SO I was in an accident... i passed out behind the wheel and wrecked. For some reason, maybe because i'm older the cop thought I had a medical emergency and called an ambulance and sent me to the hospital without any charges. My labs from the hospital came back with an opiate in my system. It is over a week later and I still have not been charged with anything and my insurance company wants me to sign a HIPA release so they can get the medical records from the accident when I went to the hospital. I didn't have any injuries, just tests and one night for observation. If I sign the HIPA release the insurance co. will know I had an opiate and even though I didn't get a DUI they will most likely jack my rates. Am I better off just denying the HIPA request and telling them I will pay the hospital bill myself? what will the insurance co. do if I refuse? what can they do? I just don't see any benefit except getting a few grand to out towards my hospital bill, seems like it will hurt me more in the long run if I comply.
No DUI.. should i tell my ins. co. NO?
- Thread starter Bob Hope
- Start date
- 2,625
What they might be able to do is cancel your policy for failing to comply with your contractual duty to cooperate with their investigation.
- 2,265
When you have an accident due to a medical emergency insurance companies code the accident as if you are not at fault and pay to fix your vehicle but not any damage you caused. I find it funny that you state you passed out and then state that the hospital found opiates in your system as if you don't know how they got there. Were they prescribed?
- Thread starter
- #4
I knew it was there, i have had issues with addiction and am in rehab. My question is whether or not my insurance co. can use the opiate in my blood work against me even though I wasn't charged with a crime for the accident? thanks.
- 2,265
They may deny coverage for any damage to your vehicle but since there have not been any charges I'm not sure how your policy will be affected. Police report can be amended and charges could be coming however. You were driving high, an increase in your rates should be the least of your worries.
- 2,625
No. There is no exclusion in an auto policy for driving while high just as there is no exclusion for driving while drunk. Insurance companies pay out claims caused by drunks and dopers all the time. It's negligence and that's what the policy covers.
What the insurance company may have a right to do is cancel the policy, and certainly can non-renew or surcharge.
geneseehill
Expert
- 28
My suggestion is to just get the medical reports and bills yourself and send them to the carrier. It saves them the time and effort to do it and also the expense. Many hospitals have specific forms they need signed for release of medical records. Save them the step in getting the correct forms. If this is a situation where you struck another vehicle and/or there is property damage then the carrier wants access to those records to help prove a no-Liability/medical emergency. If this is a one vehicle accident then I don't think you have anything to worry about. If the officer did not charge you with or test you for driving under the influence then there is no risk that your carrier would surcharge you for that. FYI your At Fault accident may be just as many points as a DUI so the perceived benefit is not as much as you may think. I've seen situations where drivers pass out because they are dehydrated from drinking. They don't want their employers to know. I get it. Unless you were driving a company vehicle then I say supply the records (redacted if you need to). If they squawk you can object by saying physician-patient privilege. Since this appears to have happened in North Carolina be aware that your physician-patient privilege will only go so far if there is a third party who is seeking recovery, I note:
It’s also worth noting that North Carolina courts have held that a plaintiff in a civil suit can make a defendant’s medical condition an issue based on North Carolina’s physician-patient privilege statute that specifically gives courts discretion. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 8-53 provides, in part:
Any resident or presiding judge in the district, either at the trial or prior thereto, or the
Industrial Commission pursuant to law may, subject to G.S. 8-53.6, compel
disclosure if in his opinion disclosure is necessary to a proper administration of
justice.
Unlike Illinois law, the statute in North Carolina does not list specific exceptions to the
physician-patient privilege. Rather, it allows the court to act in the interests of justice based on the facts of the case.
It’s also worth noting that North Carolina courts have held that a plaintiff in a civil suit can make a defendant’s medical condition an issue based on North Carolina’s physician-patient privilege statute that specifically gives courts discretion. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 8-53 provides, in part:
Any resident or presiding judge in the district, either at the trial or prior thereto, or the
Industrial Commission pursuant to law may, subject to G.S. 8-53.6, compel
disclosure if in his opinion disclosure is necessary to a proper administration of
justice.
Unlike Illinois law, the statute in North Carolina does not list specific exceptions to the
physician-patient privilege. Rather, it allows the court to act in the interests of justice based on the facts of the case.
Last edited:
