The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title XXXIII
REGULATION OF TRADE, COMMERCE, INVESTMENTS, AND SOLICITATIONS

Chapter 520
RETAIL INSTALLMENT SALES

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 520.98

520.98 Penalties.—

(1) Any person who willfully and intentionally violates any provision of s. 520.995 or engages in the business of a home improvement finance seller or a sales finance company without obtaining a license as required by this act is guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.

(2) In the case of a willful violation of this act with respect to any home improvement sale or contract, the owner may recover from the person committing such violation, or may set off or counterclaim in any action against the owner by such person, an amount equal to any finance charge and any fees charged to the owner by reason of delinquency, plus attorney’s fees and costs incurred by the owner to assert rights under this part.

History.—s. 1, ch. 69-44; s. 495, ch. 71-136; s. 3, ch. 76-168; s. 1, ch. 77-457; s. 21, ch. 80-256; s. 2, ch. 81-318; s. 30, ch. 87-91; ss. 33, 35, 36, ch. 90-103; s. 4, ch. 91-429.

F.S. 520.98 on Google Scholar

F.S. 520.98 on Casetext

Amendments to 520.98

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 520.98

Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

S520.98 - PUBLIC ORDER CRIMES - HOME IMPRV FINAN SELLR/SALES FINAN WO LIC - M: F

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

SCHMIDT, v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, v., 198 F. Supp. 3d 511 (E.D. Pa. 2016)

. . . and Service Center, Inc., including replacement of the throttle body assembly, which cost the Gills $520.98 . . .

M. ZANDER, v. CIMA,, 197 So. 3d 1082 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . solely by the terms of a home improvement contract which is governed by the provisions of ss. 520.60-520.98 . . .

In BALDUCCI OIL COMPANY, INC. T. ECKLES, v. PETCO INC. INTERSTATE,, 33 B.R. 847 (Bankr. D. Colo. 1983)

. . . January 19,1982 Petco provided transportation services to Bal-ducci for which Balducci owed Petco $520.98 . . .

SHARP M. v. UNITED STATES R. SHARP, Jr. B. W. v. UNITED STATES, 199 F. Supp. 743 (D. Del. 1961)

. . . from $14,298.90 the depreciation allowed, i. e., $13,777.92, producing an adjusted business basis of $520.98 . . . The government then subtracts the adjusted business basis of $520.98 from the proceeds of the sale which . . .