Fla. Stat. » 627
Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 627.7405 (2025)

Insurers’ right of reimbursement.

✓ 2025 Florida Statutes: through the 2025 Regular Session (some sections already show 2026 laws)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
627.7405 Insurers’ right of reimbursement.—
(1) Notwithstanding ss. 627.730-627.7405, an insurer providing personal injury protection benefits on a private passenger motor vehicle shall have, to the extent of any personal injury protection benefits paid to any person as a benefit arising out of such private passenger motor vehicle insurance, a right of reimbursement against the owner or the insurer of the owner of a commercial motor vehicle, if the benefits paid result from such person having been an occupant of the commercial motor vehicle or having been struck by the commercial motor vehicle while not an occupant of any self-propelled vehicle.
1(2) The insurer’s right of reimbursement under this section does not apply to an owner or registrant as identified in s. 627.733(1)(b).
History.—s. 7, ch. 78-374; s. 2, ch. 81-318; ss. 558, 563, ch. 82-243; s. 19, ch. 2003-411; s. 18, ch. 2007-324; s. 18, ch. 2012-151; s. 12, ch. 2012-197.
1Note.—As created by s. 12, ch. 2012-197. For a description of multiple acts in the same session affecting a statutory provision, see preface to the Florida Statutes, “Statutory Construction.” Subsection (2) was also created by s. 18, ch. 2012-151, and that version reads:

(2) For purposes of this section, no owner or registrant identified in s. 627.733(1)(b) shall be liable for right of reimbursement.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1984–2024 · leading case: Amerisure Ins. Co. v. State Farm, 897 So. 2d 1287 (Fla. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Amerisure Ins. Co. v. State Farm, 897 So. 2d 1287 (Fla. 2005). · cites it 18× “FACTS [1] Kelly Edman and her children were injured in an automobile accident while Edman was driving a commercial motor vehicle owned by Wright Construction Corporation and insured by Amerisure.”
Amer. Freight Sys. v. Fla. Farm Bur. Cas. Ins., 453 So. 2d 468 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). · cites it 5× “11, Florida Statutes (1983), prohibit the reimbursement of personal injury protection benefits pursuant to section 627.7405, Florida Statutes (1983), from an employer who has paid out full workmen's compensation benefits.”
Am. Ins. Co. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 865 So. 2d 590 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004). · cites it 6× “Amerisure Insurance Company appeals a final summary judgment in favor of State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company in an action in which State Farm sought reimbursement under section 627.7405, Florida Statutes (2001), for personal injury protection ("PIP") benefits it paid…”
Delta Cas. Co. v. Pinnacle Med., Inc., 721 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). · cites it 2× “This court rejected the argument that the statute was violative of the state and federal equal protection clauses because it discriminated against commercial vehicle owners and insurers, regardless of fault, and favored noncommercial or personal vehicle owners and insurers.”
Florida Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. v. Tropicana Prod., 456 So. 2d 549 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). · cites it 3× “At the heart of the controversy is Section 627.7405, Florida Statutes (1981), which provides: 627.”
Dealers Ins. Co. v. Jon Hall Chevrolet Co., 547 So. 2d 325 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). · cites it 8× “The trial court dismissed Dealers Insurance Company's action seeking reimbursement from Jon Hall Chevrolet Company under Section 627.7405, Florida Statutes (1985), for personal insurance protection (PIP) benefits Dealers paid to one of Jon Hall's employees.”
Saf. Nat'l Cas. Corp. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 17-4899 (Fla. 2d DCA May 24, 2019). · cites it 21× “Both the School Board and Safety National appeal, with the School Board arguing that State Farm's claims against it are barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity and Safety National arguing that it is not an insurer for purposes of the reimbursement statute, section…”
Sch. Bd. of Palm Beach Cnty. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 2023-0256 (Fla. 4th DCA July 3, 2024). · cites it 19× “4 § 627.7405(1), Fla. Stat. (2019) (emphasis added).”
Sch. Bd. of Broward Cnty. v. State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co., 390 So. 3d 27 (Fla. 4th DCA 2024). · cites it 19× “4 § 627.7405(1), Fla. Stat. (2019) (emphasis added).”
Tucker Transp. Co. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 883 So. 2d 357 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004). · cites it 8× “Appellee State Farm Mutual Insurance Company filed an action in county court seeking reimbursement for personal injury protection (“PIP”) benefits from the Ap-pellee Tucker Transportation Company, Incorporated, under section 627.7405, Florida Statutes. A bench trial was held…”
Sch. Bd. of Marion Cnty. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 397 So. 3d 248 (Fla. 5th DCA 2024). · cites it 9× “It thereafter filed suit against School Board under section 627.7405 seeking reimbursement of this sum, plus costs.”
City of Miami v. United Auto. Ins. Co., 329 So. 3d 258 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021). · cites it 2× “See § 627.7405(1), Fla. Stat. (2021); Lee Cnty.”
627.7405(1): 5 cases
Saf. Nat'l Cas. Corp. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 17-4899 (Fla. 2d DCA May 24, 2019). “Both the School Board and Safety National appeal, with the School Board arguing that State Farm's claims against it are barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity and Safety National arguing that it is not an insurer for purposes of the reimbursement statute, section…”
Sch. Bd. of Palm Beach Cnty. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 2023-0256 (Fla. 4th DCA July 3, 2024). “4 § 627.7405(1), Fla. Stat. (2019) (emphasis added).”
Sch. Bd. of Broward Cnty. v. State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co., 390 So. 3d 27 (Fla. 4th DCA 2024). “4 § 627.7405(1), Fla. Stat. (2019) (emphasis added).”
Sch. Bd. of Marion Cnty. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 397 So. 3d 248 (Fla. 5th DCA 2024). “It thereafter filed suit against School Board under section 627.7405 seeking reimbursement of this sum, plus costs.”
City of Miami v. United Auto. Ins. Co., 329 So. 3d 258 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021). “See § 627.7405(1), Fla. Stat. (2021); Lee Cnty.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.

This Florida statute resource is curated by Graham W. Syfert, a Jacksonville, Florida personal injury and workers' compensation attorney (Florida Bar No. 39104). Attorney Syfert regularly handles Chapter 627 matters in the context of insurance coverage law and represents clients throughout Northeast Florida. For legal consultation, call 904-383-7448.