Provides relative to the payment of certain expenses in personal injury claims. (8/1/22).
Impact
The implications of SB 120 are significant—it introduces the concept of a reversionary medical trust for handling future medical expenses amounting to $50,000 or more. This trust, which must be established by the liable party, ensures that funds for future medical care are set aside and managed appropriately. The trust's administrator (trustee) is responsible for reviewing invoices and ensuring payments are made for medical services as they are rendered. This change might streamline financial aspects for both claimants and healthcare providers but could also lead to increased administrative overhead in overseeing the trust's expenditures.
Summary
Senate Bill 120 addresses the procedural aspects of managing medical expenses in personal injury claims. The bill mandates that healthcare providers involved in such claims must present evidence of any payments anticipated or received for their services. This legislative change aims to increase transparency by requiring providers to disclose their financial relationships and payments from parties involved in personal injury cases, particularly over the past four years. It also enforces the paperwork and procedural rigor for injured parties when seeking reimbursement for medical expenses incurred due to injuries.
Sentiment
General sentiment surrounding SB 120 appears to be mixed. Proponents argue it enhances transparency and protects the rights of claimants by ensuring that medical expenses are documented and paid appropriately. They see the introduction of a reversionary trust as a prudent measure that can assist in adequately managing potential future medical costs arising from personal injury claims. In contrast, critics express concerns regarding the additional bureaucratic layers this bill introduces, potentially complicating the claims process and delaying reimbursements.
Contention
Notably, the bill faces contention primarily around the requirement for healthcare providers to disclose past payments received for services related to personal injury cases. Opponents argue that this could deter medical professionals from participating in such legal proceedings for fear of undercutting their financial credibility. Additionally, there are worries that the establishment of the reversionary trust may create delays in accessing medical care for claimants who may need immediate treatment, thus undermining the very purpose of timely medical reimbursement in personal injury contexts.