threshold permanency requirement. Therefore, she was entitled to bring suit. 4 .A similar statute is section 768.76(1), Florida Statutes (2003), which addresses collateral sources of indemnity and provides in pertinent part that in any negligence action the court shall reduce the amount of damages awarded "by the total of all amounts which have been paid for the benefit of the claimant ... from all collateral sources.” Because section 627.736(3) more specifically addresses PIP benefits, it controls the present case. 5 . We find it unnecessary to look to the legislative history of section 627.736 for resolution of this case; rather, we apply a plain meaning reading of these two statutes. 6 . See Caruso v. Baumle, No. SC03-127, 880 So.2d 540 at 544, 2004 WL 1403170 (Fla. June 24, 2004) (<HOLDING>). 7 . This method of calculation presumes that
holding that trier of fact whether judge or jury is to offset collateral source amount under section 6277363 holding that in a bench trial it is presumed that the judge as trier of fact is able to distinguish between competent and incompetent evidence and consider only that evidence which is admissible holding that whether a vessel is subject to jurisdiction under section 955a is a question of fact holding that there must be sufficient competent evidence from which the trier of fact could estimate the amount of damages with a reasonable degree of certainty holding that issues of discriminatory intent and actual motivation are questions of fact for the trier of fact