Home
Menu
Call attorney Graham Syfert at 904-383-7448
Personal Injury Lawyer
Florida Statute 320.641 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
F.S. 320.641 Case Law from Google Scholar
Statute is currently reporting as:
Link to State of Florida Official Statute Google Search for Amendments to 320.641

The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title XXIII
MOTOR VEHICLES
Chapter 320
MOTOR VEHICLE LICENSES
View Entire Chapter
F.S. 320.641
320.641 Discontinuations, cancellations, nonrenewals, modifications, and replacement of franchise agreements.
(1)(a) An applicant or licensee shall give written notice to the motor vehicle dealer and the department of the licensee’s intention to discontinue, cancel, or fail to renew a franchise agreement or of the licensee’s intention to modify a franchise or replace a franchise with a succeeding franchise, which modification or replacement will adversely alter the rights or obligations of a motor vehicle dealer under an existing franchise agreement or will substantially impair the sales, service obligations, or investment of the motor vehicle dealer, at least 90 days before the effective date thereof, together with the specific grounds for such action.
(b) The failure by the licensee to comply with the 90-day notice period and procedure prescribed herein shall render voidable, at the option of the motor vehicle dealer, any discontinuation, cancellation, nonrenewal, modification, or replacement of any franchise agreement. Designation of a franchise agreement at a specific location as a “nondesignated point” shall be deemed an evasion of this section and constitutes an unfair cancellation.
(2) Franchise agreements are deemed to be continuing unless the applicant or licensee has notified the department of the discontinuation of, cancellation of, failure to renew, modification of, or replacement of the agreement of any of its motor vehicle dealers; and annual renewal of the license provided for under ss. 320.60-320.70 is not necessary for any cause of action against the licensee.
(3) Any motor vehicle dealer who receives a notice of intent to discontinue, cancel, not renew, modify, or replace may, within the 90-day notice period, file a petition or complaint for a determination of whether such action is an unfair or prohibited discontinuation, cancellation, nonrenewal, modification, or replacement. Agreements and certificates of appointment shall continue in effect until final determination of the issues raised in such petition or complaint by the motor vehicle dealer. A discontinuation, cancellation, or nonrenewal of a franchise agreement is unfair if it is not clearly permitted by the franchise agreement; is not undertaken in good faith; is not undertaken for good cause; or is based on an alleged breach of the franchise agreement which is not in fact a material and substantial breach; or, if the grounds relied upon for termination, cancellation, or nonrenewal have not been applied in a uniform and consistent manner by the licensee. If the notice of discontinuation, cancellation, or nonrenewal relates to an alleged failure of the new motor vehicle dealer’s sales or service performance obligations under the franchise agreement, the new motor vehicle dealer must first be provided with at least 180 days to correct the alleged failure before a licensee may send the notice of discontinuation, cancellation, or nonrenewal. A modification or replacement is unfair if it is not clearly permitted by the franchise agreement; is not undertaken in good faith; or is not undertaken for good cause. The applicant or licensee shall have the burden of proof that such action is fair and not prohibited.
(4) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, the failure of a motor vehicle dealer to be engaged in business with the public for 10 consecutive business days constitutes abandonment by the dealer of his or her franchise agreement. If any motor vehicle dealer abandons his or her franchise agreement, he or she has no cause of action under this section. For the purpose of this section, a dealer shall be considered to be engaged in business with the public if a sales and service facility is open and is performing such services 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, excluding holidays. However, it will not be considered abandonment if such failure to engage in business is due to an act of God, a work stoppage, or a delay due to a strike or labor difficulty, a freight embargo, or other cause over which the motor vehicle dealer has no control, including any violation of ss. 320.60-320.70.
(5) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, if a motor vehicle dealer has abandoned his or her franchise agreement as provided in subsection (4), the licensee may give written notice to the dealer and the department of the licensee’s intention to discontinue, cancel, or fail to renew the franchise agreement with the dealer at least 15 days before the effective date thereof, specifying the grounds for such action. A motor vehicle dealer receiving such notice may file a petition or complaint for determination of whether in fact there has been an abandonment of the franchise.
(6) If the complainant motor vehicle dealer prevails, he or she shall have a cause of action against the licensee for reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs incurred by him or her in such proceeding, and he or she shall have a cause of action under s. 320.697.
(7) Except as provided in s. 320.643, no replacement motor vehicle dealer shall be named for this point or location to engage in business and the franchise agreement shall remain in effect until a final judgment is entered after all appeals are exhausted, provided that, when a motor vehicle dealer appeals a decision upholding a discontinuation, cancellation, or nonrenewal based upon abandonment or revocation of the dealer’s license pursuant to s. 320.27, as lawful reasons for such discontinuation, cancellation, or nonrenewal, the franchise agreement shall remain in effect pending exhaustion of all appeals only if the motor vehicle dealer establishes a likelihood of success on appeal and that the public interest will not be harmed by keeping the franchise agreement in effect pending entry of final judgment after such appeal.
(8) If a transfer is proposed pursuant to s. 320.643(1) or (2) after a notice of intent to discontinue, cancel, or not renew a franchise agreement is received but, prior to the final determination, including exhaustion of all appellate remedies of a motor vehicle dealer’s complaint or petition contesting such action, the termination proceedings shall be stayed, without bond, during the period that the transfer is being reviewed by the licensee pursuant to s. 320.643. During the period that the transfer is being reviewed by the licensee, pursuant to s. 320.643, the franchise agreement shall remain in full force and effect, and the motor vehicle dealer shall retain all rights and remedies pursuant to the terms and conditions of the franchise agreement and applicable law, including all rights of transfer until such time as the licensee has accepted or rejected the proposed transfer. If the proposed transfer is rejected, the motor vehicle dealer shall retain all of its rights pursuant to s. 320.643 to an administrative determination as to whether the licensee’s rejection is in compliance with the provisions of s. 320.643, and during the pendency of any such administrative proceeding, and any related appellate proceedings, the termination proceedings shall remain stayed without bond, the franchise agreement shall remain in full force and effect, and the motor vehicle dealer shall retain all rights and remedies pursuant to the terms and conditions of the franchise agreement and applicable law, including all rights of transfer. If a transfer is approved by the licensee or mandated by law, the termination proceedings shall be dismissed with prejudice as moot. This subsection applies only to the first two proposed transfers pursuant to s. 320.643(1) or (2) after notice of intent to discontinue, cancel, or not renew is received.
History.s. 9, ch. 70-424; s. 1, ch. 70-439; s. 3, ch. 76-168; s. 1, ch. 77-457; ss. 6, 16, 17, ch. 80-217; ss. 2, 3, ch. 81-318; s. 6, ch. 84-69; ss. 11, 20, 21, ch. 88-395; s. 4, ch. 91-429; s. 373, ch. 95-148; s. 22, ch. 2001-196; s. 2, ch. 2007-195; s. 3, ch. 2017-187.

F.S. 320.641 on Google Scholar

F.S. 320.641 on Casetext

Amendments to 320.641


Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 320.641
Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 320.641.



Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

RECOVERY RACING, LLC, d b a Ft. LLC, d b a v. MASERATI NORTH AMERICA, INC., 261 So. 3d 600 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . We reverse the agency's determination that the dealers were entitled to section 320.641 fairness hearings . . . The dealers challenged the 2017 program under section 320.641, Florida Statutes (2017). . . . They argued that Maserati did not comply with the 90-day notice requirement of subsection 320.641(1)( . . . a), so that the 2017 program was "voidable" at their option pursuant to subsection 320.641(1)(b). . . . Nothing in subsections 320.641 or 320.60 so handcuffs motor vehicle manufacturers. . . .

HOPKINS PONTIAC GMC, INC. v. ALLY FINANCIAL INC. f k a GMAC LLC, f k a LLC,, 60 F. Supp. 3d 1252 (N.D. Fla. 2014)

. . . ,' cancellation, or nonrenewal, if implemented, would be in violation of any of the provisions of § 320.641 . . . a franchise agreement of a licensed motor vehicle dealer in violation of any of the provisions of § 320.641 . . . Stat. § 320.641, which requires 90-day advance written notice of any intent not to cancel or fail to . . .

WINTER PARK IMPORTS, INC. v. JM FAMILY ENTERPRISES,, 66 So. 3d 336 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . not be applicable to any motor vehicle dealer after final determination by the department under s. 320.641 . . .

PALMETTO FORD TRUCK SALES, INC. d b a v. STERLING TRUCK CORPORATION, v. d b a v., 38 So. 3d 205 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles (DHSMV) for an administrative hearing pursuant to section 320.641 . . . In the final order under review, DHSMV dismissed the dealers’ complaints on grounds that section 320.641 . . . operations never affords a dealer the right to petition for a fairness determination pursuant to section 320.641 . . . Pursuant to section 320.641(3), Florida Statutes (2008), a dealer has the right to an administrative . . . applicant or licensee shall have the burden of proof that such action is fair and not prohibited. § 320.641 . . .

DAEWOO MOTOR AMERICA, INC. v. GENERAL MOTORS CORP. GM Co., 459 F.3d 1249 (11th Cir. 2006)

. . . . § 320.641) against all defendants; (12) Illegal Conduct Related to Motor Vehicle Business (Fla.Stat . . . Stat. §. 320.641(l)(b)(3), which proscribes the "unfair” termination. of a franchise agreement. . . .

DAEWOO MOTOR AMERICA, INC. v. GENERAL MOTORS CORP. GM Co., 459 F.3d 1249 (11th Cir. 2006)

. . . . § 320.641) against all defendants; (12) Illegal Conduct Related to Motor Vehicle Business (Fla.Stat . . . Stat. § 320.641(l)(b)(3), which proscribes the "unfair” termination of a franchise agreement. . . .

BECKFORD, v. GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION,, 919 So. 2d 612 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . , Florida Statutes (2002), and (2) Florida’s Motor Vehicle Licensing Act (“FMVLA”), sections 320.60-320.641 . . .

DAEWOO MOTOR AMERICA, INC. v. GENERAL MOTORS CORP. GM Co., 315 B.R. 148 (M.D. Fla. 2004)

. . . . § 549; (XI) Constructive Termination of Distribution/Franchise Agreements, Florida Statute § 320.641 . . .

L. BROOKS, v. ST. JOHN S MOTOR SALES, INC., 814 So. 2d 1237 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . In the Complaint, the Plaintiff alleges violation of § 320.641 and § 320.645, Fla. . . . A review of the content of the Act, especially § 320.641, Fla. . . .

CHRYSLER CORPORATION, v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES,, 720 So. 2d 563 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . proceedings in the trial court relating to Chrysler’s challenge to the facial constitutionality of section 320.641 . . . agreements between motor vehicle manufacturers (“licensees”) and dealers states in pertinent part: 320.641 . . . alleged breach of the franchise agreement which is not in fact a material and substantial breach. § 320.641 . . . with the Department an administrative complaint against Chrysler seeking relief pursuant to section 320.641 . . . In its facial challenge, Chrysler alleged that section 320.641(3), Florida Statutes (1995), “provides . . .

J. PEARSON, J. v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY,, 694 So. 2d 61 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . Appellant alleges violation of section 320.641, unfair cancellation of franchise agreements; section . . . Section 320.641 requires a licensee, in this case Ford, to give written notice to the Florida Department . . . This is also known as the Florida Motor Vehicle Dealer Act, §§ 320.60-320.70, Fla.Stat. (1995). . 320.641 . . .

AERO PRODUCTS CORPORATION, v. DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES,, 675 So. 2d 661 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . issue is whether an ambulance dealer is included in the limited class of dealers protected by section 320.641 . . . between it and Aero is governed by §§ 320.60-70 Florida Statutes (1993) and, therefore, believes § 320.641 . . . Therefore, to determine if Aero comes under the protection of section 320.641, we must consider if an . . . 320.60(10) applies, whenever the term motor vehicle is used in Secs. 320.61-320.70, including Sec. 320.641 . . . See § 320.641(3), Fla. . . .

FERRARI NORTH AMERICA, INC. v. CROWN AUTO DEALERSHIPS, INC. d b a, 658 So. 2d 1187 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . (Crown) pursuant to section 320.641, Florida Statutes (1993). We affirm. . . . complaint with the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles for a determination under section 320.641 . . . See the last sentence of Section 320.641(3), Florida Statutes, which by necessary implication authorizes . . . Section 320.641(3) provides: Any motor vehicle dealer whose franchise agreement is discontinued, canceled . . . Because the hearing officer had jurisdiction pursuant to section 320.641 to consider the issues raised . . .

J. PEARSON, v. FORD MOTOR CO. Co. Co., 865 F. Supp. 1504 (N.D. Fla. 1994)

. . . Neither the parties, nor I, have discovered any reported decision of a Florida court construing Section 320.641 . . .

MIKE SMITH PONTIAC, GMC, INC. v. MERCEDES- BENZ OF NORTH AMERICA, INC., 32 F.3d 528 (11th Cir. 1994)

. . . Pursuant to § 320.641, MSP filed an administrative complaint with the Department of Highway Safety and . . . Section 320.641(l)(a) requires a manufacturer to give 90 days notice of its intent to cancel a dealer . . .

GUS MACHADO BUICK- GMC TRUCK, INC. v. GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION, GUS MACHADO BUICK- GMC TRUCK, INC. v. BUICK MOTOR DIVISION, GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION,, 623 So. 2d 810 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . Thereafter, on March 5, 1991, GM notified Machado, pursuant to Sections 320.641(4) and (5), Florida Statutes . . . On March 22, 1991, Machado filed a petition pursuant to section 320.641(5) for determination of whether . . . transfer acts to continue the franchise agreement in a termination proceeding commenced under section 320.641 . . . ease would have the same effect in GM’s abandonment/termination proceeding commenced under sections 320.641 . . . As there was no valid transfer, the stay provisions of section 320.641(7) do not apply. . . .

BARRY COOK FORD, INC. v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY,, 616 So. 2d 512 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . Section 320.641(3) provides that any motor vehicle dealer whose franchise agreement is discontinued, . . . Section 320.641(5) provides that if the dealer prevails, he shall have a cause of action against the . . . Similarly, while resort may be had to the administrative forum pursuant to section 320.641(3) to determine . . . Section 320.641(3) uses the past tense. . . . Cook Ford concedes that certain 1988 amendments to section 320.641(3) are not applicable in this case . . .

In TOM STIMUS CHRYSLER- PLYMOUTH, INC., 134 B.R. 676 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1991)

. . . . § 320.641(4). . . . These Sections of the Florida Statutes provide in pertinent part as follows: 320.641. . . .

GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION, BUICK AND GMC TRUCK DIVISION, v. GUS MACHADO BUICK- GMC, INC., 581 So. 2d 637 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . This remedy is expressly provided for in subsections 320.641(4) and (5), Florida Statutes (1989). . . . It relied on section 320.641(5) which provides: [I]f a motor vehicle dealer has abandoned his franchise . . . See §§ 320.641(l)-(3), Fla.Stat. (1989). . . .

MERCEDES- BENZ OF NORTH AMERICA, a v. MIKE SMITH PONTIAC GMC, INC. a v. DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES, MERCEDES- BENZ OF NORTH AMERICA, INC. v. MIKE SMITH PONTIAC GMC, INC. Z. R., 561 So. 2d 620 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . On January 16, 1986, MSP filed an administrative complaint with the Department pursuant to section 320.641 . . . within the ninety day notice period, the dealer agreement continued in effect by operation of section 320.641 . . . Section 320.641(3) provides as follows: Any motor vehicle dealer whose franchise agreement is discontinued . . . agreements renewed or entered into subsequent to May 31, 1984, will be governed by this act. .See § 320.641 . . .

In LAUDERDALE MOTORCAR CORP. LAUDERDALE MOTORCAR CORP. v. ROLLS- ROYCE MOTORS INC., 35 B.R. 544 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 1988)

. . . . § 320.641 on or before September 30, 1983.” . . . Fla.Stat. § 320.641(2) (1981). . . . Fla.Stat. § 320.641(1) (1981). . . . Fla.Stat. § 320.641(3) (1981). . . . the 90-day notice period during which an automobile dealer may protest non-renewal under Fla.Stats. § 320.641 . . .

ED MULLINAX FORD, INC. v BOLTON- HOOLEY, INC., 34 Fla. Supp. 2d 192 (Fla. Div. Admin. Hearings 1988)

. . . inadequate representation in the relevant territory or community and that the requirements of Section 320.641 . . .

CABRIOLET PORSCHE AUDI, INC. a d b a v. AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO. INC. A, 773 F.2d 1193 (11th Cir. 1985)

. . . Statutes The district court found that American Honda violated sections 320.64(4) and (8) and section 320.641 . . . Section 320.641(l)(a) provides that motor vehicle manufacturers, distributors and importers shall notify . . . Thus, 320.641(l)(a) and 320.64(8) do not apply. . . . The court further found that 320.641(l)(a) was also violated when American Honda discriminated against . . . ” or "discontinuance” of Cabriolet’s dealership, in violation of the notice requirements of Section 320.641 . . .

DICK WINNING CHRYSLER- PLYMOUTH OF FT. MYERS, INC. a v. CHRYSLER MOTORS CORPORATION a, 750 F.2d 895 (11th Cir. 1985)

. . . In addition, section 320.641 prohibits unfair cancellations of franchise agreements and provides for . . .

MERCEDES- BENZ OF NORTH AMERICA, INC. a v. DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES OF STATE FIFTH AVENUE MOTORS, LTD. a d b a a d b a, 455 So. 2d 404 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

. . . struck MBNA’s final defense relating to the impact of the 1980 amendment, reasoning that under section 320.641 . . . Mercedes-Benz standard dealer agreement inured to the benefit of both Fifth Avenue and Hawkins under section 320.641 . . . holding is that the trial court made its determination by applying Florida law, in particular section 320.641 . . .

J. R. FURLONG, INC. d b a v. CHRYSLER CORPORATION,, 419 So. 2d 385 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

. . . 1978, FURLONG filed with the Department of Motor Vehicles of the State of Florida, pursuant to Section 320.641 . . . without just provocation, unfairly cancelled the aforesaid agreement contrary to Sections 320.64 and 320.641 . . . attahced [sic] hereto and made a part hereof as Plaintiff’s Exhibit “C”, ruled pursuant to Section 320.641 . . . Section 320.641(5), Florida Statutes, states that if a motor vehicle dealer prevails against a licensee . . . II Section 320.641(3), (5), Florida Statutes (1981), upon which the subject complaint was based, provides . . .

NEW MOTOR VEHICLE BOARD OF CALIFORNIA v. ORRIN W. FOX CO., 439 U.S. 96 (U.S. 1978)

. . . . §320.641 (1977); Ga. Code § 84-6610 (f) (Supp. 1977); Haw. Rev. . . .

FIAT MOTORS OF NORTH AMERICA, INC. v. D. CALVIN a, 356 So. 2d 908 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1978)

. . . Section 320.641(3), Florida Statutes (1977), provides: (3) Any motor vehicle dealer whose franchise agreement . . . statute, respondent Calvin, director of the Division, entered an order setting a hearing under Section 320.641 . . . Section 320.641(3) provides that the dealer’s filing of a verified complaint, without more, stays the . . .

INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY, v. D. CALVIN,, 353 So. 2d 144 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1977)

. . . The Director has so acted under Section 320.641, Florida Statutes (1975), which allows him to find an . . . complained to the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, under another subsection of Section 320.641 . . . bad faith by the manufacturer, constituting an unfair cancellation under Sections 320.64(7), (8) and 320.641 . . . Section 320.641 specifically deals with unfair cancellations of franchise agreements and provides in . . . The only criterion for agency review under Section 320.641(3) is whether the franchise agreement was . . .

YAMAHA PARTS DISTRIBUTORS INC. v. EHRMAN, 316 So. 2d 557 (Fla. 1975)

. . . appeal from an order- of the Broward County Circuit Court which upheld the constitutionality of Sections 320.641 . . . In that order the trial court found Sections 320.641 and 320.695, Florida Statues, to be constitutional . . . termination was invalid for failure to provide 90 days notice of termination as required by Section 320.641 . . . We hold that the Section 320.641, Florida Statutes, applies prospectively to motor vehicle franchise . . . Section 320.641(3), Fla.Stat. . Art. I, Section 10, U.S.Const.; Art. I, Section 10, Fla.Const. . . . .

STATE v. BRITISH LEYLAND MOTORS, INC., 290 So. 2d 576 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1974)

. . . Section 320.641, F.S.A., which provides in part: “(l)(a) An applicant or licensee shall notify the motor . . . Section 320.641, F.S.A.; that the court cannot change the plain meaning of the statute and, consequently . . . Certainly the legislature contemplated that the benefits of Section 320.641 would extend to that class . . . The court is of the opinion that the context of Section 320.641, when considered in the context of the . . . If there were doubt as to whether the contract in question was within the terms of Section 320.641, that . . .

PLANTATION DATSUN, INC. a U. S. A. a v. D. CALVIN,, 275 So. 2d 26 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1973)

. . . Section 320.641 et seq., Florida Statutes, F.S.A. . . .