The implementation of the Proposed Ninth Amendment to Regulation 68 (“The
Proposed Amendment”) would give the no-fault insurer the option
to void the AOB when the no-fault insurer issues a denial for the patient’s
failure to attend either an IME or an EUO. This would create a climate
of extreme uncertainty that would detrimentally impact the patient, the
healthcare provider, and the liability portion of the automobile policy
in ways not yet perceived by the Department of Financial Services. The
Firm believes that the extremely detrimental, albeit unintended, consequences
of the Proposed Amendment outweigh any potential benefit gained therefrom.
Based on this belief, the Firm submitted the following comments opposing
the enactment of the Proposed Amendment.