Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

You're probably overthinking it. Call a lawyer.

Call Now: 904-383-7448
Florida Statute 627.6675 - Full Text and Legal Analysis
Florida Statute 627.6675 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
Link to State of Florida Official Statute
F.S. 627.6675 Case Law from Google Scholar Google Search for Amendments to 627.6675

The 2025 Florida Statutes

Title XXXVII
INSURANCE
Chapter 627
INSURANCE RATES AND CONTRACTS
View Entire Chapter
627.6675 Conversion on termination of eligibility.Subject to all of the provisions of this section, a group policy delivered or issued for delivery in this state by an insurer or nonprofit health care services plan that provides, on an expense-incurred basis, hospital, surgical, or major medical expense insurance, or any combination of these coverages, shall provide that an employee or member whose insurance under the group policy has been terminated for any reason, including discontinuance of the group policy in its entirety or with respect to an insured class, and who has been continuously insured under the group policy, and under any group policy providing similar benefits that the terminated group policy replaced, for at least 3 months immediately prior to termination, shall be entitled to have issued to him or her by the insurer a policy or certificate of health insurance, referred to in this section as a “converted policy.” A group insurer may meet the requirements of this section by contracting with another insurer, authorized in this state, to issue an individual converted policy, which policy has been approved by the office under s. 627.410. An employee or member shall not be entitled to a converted policy if termination of his or her insurance under the group policy occurred because he or she failed to pay any required contribution, or because any discontinued group coverage was replaced by similar group coverage within 31 days after discontinuance.
(1) TIME LIMIT.Written application for the converted policy shall be made and the first premium must be paid to the insurer, not later than 63 days after termination of the group policy. However, if termination was the result of failure to pay any required premium or contribution and such nonpayment of premium was due to acts of an employer or policyholder other than the employee or certificateholder, written application for the converted policy must be made and the first premium must be paid to the insurer not later than 63 days after notice of termination is mailed by the insurer or the employer, whichever is earlier, to the employee’s or certificateholder’s last address as shown by the record of the insurer or the employer, whichever is applicable. In such case of termination due to nonpayment of premium by the employer or policyholder, the premium for the converted policy may not exceed the rate for the prior group coverage for the period of coverage under the converted policy prior to the date notice of termination is mailed to the employee or certificateholder. For the period of coverage after such date, the premium for the converted policy is subject to the requirements of subsection (3).
(2) EVIDENCE OF INSURABILITY.The converted policy shall be issued without evidence of insurability.
(3) CONVERSION PREMIUM; EFFECT ON PREMIUM RATES FOR GROUP COVERAGE.
(a) The premium for the converted policy shall be determined in accordance with premium rates applicable to the age and class of risk of each person to be covered under the converted policy and to the type and amount of insurance provided. However, the premium for the converted policy may not exceed 200 percent of the standard risk rate as established by the office, pursuant to this subsection.
(b) Actual or expected experience under converted policies may be combined with such experience under group policies for the purposes of determining premium and loss experience and establishing premium rate levels for group coverage.
(c) The office shall annually determine standard risk rates, using reasonable actuarial techniques and standards adopted by the commission by rule. The standard risk rates must be determined as follows:
1. Standard risk rates for individual coverage must be determined separately for indemnity policies, preferred provider/exclusive provider policies, and health maintenance organization contracts.
2. The office shall survey insurers and health maintenance organizations representing at least an 80 percent market share, based on premiums earned in the state for the most recent calendar year, for each of the categories specified in subparagraph 1.
3. Standard risk rate schedules must be determined, computed as the average rates charged by the carriers surveyed, giving appropriate weight to each carrier’s statewide market share of earned premiums.
4. The rate schedule shall be determined from analysis of the one county with the largest market share in the state of all such carriers.
5. The rate for other counties must be determined by using the weighted average of each carrier’s county factor relationship to the county determined in subparagraph 4.
6. The rate schedule must be determined for different age brackets and family size brackets.
(4) EFFECTIVE DATE OF COVERAGE.The effective date of the converted policy shall be the day following the termination of insurance under the group policy.
(5) SCOPE OF COVERAGE.The converted policy shall cover the employee or member and his or her dependents who were covered by the group policy on the date of termination of insurance. At the option of the insurer, a separate converted policy may be issued to cover any dependent.
(6) OPTIONAL COVERAGE.The insurer is not required to issue a converted policy covering any person who is or could be covered by Medicare. The insurer is not required to issue or renew a converted policy covering a person if paragraphs (a) and (b) apply to the person:
(a) If any of the following apply to the person:
1. The person is covered for similar benefits by another hospital, surgical, medical, or major medical expense insurance policy or hospital or medical service subscriber contract or medical practice or other prepayment plan, or by any other plan or program.
2. The person is eligible for similar benefits, whether actually provided coverage, under any arrangement of coverage for individuals in a group, whether on an insured or uninsured basis.
3. Similar benefits are provided for or are available to the person under state or federal law.
(b) If the benefits provided under the sources referred to in subparagraph (a)1. or the benefits provided or available under the sources referred to in subparagraphs (a)2. and 3., together with the benefits provided by the converted policy, would result in overinsurance according to the insurer’s standards. The insurer’s standards must bear some reasonable relationship to actual health care costs in the area in which the insured lives at the time of conversion and must be filed with the office before their use in denying coverage.
(7) INFORMATION REQUESTED BY INSURER.
(a) A converted policy may include a provision under which the insurer may request information, in advance of any premium due date, of any person covered thereunder as to whether:
1. The person is covered for similar benefits by another hospital, surgical, medical, or major medical expense insurance policy or hospital or medical service subscriber contract or medical practice or other prepayment plan or by any other plan or program.
2. The person is covered for similar benefits under any arrangement of coverage for individuals in a group, whether on an insured or uninsured basis.
3. Similar benefits are provided for or are available to the person under any state or federal law.
(b) The converted policy may provide that the insurer may refuse to renew the policy or the coverage of any person only for one or more of the following reasons:
1. The benefits provided under the sources referred to in subparagraphs (a)1. and 2. for the person or the benefits provided or available under the sources referred to in subparagraph (a)3. for the person, together with the benefits provided by the converted policy, would result in overinsurance according to the insurer’s standards on file with the office. The reason for nonrenewal authorized by this subparagraph is not required to be contained in the converted policy but must be provided in writing to the policyholder at least 90 days before the policy renewal date.
2. The converted policyholder fails to provide the information requested pursuant to paragraph (a).
3. Fraud or intentional misrepresentation in applying for any benefits under the converted policy.
4. Other reasons approved by the office.
(8) BENEFITS OFFERED.
(a) An insurer shall not be required to issue a converted policy that provides benefits in excess of those provided under the group policy from which conversion is made.
(b) An insurer shall offer the benefits specified in s. 627.668 and the benefits specified in s. 627.669 if those benefits were provided in the group plan.
(c) An insurer shall offer maternity benefits and dental benefits if those benefits were provided in the group plan.
(9) PREEXISTING CONDITION PROVISION.The converted policy shall not exclude a preexisting condition not excluded by the group policy. However, the converted policy may provide that any hospital, surgical, or medical benefits payable under the converted policy may be reduced by the amount of any such benefits payable under the group policy after the termination of coverage under the group policy. The converted policy may also provide that during the first policy year the benefits payable under the converted policy, together with the benefits payable under the group policy, shall not exceed those that would have been payable had the individual’s insurance under the group policy remained in force.
(10) REQUIRED OPTION FOR MAJOR MEDICAL COVERAGE.Subject to the provisions and conditions of this part, the employee or member shall be entitled to obtain a converted policy providing major medical coverage under a plan meeting the following requirements:
(a) A maximum benefit equal to the lesser of the policy limit of the group policy from which the individual converted or $500,000 per covered person for all covered medical expenses incurred during the covered person’s lifetime.
(b) Payment of benefits at the rate of 80 percent of covered medical expenses which are in excess of the deductible, until 20 percent of such expenses in a benefit period reaches $2,000, after which benefits will be paid at the rate of 90 percent during the remainder of the contract year unless the insured is in the insurer’s case management program, in which case benefits shall be paid at the rate of 100 percent during the remainder of the contract year. For the purposes of this paragraph, “case management program” means the specific supervision and management of the medical care provided or prescribed for a specific individual, which may include the use of health care providers designated by the insurer. Payment of benefits for outpatient treatment of mental illness, if provided in the converted policy, may be at a lesser rate but not less than 50 percent.
(c) A deductible for each calendar year that must be $500, $1,000, or $2,000, at the option of the policyholder.
(d) The term “covered medical expenses,” as used in this subsection, shall be consistent with those customarily offered by the insurer under group or individual health insurance policies but is not required to be identical to the covered medical expenses provided in the group policy from which the individual converted.
(11) ALTERNATIVE PLANS.The insurer may, at its option, offer alternative plans for group health conversion in addition to the plans required by this section.
(12) RETIREMENT COVERAGE.If coverage would be continued under the group policy on an employee following the employee’s retirement prior to the time he or she is or could be covered by Medicare, the employee may elect, instead of such continuation of group insurance, to have the same conversion rights as would apply had his or her insurance terminated at retirement by reason or termination of employment or membership.
(13) REDUCTION OF COVERAGE DUE TO MEDICARE.The converted policy may provide for reduction of coverage on any person upon his or her eligibility for coverage under Medicare or under any other state or federal law providing for benefits similar to those provided by the converted policy.
(14) CONVERSION PRIVILEGE ALLOWED.The conversion privilege shall also be available to any of the following:
(a) The surviving spouse, if any, at the death of the employee or member, with respect to the spouse and the children whose coverages under the group policy terminate by reason of the death, otherwise to each surviving child whose coverage under the group policy terminates by reason of such death, or, if the group policy provides for continuation of dependents’ coverages following the employee’s or member’s death, at the end of such continuation.
(b) The former spouse whose coverage would otherwise terminate because of annulment or dissolution of marriage, if the former spouse is dependent for financial support.
(c) The spouse of the employee or member upon termination of coverage of the spouse, while the employee or member remains insured under the group policy, by reason of ceasing to be a qualified family member under the group policy, with respect to the spouse and the children whose coverages under the group policy terminate at the same time.
(d) A child solely with respect to himself or herself upon termination of his or her coverage by reason of ceasing to be a qualified family member under the group policy, if a conversion privilege is not otherwise provided in this subsection with respect to such termination.
(15) BENEFIT LEVELS.If the benefit levels required in subsection (10) exceed the benefit levels provided under the group policy, the conversion policy may offer benefits which are substantially similar to those provided under the group policy in lieu of those required in subsection (10).
(16) GROUP COVERAGE INSTEAD OF INDIVIDUAL COVERAGE.The insurer may elect to provide group insurance coverage instead of issuing a converted individual policy.
(17) NOTIFICATION.A notification of the conversion privilege shall be included in each certificate of coverage. The insurer shall mail an election and premium notice form, including an outline of coverage, on a form approved by the office, within 14 days after an individual who is eligible for a converted policy gives notice to the insurer that the individual is considering applying for the converted policy or otherwise requests such information. The outline of coverage must contain a description of the principal benefits and coverage provided by the policy and its principal exclusions and limitations, including, but not limited to, deductibles and coinsurance.
(18) OUTSIDE CONVERSIONS.A converted policy that is delivered outside of this state must be on a form that could be delivered in the other jurisdiction as a converted policy had the group policy been issued in that jurisdiction.
(19) APPLICABILITY.This section does not require conversion on termination of eligibility for a policy or contract that provides benefits for specified diseases, or for accidental injuries only, disability income, Medicare supplement, hospital indemnity, limited benefit, nonconventional, or excess policies.
(20) CONSTRUCTION.Nothing in this section or in the incorporation of it into insurance policies shall be construed to require insurers to provide benefits equal to those provided in the group policy from which the individual converted; provided, however, that comprehensive benefits are offered which shall be subject to approval by the office.
History.s. 2, ch. 78-385; ss. 1, 10, ch. 80-341; s. 2, ch. 81-318; ss. 519, 523, 809(2nd), ch. 82-243; ss. 64, 79, ch. 82-386; s. 112, ch. 83-216; s. 3, ch. 85-177; s. 6, ch. 90-249; ss. 138, 149, ch. 92-33; ss. 114, 116, ch. 92-318; s. 352, ch. 97-102; s. 13, ch. 97-179; s. 11, ch. 98-159; s. 13, ch. 99-204; s. 7, ch. 99-275; s. 12, ch. 99-393; s. 1167, ch. 2003-261; s. 22, ch. 2013-101; s. 7, ch. 2015-121.

F.S. 627.6675 on Google Scholar

F.S. 627.6675 on CourtListener

Amendments to 627.6675


Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 627.6675

Total Results: 8  |  Sort by: Relevance  |  Newest First

Copy

Savona v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 648 So. 2d 705 (Fla. 1995).

Cited 12 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 20 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 9, 1995 Fla. LEXIS 4, 1995 WL 2421

...We have for review a question certified from the United States Court of Appeals for *706 the Eleventh Circuit which is determinative of a cause pending in the federal courts and for which there appears to be no clear, controlling precedent from this Court: WHETHER UNDER FLA. STAT. ANN. § 627.6675, A CONVERSION INSURANCE POLICY MUST PROVIDE BENEFITS EQUAL TO THOSE PROVIDED UNDER THE ORIGINAL GROUP INSURANCE POLICY....
...The group policy provided for aggregate lifetime health insurance benefits of $1,000,000. In the event Savona was terminated, the group policy also provided that she could convert the group policy to an individual expense health insurance policy, but only for the minimum maximum payment required by Florida law. Section 627.6675, Florida Statutes (1987), required the availability of the converted policy and stated with respect to the maximum payment amount of the converted policy that: Subject to the provisions and conditions of this part, if the group insur...
...A maximum payment of $250,000 per covered person for all covered medical expenses incurred during the covered persons's lifetime. 2. The smaller of the following amounts: a. The maximum benefit provided under the group policy. b. A maximum payment of $250,000 for each unrelated injury or sickness. § 627.6675(11), Fla....
...29 U.S.C. §§ 1001 et seq., and her claim, therefore, presented a federal question. See 29 U.S.C. § 1132 (a)(1)(B) and (e); 28 U.S.C. § 1441. The federal court, however, decided the case on state grounds. The court concluded that the language of section 627.6675, as well as the legislative intent as evidenced by subsequent amendments to the statute, permitted coverage of a lesser amount in the individual conversion policy. The court also noted that the interpretations of section 627.6675 provided in Shufelt and Clark conflicted with the plain language of the statute and, thus, declined to follow these cases....
...On appeal, the Eleventh Circuit found that the case presented an issue of Florida law and certified the question for resolution by this Court. *707 Prudential urges this Court to conduct a de novo review and address its claim that ERISA rather than section 627.6675 should control the outcome of this case....
...been properly briefed and argued, and are dispositive of the case. Savoie v. State, 422 So.2d 308 (Fla. 1982). Such is not the case here, and we, therefore, limit our review to the certified question. The question presented requires us to interpret section 627.6675, Florida Statutes (1987). This section expressly affords the insurer the option of providing a maximum conversion policy benefit of the smaller of $250,000 or the group policy limits. § 627.6675(11), Fla....
...City of Miami Beach v. Galbut, 626 So.2d 192 (Fla. 1993); McCollam, 612 So.2d at 573; Streeter v. Sullivan, 509 So.2d 268, 271 (Fla. 1987); Holly v. Auld, 450 So.2d 217, 219 (Fla. 1984). Accordingly, we reject Savona's contention that the context of section 627.6675 should yield to the legislative intent as evidenced by subsequent amendments to the statute. [1] We do not address these amendments due to our conclusion that the statute has a plain and discernible meaning. Furthermore, any case that interprets section 627.6675 as requiring a conversion policy with limits equal to those of the original group policy erroneously abrogates legislative power....
...To do so would be an abrogation of legislative power." Holly, 450 So.2d at 219 (quoting American Bankers Life Assurance Co. v. Williams, 212 So.2d 777, 778 (Fla. 1st DCA 1968) (emphasis added)). Accordingly, we decline to follow the Fifth District's holding in Shufelt that "section 627.6675 should be construed to require that every `converted policy' contain coverage and benefits to the employee comparable to the coverage and benefits the employee had under the group policy which *708 the `converted policy' replaces." 487 So.2d at 1087....
...se. The court's conclusion in Clark that the terminated employee was entitled to a converted policy providing a maximum payment amount equal to those in which the group coverage provided was based on the language in the terminated policy rather than section 627.6675. The district court correctly concluded that section 627.6675 establishes the minimum criteria a converted policy must meet....
...,000,000 coverage *709 in this case, this kind of insurance coverage sleight-of-hand is why many members of the public are upset with the health care system and why this situation should be corrected by the legislature. KOGAN, J., concurs. NOTES [1] Section 627.6675(20) was added in March 1992 and reads as follows: Nothing in this section or in the incorporation of it into insurance policies shall be construed to require insurers to provide benefits equal to those provided in the group policy from which the individual converted....
...ing case law. Prudential contends the amendments were an attempt by the Legislature to change prior case law on the issue and that they clearly indicate that the conversion policy need not provide benefits equal to those of the converted policy. [2] Section 627.6675 currently permits the employer and/or insurer, through a conversion policy, to decrease the benefits of a totally disabled employee after the person becomes totally disabled....
...e has incurred an illness or injury which will produce expenses up to the amount of the maximum payment existing at the time the illness or injury is incurred. This could be avoided, if the statute mandated, in the extension of benefits provision of section 627.6675, that benefits be extended up to the existing maximum amount of a policy for the treatment of a specific accident or illness incurred while the policy was in effect, thereby eliminating the 12-month limitation of that section.
Copy

Lutz v. Prot. Life Ins. Co., 951 So. 2d 884 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007).

Cited 10 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 41, 2007 WL 5768

...While we agree with the trial court that nothing in the relevant statutes indicates that the legislature intended to create a private right of action for an insured to enforce compliance with an insurer's violation of sections 627.6515, 627.6571 or 627.6675, we believe these statutory provisions could form the basis for a breach of contract action by an insured if properly pled and supported by the evidence....
...actual breaches to any specific statutory language or requirements. Lutz alleged that Protective Life failed to comply with section 627.6515(2), which would exempt the out-of-state policy from the requirements of the bulk of Part VII of Chapter 627; section 627.6675, which requires group policies to provide employees with the option of transferring to a conversion policy when coverage under the group policy is terminated; and section 627.6571, which provides in part that an insurer "must renew o...
Copy

Freedom Life Ins. Co. of Am. v. Wallant, 891 So. 2d 1109 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004).

Cited 8 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2004 WL 2996898

...The second count was for declaratory judgment, seeking that Freedom Life be mandated to comply with Part VII of the Florida Insurance Code regarding claim payment due to noncompliance with section 627.6515(2), which includes a mandate to provide conversion rights as set forth by Florida Statutes section 627.6675, that the dispute resolution provision be rendered unenforceable, and that class members be compensated for violations of Part VII....
Copy

United Wis. Life Ins. Co. v. Off. of Ins., 849 So. 2d 417 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003).

Cited 6 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 10377, 2003 WL 21554509

...All eight counts of the administrative complaint were dismissed by the ALJ after a hearing, but the dismissal as to Counts V and VIII was overturned by DOI. Those two counts are at issue in this appeal. *419 Count VIII alleged in pertinent part as follows: 45. United Wisconsin knowingly failed to provide the form required by Section 627.6675(17), Fla....
Copy

Blue cross/blue Shield of Fla. v. Shufelt, 487 So. 2d 1085 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986).

Cited 2 times | Published | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 701, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 6948

...Townsend of Maguire, Voorhis & Wells, P.A., Orlando, Robert P. Macina and Thomas W. Stanley, Jacksonville, for appellant. J. Russell Hornsby and Leon M. Boyajan, II, of Law Offices of J. Russell Hornsby, Orlando, for appellee. COWART, Judge. This case involves the construction of sections 627.667(1) and 627.6675, Florida Statutes, which assure employees certain benefits under group health and accident policies provided by employers....
...However, the injured employee cannot require the employer to discontinue the group policy and, in this case, the employer desires to continue that coverage. The insurer says that the injured employee's remedy is to obtain a "converted policy" as provided for in section 627.6675, Florida Statutes....
...er the group policy. However, a totally disabled employee normally becomes unnecessary to the employer, is consequently normally discharged, and, for that reason, will usually lose all benefits under the group policy. According to the insurer, under section 627.6675, the employee is entitled to a "converted policy," but not to benefits equal to those provided by the group policy from which it is converted....
...n extension of benefits not only when the group policy is discontinued but when coverage to the employee is discontinued because of termination of employment due to injuries received while covered under the employer's group policy, or (2) construing section 627.6675, Florida Statutes, to require that the "converted policy" provide the same benefits as the group policy which it replaces....
...y to the discontinuance of the group policy and not to the discontinuance of coverage in favor of a particular employee. The legislature should change this. However, the employee is correct as to the second argument. The intent of the legislature in section 627.6675 does appear to be to entitle an employee to a "converted policy" which provides the employee with the benefits that the employee was entitled to receive under a group policy....
...s statute would be only an illusion, if the insurance company could discharge its statutory duty by offering a totally disabled employee a "converted policy" providing substantially lesser benefits than those provided in the group policy. Therefore, section 627.6675 should be construed to require that every "converted policy" contain coverage and benefits to the employee comparable to the coverage and benefits the employee had under the group policy which the "converted policy" replaces....
...hen was terminated from employment because of his inability to perform as an employee. The court held that section 627.667(1), Fla. Stat. (1977), did not require termination of the entire group contract for an extension of benefits to an individual. Section 627.6675 became law in 1978 and was therefore not in effect at the time of this action.
Copy

Barbara A. Savona v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 51 F.3d 241 (11th Cir. 1995).

Cited 1 times | Published | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 9838, 1995 WL 221496

PER CURIAM: We certified the following question to the Supreme Court of Florida: WHETHER, UNDER FLA.STAT.ANN. § 627.6675, A CONVERSION INSURANCE POLICY MUST PROVIDE BENEFITS EQUAL TO THOSE PROVIDED UNDER THE ORIGINAL GROUP INSURANCE POLICY....
Copy

Northbrook Life Ins. Co. v. Clark, 582 So. 2d 1199 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991).

Published | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 5557, 1991 WL 101821

...We have examined the various points raised by Northbrook and think only one merits discussion, i.e., the adequacy of the conversion policy issued. Northbrook argues it was only required to issue Ms. Clark a conversion policy providing benefits required in section 627.6675, not the original group policy. 1 We agree with the trial court and Ms. Clark that she is entitled to a conversion policy providing benefits equal to those which the group coverage provided her. Contrary to Northbrook’s argument, we think section 627.6675 merely sets forth minimum requirements to which an insurer must adhere....
...ge equal to the benefits provided in the group plan. Subject only to those limitations enumerated in the group policy, the conversion policy must afford a former group insured with coverage equal to that provided under the group policy. We interpret section 627.6675 merely as establishing the minimum criteria a conversion policy must meet....
...minimum requirements, the statute would govern. Our interpretation is bolstered by Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Florida, Inc. v. Shufelt, 487 So.2d 1085, 1087 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986). There, the Fifth District stated, “[t]he intent of the legislature in section 627.6675 does appear to be to entitle an employee to a ‘converted policy’ which provides the employee with the benefits that the employee was entitled to receive under a group policy.” Affirmed....
...We note that even under Northbrook’s own interpretation, it has not complied with its obligations. The evidence indicates that in the conversion policy, the use of a benefit factor multiplier would render it inadequate as compared to the minimum requirements of section 627.6675.
Copy

Barbara A. Savona v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 51 F.3d 230 (11th Cir. 1993).

Published | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 38160, 1993 WL 767774

...Middle District of Florida. *232 Fla.Stat.Ann. § 626.6675 dictates the amount of coverage that a major medical conversion policy, such as the one involved here, must contain. At the time Savona’s conversion policy issued, the relevant portion of section 627.6675 read as follows: (11) OPTIONAL COVERAGE; MAJOR MEDICAL....
...Sa-vona contends, correctly, that notwithstanding such compliance, Florida case law (specifically, Northbrook Life Ins. Co. v. Clark, 582 So.2d 1199 (Fla.App. 2 Dist.1991) and Blue Cross/Blue Shield v. Shufelt, 487 So.2d 1085 (Fla.App. 5 Dist.1986)), construing section 627.6675 required Prudential to issue Savona a policy with the same $1,000,000 coverage that the group policy provided. Prudential, on the other hand, contends that the Supreme Court of Florida, if called upon to consider these cases, would overrule them because they are in direct conflict with the plain language of section 627.6675. According to Prudential, the plain language of section 627.6675, affording an employer the option of providing a conversion policy with maximum major medical coverage amounting to the lesser of either the statutorily mandated amount or the group policy limits, permits an employer to offer a conve...
...in conflict with “unambiguous statutory language to the contrary,” and that, to the extent that those two opinions were “based upon a perception of legislative intent, such perception has been unequivocally refuted by subsequent amendments to section 627.6675.” 2 Savona appealed this judgment. *233 We believe the issue of Florida law these parties raise is appropriate for resolution by the highest court of Florida. We, therefore, certify the following question: WHETHER, UNDER FLA.STAT.ANN. § 627.6675, A CONVERSION INSURANCE POLICY MUST PROVIDE BENEFITS EQUAL TO THOSE PROVIDED UNDER THE ORIGINAL GROUP INSURANCE POLICY....
...n its consideration of the problem posed by the case. In order to assist the court’s consideration of the case, the entire record, along with the briefs of the parties, shall be transmitted to the court. QUESTION CERTIFIED. 1 . Under Fla.Stat.Ann. § 627.6675 (West Supp. 1993), all group policies must provide employees with the option of transferring to a conversion policy whenever their coverage under the group policy is terminated. Current section 627.6675 is, for purposes of this inquiry, identical to the section in effect at the time Savona's conversion policy issued, and states, in relevant part: 627.6675....
...whose insurance under the group policy has been terminated for any reason ... shall be entitled to have issued to him by the insurer a policy or certificate of health insurance, referred to in this section as a “converted policy.” 2 . The district court's reference to "subsequent amendments to section 627.6675” refers to section 627.6675(20). Current section 627.6675(20) reads, as enacted in July, 1992 and subsequently amended prior to the effective date on October 1, 1992: Nothing in this section or in the incorporation of it into insurance policies shall be construed to require insurers to provide benefits equal to those provided in the group policy from which the individual converted, provided, however, that comprehensive benefits are offered which shall be subject to approval by the Insurance Commissioner. Fla.Stat.Ann. § 627.6675(20). In ratifying subsection (20) as written above, however, the Florida Legislature specifically chose to delete, prior to the October 1, 1992 effective date, language that had accompanied current section 627.6675(20). The predecessor to the final version of section 627.6675(20) had originally stated: Nothing in this section or in the incorporation of it into insurance policies shall be construed to require insurers to provide benefits equal to those provided in the group policy from which the individual converted....

This Florida statute resource is curated by Graham W. Syfert, Esq., a Jacksonville, Florida personal injury and workers' compensation attorney. Attorney Syfert regularly works with Chapter 627 in the context of insurance coverage law and represents clients throughout Northeast Florida. For legal consultation, call 904-383-7448.