Retroactive application of no-fault fee schedules; MCL 500.3157; Andary v USAA Cas Ins Co (Andary II); Contractual vs statutory rights to PIP; Applicability to pre–7/2/20 accidents; MCL 500.3107c; MCL 500.3107d; Mr. Sunshine v Delta Coll Bd of Trs; Principle that a motorcycle claimant’s rights are purely statutory under priority rules; MCL 500.3114(5); Harris v Auto Club Ins Ass’n

The court held that the MCL 500.3157 fee schedules apply to post-7/1/21 services for this 2019 motorcycle crash because plaintiff-motorcyclist’s (Fuentes) PIP claim arises purely by statute under MCL 500.3114(5), not by contract, and thus, Andary II’s non-retroactivity rule does not apply, and nothing in MCL 500.3157 limits its operation to accidents after 7/1/20. Fuentes sought PIP benefits from defendant-insurer (GEICO), and plaintiff-medical provider (Miracle Hands) sought payment for in-home services. The trial court applied the fee caps to treatment after 7/1/21. On appeal, the court rejected plaintiffs’ retroactivity argument under Andary II, explaining that Andary’s bar turns on whether a claimant has both contractual and statutory PIP rights. “Andary II’s ban on the retroactive application of the fee schedules in MCL 500.3157 depends on whether a plaintiff has both a statutory and contractual right to claim PIP benefits.” The court next rejected the contention that accidents before 7/2/20 are exempt, noting that “unlike MCL 500.3107c and MCL 500.3107d, the text of MCL 500.3157 does not distinguish the fee schedule’s applicability from the policy’s effective date. It merely details the amount of payment owed” for treatment rendered after 7/1/21. Reading in a date limit “would run counter to our canons of statutory interpretation.” Finally, the court rejected Fuentes’s third-party-beneficiary theory, relying on Harris. The plaintiff in Harris was “neither a third-party beneficiary nor a subrogee of the no-fault policy.” Rather, that plaintiff’s right to PIP benefits arose “solely by statute.” MCL 500.3114(5) “does not give motorcyclists a contractual right to recover PIP benefits from an insurance policy; it only provides a statutory right to make a claim for PIP benefits from specific insurers.” Affirmed.