Florida has one of the highest rates of uninsured drivers in the country, and Miami-Dade County sits at the top of the state's list. Florida law does not require most drivers to carry bodily injury liability coverage at all. A driver can legally operate a car on the Palmetto Expressway with nothing more than $10,000 in personal injury protection and $10,000 in property damage liability. If that driver runs a red light on Flagler Street and puts you in the hospital, there may be no liability policy to pay for your surgery, your lost wages, or your pain.
Uninsured motorist (UM) and underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage exists to fill that gap. It is coverage you buy on your own auto policy that steps into the shoes of the at-fault driver when that driver has no bodily injury coverage or too little of it. The governing statute is Fla. Stat. § 627.727, and the details of that statute decide whether a seriously injured Miami driver recovers full value or walks away with almost nothing.
Section 627.727(1) requires every motor vehicle liability policy delivered or issued in Florida that includes bodily injury liability coverage to also include uninsured motorist coverage. The statute sets two default rules:
The statute defines an "uninsured motor vehicle" broadly under § 627.727(3). It includes vehicles with no bodily injury coverage at all, vehicles whose insurer has denied coverage or become insolvent, and, most important in practice, vehicles whose liability limits are less than your damages. That last category is what people mean by "underinsured." In Florida, UM and UIM are the same coverage applied to two situations.
This is where many Miami UM claims are won or lost before the crash ever happens. Under § 627.727(1), when a named insured signs the approved rejection or limit-selection form, the statute creates a conclusive presumption that the rejection or selection was informed and knowing. "Conclusive" means what it says: if the form is valid, you generally cannot argue later that the agent failed to explain the coverage or that you did not understand what you were signing.
The presumption cuts the other way, too. If the insurer cannot produce a properly executed form, or the form deviates from the approved format, the default rule takes over and the policy is treated as carrying UM limits equal to the bodily injury limits. In litigation we routinely demand the signed rejection form in discovery. Insurers lose forms. Agents have insureds sign the wrong version. Electronic signatures get applied to the wrong policy. Each of those errors can convert a "no UM coverage" denial into six figures of coverage.
Two more points about the form:
Florida's stacking rules are unusual, and they matter enormously in multi-car households, which are common in Miami-Dade. By default, UM coverage in Florida is stacked. Section 627.727(9) permits insurers to sell non-stacked coverage at a reduced premium, but only if the named insured signs a separate approved form containing the specific notice language the statute prescribes.
Stacked coverage multiplies your per-person UM limit by the number of vehicles on the policy (and, in many situations, allows you to combine UM coverage across separate household policies). Stacked coverage also follows the person rather than the vehicle. You are covered while riding as a passenger in a friend's car, walking across Biscayne Boulevard, or riding a bicycle in Coral Way.
Worked example: A Miami family insures three vehicles on one policy with stacked UM limits of $50,000 per person / $100,000 per accident. The father is rear-ended on I-95 by a driver with no bodily injury coverage and suffers a herniated disc requiring fusion surgery. With stacking, his available UM coverage is $50,000 × 3 vehicles = $150,000 per person. If the coverage were non-stacked, he would have $50,000, full stop, regardless of how many cars are on the policy.
Section 627.727(9) is strict about the election. The insurer must use the approved form, the form must be signed by a named insured, and the insurer must actually charge the reduced premium the statute contemplates. If any element is missing, courts treat the coverage as stacked by operation of law. On a three-car policy, an invalid non-stacking form can triple the available coverage. Always request the election form, the premium documentation, and the policy declarations for every policy period at issue.
UIM coverage in Florida sits on top of the at-fault driver's bodily injury coverage; it is not reduced dollar-for-dollar in the way some drivers assume. Section 627.727(1) provides that UM coverage is "over and above" benefits available from the tortfeasor, though the insurer receives a setoff for the BI money actually recovered when the total is applied against your damages.
Worked example: You are hit at NW 36th Street and 27th Avenue by a driver carrying $25,000 in bodily injury coverage. Your damages, including a shoulder surgery, six months of lost income, and permanent impairment, total $200,000. You carry $100,000 in stacked UM coverage on two vehicles, giving you $200,000 in UIM coverage. The recovery works like this: $25,000 from the tortfeasor's BI carrier, plus up to $200,000 in UIM benefits, capped at your total damages. Your own carrier pays the difference between the BI recovery and your damages, up to its limits. Here, that means the full remaining $175,000 is potentially available.
Hit-and-run crashes are a daily occurrence in Miami-Dade. UM coverage applies to them. An unidentified driver who strikes your vehicle and flees is treated as an uninsured motorist. Coverage also extends to "phantom vehicle" cases where another car forces you off the road without contact, though those claims demand strong corroborating evidence: witness statements, dashcam footage, or physical evidence consistent with your account. Report a hit-and-run to police immediately and preserve any video from nearby businesses or residential cameras. These claims also arise in garages and shopping centers; our page on insurance coverage for parking lot accidents in Florida explains how those crashes are handled.
This provision destroys more UIM claims than any other. When the at-fault driver's insurer tenders its policy limits, you cannot simply take the check and release the driver. Section 627.727(6) requires the injured insured to give written notice of the proposed settlement to the UIM carrier before settling. The UIM carrier then has 30 days to respond. If it wants to preserve its subrogation rights against the at-fault driver, it must pay you the amount of the proposed settlement itself within those 30 days. If it does nothing, you may accept the tortfeasor's payment, execute the release, and proceed with your UIM claim.
Worked example: The at-fault driver's carrier offers its $50,000 BI limits for your crash on the Dolphin Expressway. Before accepting, your attorney sends written notice to your UIM carrier by certified mail. Day 1 through day 30, the UIM carrier evaluates whether the at-fault driver has personal assets worth pursuing. On day 22, it declines to substitute payment. You accept the $50,000, sign the release, and pursue your UIM claim for the remaining damages. Had you signed the release on day 1 without notice, the carrier could argue you prejudiced its subrogation rights and forfeited UIM coverage entirely.
Releases deserve careful attention in any Florida injury settlement, and doubly so where UIM coverage is in play. The wrong release language can extinguish the UIM claim. We cover the mechanics on our page about signing releases before receiving a settlement check in Florida.
UM/UIM claims involve two separate clocks, and confusing them is dangerous.
Do not let the longer contract period lull you. Building the UIM claim requires proving the underlying negligence case, and evidence goes stale fast. Traffic camera footage in Miami-Dade is routinely overwritten within weeks.
Your personal injury protection benefits pay first: 80% of medical bills and 60% of lost wages up to $10,000, provided you obtained initial treatment within 14 days of the crash. Miss that window and you lose PIP benefits, which also complicates the UM claim. See our explanation of the Florida PIP 14-day rule for Miami crash victims. In the UM claim, your carrier receives a setoff for PIP benefits paid or payable, so the UM recovery targets the damages PIP does not reach: the remaining medical expenses, lost earnings above the PIP cap, and pain and suffering (which requires a permanent injury under Florida's threshold in § 627.737).
Comparative fault applies to UM claims just as it applies to the underlying negligence case. Under HB 837's modified comparative negligence rule, a claimant found more than 50% at fault recovers nothing, and any lesser percentage reduces the recovery proportionally. You can model the effect with our Florida comparative negligence calculator.
A UM claim puts you in an adversarial position with your own insurance company. The adjuster on the other side of the table works for the carrier, not for you, and carriers frequently value UM claims as if they were defending the at-fault driver. Florida law gives insureds a remedy. Under Fla. Stat. § 624.155, an insurer that fails to settle a claim in good faith, when it could and should have done so had it acted fairly and honestly toward its insured, is exposed to damages exceeding the policy limits, including the full excess judgment.
The procedure is specific. Before filing a bad faith action, the insured must file a Civil Remedy Notice with the Department of Financial Services identifying the statutory violations. The insurer then has 60 days to cure, ordinarily by paying the policy limits. Section 627.727(10) confirms that damages recoverable in a UM bad faith case include the total amount of the insured's damages, even beyond the UM limits. In a serious injury case with modest UM limits, the bad faith setup is often where the true value lies. It must be built deliberately: documented demands, reasonable deadlines, and a clean record of the carrier's conduct.
In UM litigation, the coverage questions are frequently worth more than the liability questions. Whether a rejection form is valid, whether a non-stacking election complies with § 627.727(9), whether a resident relative qualifies as an insured, and whether the carrier's setoff calculations are correct can each swing a recovery by tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars. These are document-driven, statute-driven fights. A careful reading of the policy against the statutory requirements, done at the start of the case, shapes everything that follows.
We obtain and audit every applicable policy, test the validity of UM rejection and non-stacking forms against § 627.727, and handle the settlement notice procedure so your UIM claim survives the BI settlement. If your own carrier undervalues the claim, we build the Civil Remedy Notice record needed to pursue bad faith damages beyond the policy limits. Send us the crash report and your declarations page, and we will tell you what coverage actually exists.
You can contact the Law Offices of Albert Goodwin by phone at 786-522-1411 or by email at [email protected].