Skip to content

Housing Accommodations Which Do Not Have the Purpose of Effectuating an Injured Person’s Care, Recovery, Rehabilitation, Are Not Compensable as Allowable Expenses under the No-Fault Act

Magdich Law | Nicholas Girimont

Nicholas E. Girimont wrote our motion for partial summary disposition as to the claims submitted by Residential Care Solutions, LLC (“RCS”) which was seeking $82,268.48 as PIP benefits for the apartment provided to the underlying claimant. Mr. Girimont argued (in the motion and at the hearing) that RCS cannot establish that its “housing accommodations” for claimant are compensable as allowable expenses under the No-Fault Act because the “housing accommodations” were ordinary, everyday products, services or accommodations. An ordinary, everyday expense simply cannot have the object or purpose of effectuating an injured person’s care, recovery, or rehabilitation, because it is incurred by everyone whether injured or not.

Mr. Girimont further outlined that RCS merely rented the ADA-compliant home to the claimant and made no accommodations whatsoever to the apartment. Rent and utilities are expenses that an uninjured person has to pay, as well. After considering the arguments and the evidence in the light most favorable to RCS, Judge Cheryl A. Matthews agreed that RCS failed to show that the claimant received any housing accommodations (compensable as allowable expenses). Therefore, our motion for partial summary disposition was granted and RCS’ claims totaling $82,268.48 were dismissed.  

The plaintiff attorney then filed a claim of appeal, which also was dismissed.


More Posts

Stolen Vehicle Leads to Dismissed Claims

Jeff Murray secured an order dismissing plaintiff’s claims, with prejudice, on a motion for summary disposition. The underlying claimant had stolen her mother’s vehicle, gotten

Send us a Message