Stacking occurs when an insured combines or aggregates uninsured motorist coverage from more than one source. Kenilworth Insurance Co. v. Drake, 396 So.2d 836 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981). There are two methods that can be used to accomplish this. One way is when an insured who is covered under two or more policies combines or stacks the UM coverage from each of the policies. The other way is when an injured party, insured under one policy that covers two or more vehicles, is permitted to combine or stack the coverage for each vehicle insured on the policy. Sellers v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 185 So.2d 689 (Fla. 1966); Tucker v. Government Employees Insurance Co., 288 So.2d 238 (Fla. 1974).
So if you are involved in a Palm Beach County car accident and you maintain an insurance policy that provides uninsured motorist coverage of $10,000 but insurers three separate vehicles, you would have $30,000 in available coverage, unless of course you elected non stacked insurance on a form approved by the Florida department of financial services. In Florida, the number of coverages that can be stacked is limited to the number of coverages for which premiums have been paid. See United Services Automobile Ass’n v. Roth, 744 So.2d 1227 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (stacking not available when premiums not paid).
Under F.S. 627.727(9) (a)-(9) (b), insurance providers may offer policies that prohibit stacking and limit coverages to the vehicle occupied by the insured at the time of the accident. What this means is that if the insured is occupying a non-owned vehicle, the insured may recover under the policy covering the occupied vehicle and, as excess, under the policy affording the highest coverage to the injured party as a Class 1 insured (remember these include named insured, named insured’s spouse, and resident relatives). F.S. 627.727(9) (c). If not an occupant of a motor vehicle at the time of the accident, the insured may select the coverage on any one vehicle under a policy providing coverage. F.S. 627.727(9) (e). You should be aware that a Class 1 insured (see above) can stack the limits of all vehicles under the policies in which they are Class I insureds and may add to that policy in which they are Class II insureds. See, e.g., United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Curry, 395 So.2d 530 (Fla. 1981); Sellers v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 185 So.2d 689 (Fla. 1966). However, a Class II insured is not permitted to stack the coverage for vehicles under the policy that insurers him or her as a Class II insured. Travelers Insurance Co. v. Pac, 337 So.2d 397 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976). Here is an example of how these principles apply to an everyday automobile accident:
A is riding as a passenger in his friend B’s car when there is a west palm beach car wreck and A is injured as a result of the negligence of an uninsured motorist. A has a policy of insurance that provides $25,000 in UM coverage and insures three vehicles kept in Florida. B has a policy with $15,000 in UM coverage that insures the vehicle in which A is riding as a passenger and one other vehicle. A is not a resident of B’s household. A may stack the coverage for the three vehicles on A’s own policy and may use B’s coverage on the vehicle occupied at the time of the accident. A may not stack coverage for B’s vehicles. A’s coverage, therefore, totals $90,000 but B only has 15,000.00 in UM coverage because Class II insured is not permitted to stack the coverage for vehicles under the policy that insurers him or her as a Class II insured. Travelers Insurance Co. v. Pac, 337 So.2d 397 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976). See Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. v. Searle, 379 So.2d 131 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980).