money for your non-economic damages at all.
To better understand Full Tort vs. Limited Tort, let’s look at the “Fun Run” episode of The Office as an example. In this episode, the boss of the office, Michael Scott, is driving to work. As he turns into the parking lot, he looks away from the road for a few seconds until BAM! He hits something, and we see the body of Meredith (an employee) hit the windshield, then roll off the hood of the car onto the ground.
Later, Michael reports what happened (kind of) to his staff, letting them know that Meredith has a slight “pelvical fracture.”
The office staff take up a collection for flowers and go to visit her in the hospital.
Dwight: As a farmer, I know that when an animal is sick, sometimes the right thing to do, is to put it out of its misery. With the electricity we’re keeping Meredith alive, we could power a small fan for two days. You tell me what’s unethical.
Dwight: Blink once if you want me to pull the plug.
Meredith: Don’t pull any plugs.
Meredith was injured in a car accident and needed to be hospitalized. Who will pay her medical bills? What if she suffers non-economic damages like pain and suffering?
Pennsylvania has a “no-fault” law for medical expenses in car accidents. This means that if you are injured in a car accident, no matter whose fault the accident was, your own car insurance will pay the medical bills, up to the policy limit. Then your health insurance would pay expenses beyond that. [1]
So even though Michael hit Meredith with his car, it’s her car insurance that will pay her medical expenses.
If Meredith had Full Tort coverage, she could also receive payment for her non-economic damages like pain and suffering right away.
However, if Meredith had Limited Tort coverage, in order to receive any payment for her non-economic damages, she would have to prove that she suffered a “serious impairment of a body function” or that she meets one of the limited exceptions.
Would a fractured pelvis qualify as a serious impairment of a body function? Meredith would have to show that this injury had a serious impact for an extended period of time on her life, and substantially interfered with her normal activities. As discussed above, this is a subjective standard, to be decided by a judge or jury. It is very hard to predict how they will decide, and as such, Meredith’s chance of winning this argument is about 50/50.
In addition, she would have to wait until the case is decided before receiving any compensation for non-economic damages. The insurance company may offer her a settlement, but it will likely be much lower than what her case is worth, because they know that pursuing the case is risky for her – she may win nothing at all.
However, in this particular case, Meredith could prove that she meets one of the exceptions because she was a pedestrian at the time of the accident. If the injured person was a pedestrian or cyclist at the time of the accident, their claim is treated as a Full Tort claim. As such, Meredith would be able to pursue a claim against the at-fault party for non-economic damages, and could collect as soon as the accident happens.
If Meredith had been driving at the time of the accident, and had Limited Tort coverage, she very likely would not be able to make a claim for non-economic damages.
The differences between Full Tort and Limited Tort and how they affect claims are complicated. If you are injured in a car accident, contact the experienced car accident lawyers at Aversa & Linn as soon as possible to discuss your ability to pursue a claim.
[1] Your health insurance company may have a right to be repaid for medical bills they pay due to your car accident if you get a settlement from the at-fault insurance company.
