Michigan No-Fault PIP Deadlines in 2026: One-Year-Back Rule

By Attorney Manny Chahal · Updated May 2026 · Reading time: ~8 min

If you were hurt in a Michigan motor vehicle crash, the deadlines that govern your Personal Injury Protection (PIP) claim are not a single calendar entry. They are a layered set of statutory triggers under MCL 500.3145 — each capable of cutting off benefits you have already earned. The 2019 reforms added a tolling rule that softened the harshest edges, but the Michigan Supreme Court’s April 2025 decision in Spine Specialists of Michigan, PC v. MemberSelect Insurance Co. has now drawn a hard line around who can use it.

The Three Deadlines That Govern Every Michigan PIP Claim

The No-Fault Act buries three separate deadlines inside a single statute. Confusing them is the most common reason valid claims get denied.

1. The One-Year Notice Rule — MCL 500.3145(1)

An action to recover PIP benefits cannot be commenced later than one year after the date of the accident unless one of two things happens within that first year: (a) written notice of injury is given to the insurer, or (b) the insurer has already made a PIP payment for the injury. The notice must identify the claimant, the injured person, and the time, place, and nature of the injury in ordinary language.

Practical effect: if you do not give written notice and the insurer has not paid anything within twelve months of the crash date, the claim window closes — full stop. Putting the carrier on written notice early, even when treatment is ongoing, is the single most protective step a claimant can take.

2. The One-Year-Back Damages Rule — MCL 500.3145(2)

Even when the lawsuit is timely filed, a claimant may not recover benefits for any portion of the loss incurred more than one year before the date suit was filed. This is a damages cap, not a statute of limitations. It quietly destroys older medical bills, attendant care, and replacement-services losses every time a claim sits too long.

3. When the Lawsuit Itself Must Be Filed

If notice was given or a payment was made, the action may be commenced within one year after the most recent allowable expense, work-loss, or survivor’s-loss benefit was incurred. Each fresh expense restarts the one-year filing window for that category of loss — subject, of course, to the one-year-back damages cap above.

The 2019 Tolling Amendment — MCL 500.3145(3)

The Michigan Legislature added subsection (3) to MCL 500.3145 in 2019 PA 21, effective June 11, 2019. The provision tolls the limitations period and the one-year-back damages cap from the date a specific claim for payment is submitted to the insurer until the date the insurer formally denies the claim.

The amendment also carries a fairness escape valve for insurers: tolling does not apply if the claimant fails to pursue the claim with reasonable diligence. A claim cannot sit dormant for years and then revive itself on the theory that the carrier “never said no.”

Why this mattered: before 2019, every day a carrier dragged its feet eroded a claimant’s recoverable damages. The tolling provision flipped that incentive — an insurer that wants the clock to run must put a formal denial in writing.

What Encompass Healthcare Established About “Formal Denial”

The first major appellate clarification came in Encompass Healthcare, PLLC v. Citizens Insurance Company, a published Michigan Court of Appeals decision issued November 17, 2022 (Docket No. 357225). The provider sought reimbursement of approximately $921,828 in pressure-sore treatment for a catastrophically injured claimant; Citizens paid only a fraction and issued Explanations of Review (EORs) along the way.

Citizens argued the claim was capped by the one-year-back rule. The Court of Appeals disagreed. It held that the EORs — which neither stated the claim was denied nor used finality language — did not constitute a “formal denial” sufficient to stop the tolling clock. Tolling under MCL 500.3145(3) therefore continued until the lawsuit was filed.

The takeaway for 2026 is straightforward: an insurer’s silence, partial payment, or vague EOR does not start the one-year-back period running again. A claimant whose carrier has been paying piecemeal — or paying nothing while never sending a formal denial — may have far more recoverable past loss than they assume.

Spine Specialists v. MemberSelect (April 2025): Pre-2019 Claimants Cannot Use Tolling

In April 2025, the Michigan Supreme Court issued its decision in Spine Specialists of Michigan, PC v. MemberSelect Insurance Company (Docket No. 165445). The patient was injured in 2017 — before the tolling amendment took effect — and assigned his PIP rights to the provider. When MemberSelect refused payment, Spine Specialists argued the 2019 tolling provision rescued claims that would otherwise be barred by the one-year-back rule.

The Supreme Court held that MCL 500.3145(3) does not apply retroactively. Because the cause of action accrued before June 11, 2019, the tolling amendment could not revive otherwise-stale damages. The Court reasoned that the Legislature did not signal retroactive intent and that imposing tolling on closed-out adjuster decisions would attach new legal consequences to past transactions.

This is the second time in two years the Supreme Court has policed the temporal boundary of the 2019 reforms. It follows Andary v. USAA Casualty Insurance Co., 511 Mich 137 (2023), which held that the 2019 medical-fee-schedule reductions and the 56-hour-per-week family attendant-care cap also do not apply to pre-amendment claimants.

Pre-Amendment vs. Post-Amendment: A Side-by-Side

Who Is Affected in 2026

Three categories of Michigan claimants need to read their files with fresh eyes after Spine Specialists:

• Pre-June 11, 2019 catastrophic claimants. If your accident predates the amendment, the one-year-back damages cap is the rigid version — tolling under subsection (3) is unavailable. Older bills must be litigated promptly or they vanish. The good news under Andary: the fee schedule and the 56-hour family-care cap also do not apply, so reasonable charges and uncapped attendant care remain on the table.
• Post-June 11, 2019 claimants with delayed insurer responses. The tolling provision is your shield. Track every claim submission and every insurer communication. If the carrier has not issued a written, unequivocal denial, the one-year-back clock has not restarted on those bills.
• Healthcare providers holding assignments. The Encompass standard for “formal denial” is high. Boilerplate EORs and partial payments will not trigger the limitations cap. Document every reimbursement request and preserve copies of every insurer communication.

Practical Steps to Protect Your Claim

1. Send written notice within twelve months of the crash, even if you are still treating. The MCL 500.3145(1) notice is short, simple, and prevents the most catastrophic time-bar outcome. Mail or email it to the carrier with proof of delivery.
2. Submit each medical bill, attendant-care log, replacement-services calendar, and wage-loss claim as a “specific claim for payment.” Tolling under MCL 500.3145(3) attaches to specific claims, not to vague global demands. The cleaner the submission, the cleaner the tolling.
3. Read every insurer letter for finality language. Words like “denied,” “closed,” and “we will not pay” matter. Vague language, EORs, and “pending review” notices generally do not stop the tolling clock under Encompass.
4. Calendar the lawsuit deadline conservatively. Even when tolling is available, a missed limitations period is unforgiving. File suit before the carrier’s formal denial date plus one year. If a claim is contested, do not wait.
5. For pre-June 2019 accidents, audit older bills now. The window to recover them is narrower than it is for newer claims. Coordinate with a Michigan no-fault attorney to evaluate the timeline before more bills age past the one-year-back line.

Frequently Asked Questions