of the ramp problem. Id. at 503. Despite numerous conversations, conferences and correspondences between plaintiffs and the Providence School Department, the assistance and transportation problems were not resolved. Id. at 503. Given the School Department's "intransigent" refusal to resolve plaintiff's claims, the Court in Hurry (Boyle, C.J.) held "no further attempt by plaintiffs to exhaust their administrative remedies was necessary." Id. at 505. In the words of Judge Breyer of the First Circuit, "it was the agency not the plaintiffs that prevented administrative remedies from being exhausted." Ezratty, 648 F.2d at 775 (emphasis in the original).
The facts of the present case are in stark contrast to those of Hurry. All that is alleged is that plaintiffs learned in September of 1986 that their insurance coverage for "mental infirmity
42 F.Supp.2d 1293 (1999)
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff,
v.
FIFTY SEVEN THOUSAND, FOUR HUNDRED AND FORTY-THREE DOLLARS ($57,443.00), Defendant.
No. 97-1602-Civ-LENARD.
United States District Court, S.D. Florida.
January 24, 1999.
*1294 *1295 AUSA Gerardo M. Sims, United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida, Miami, Florida, for plaintiff.
Peter S. Herrick, Miami, Florida, for defendant.

ORDER
TURNOFF, United States Magistrate Judge.
This matter comes before the Court on the United States's Motion for Summary Judgment (DE 15) and Claimant Luz Neyla-Dunlap's Motion to Dismiss (DE 17). For the reasons stated below, this Court will deny the government's Motion for Summary Judgment (DE 15), deny in part and grant in part the Claimant's Motion to Dismiss (DE 17), and enter a finding of probable cause in favor of the United States pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil