The court determined an insured's satisfaction of its deductible or copayment obligation under a standard automobile policy does not operate to also reduce the $15,000 statutory Personal Injury Protection (PIP) limits of liability. In reaching its decision, the court examined the policies' declaration pages, PIP policy provisions, and the incorporated Buyer's Guide, and concluded Travelers did not clearly express to reasonable insureds, like plaintiffs, that the limits of liability would be reduced if their claims exceeded $15,000. The court also evaluated the legislative history of New Jersey's no-fault scheme and determined its decision did not violate the Legislature's overarching goal of reducing the costs of auto insurance.
Further, the court held absent legislative and regulatory approval, defendant was likely precluded from providing less than $15,000 of PIP medical expense benefits, regardless of the clarity of its policies or declaration pages. Finally, the court distinguished our previous decision in IMO Industries Inc. v. Transamerica Corp., 437 N.J. Super. 577, 622 (App. Div. 2014), as that case involved a commercial general liability policy between sophisticated parties and relied in part on Benjamin Moore & Co. v. Aetna Co., 179 N.J. 87, 93 (2004), which involved a commercial general liability policy whose express language clearly indicated to the insured that the insurer's limit was reduced by the policy's deductible.