Florida Statute 162.9 - Full Text and Legal Analysis

The 2025 Florida Statutes

Title XI
COUNTY ORGANIZATION AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS

Chapter 162
COUNTY OR MUNICIPAL CODE ENFORCEMENT

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 162.09

162.09 Administrative fines; costs of repair; liens.—

(1) An enforcement board, upon notification by the code inspector that an order of the enforcement board has not been complied with by the set time or upon finding that a repeat violation has been committed, may order the violator to pay a fine in an amount specified in this section for each day the violation continues past the date set by the enforcement board for compliance or, in the case of a repeat violation, for each day the repeat violation continues, beginning with the date the repeat violation is found to have occurred by the code inspector. In addition, if the violation is a violation described in s. 162.06(4), the enforcement board shall notify the local governing body, which may make all reasonable repairs which are required to bring the property into compliance and charge the violator with the reasonable cost of the repairs along with the fine imposed pursuant to this section. Making such repairs does not create a continuing obligation on the part of the local governing body to make further repairs or to maintain the property and does not create any liability against the local governing body for any damages to the property if such repairs were completed in good faith. If a finding of a violation or a repeat violation has been made as provided in this part, a hearing shall not be necessary for issuance of the order imposing the fine. If, after due notice and hearing, a code enforcement board finds a violation to be irreparable or irreversible in nature, it may order the violator to pay a fine as specified in paragraph (2)(a).

(2)(a) A fine imposed pursuant to this section shall not exceed $250 per day for a first violation and shall not exceed $500 per day for a repeat violation, and, in addition, may include all costs of repairs pursuant to subsection (1). However, if a code enforcement board finds the violation to be irreparable or irreversible in nature, it may impose a fine not to exceed $5,000 per violation.

(b) In determining the amount of the fine, if any, the enforcement board shall consider the following factors:

1. The gravity of the violation;

2. Any actions taken by the violator to correct the violation; and

3. Any previous violations committed by the violator.

(d) A county or a municipality having a population equal to or greater than 50,000 may adopt, by a vote of at least a majority plus one of the entire governing body of the county or municipality, an ordinance that gives code enforcement boards or special magistrates, or both, authority to impose fines in excess of the limits set forth in paragraph (a). Such fines shall not exceed $1,000 per day per violation for a first violation, $5,000 per day per violation for a repeat violation, and up to $15,000 per violation if the code enforcement board or special magistrate finds the violation to be irreparable or irreversible in nature. In addition to such fines, a code enforcement board or special magistrate may impose additional fines to cover all costs incurred by the local government in enforcing its codes and all costs of repairs pursuant to subsection (1). Any ordinance imposing such fines shall include criteria to be considered by the code enforcement board or special magistrate in determining the amount of the fines, including, but not limited to, those factors set forth in paragraph (b).

(e) For the demolition of a building or structure that is individually listed in the National Register of Historic Places as defined in s. 267.021 or is a contributing resource to a National Register-listed district, a code enforcement board or special magistrate may impose a fine that exceeds the limits of this subsection if the code enforcement board or special magistrate finds, based on competent substantial evidence, that the demolition of the building or structure was knowing and willful and was not permitted or the result of a natural disaster. A fine imposed pursuant to this paragraph may not exceed 20 percent of the fair or just market valuation of the property before demolition of the building or structure, as determined by the property appraiser.

(3) A certified copy of an order imposing a fine, or a fine plus repair costs, may be recorded in the public records and thereafter shall constitute a lien against the land on which the violation exists and upon any other real or personal property owned by the violator. Upon petition to the circuit court, such order shall be enforceable in the same manner as a court judgment by the sheriffs of this state, including execution and levy against the personal property of the violator, but such order shall not be deemed to be a court judgment except for enforcement purposes. A fine imposed pursuant to this part shall continue to accrue until the violator comes into compliance or until judgment is rendered in a suit filed pursuant to this section, whichever occurs first. A lien arising from a fine imposed pursuant to this section runs in favor of the local governing body, and the local governing body may execute a satisfaction or release of lien entered pursuant to this section. After 3 months from the filing of any such lien which remains unpaid, the enforcement board may authorize the local governing body attorney to foreclose on the lien or to sue to recover a money judgment for the amount of the lien plus accrued interest. No lien created pursuant to the provisions of this part may be foreclosed on real property which is a homestead under s. 4, Art. X of the State Constitution. The money judgment provisions of this section shall not apply to real property or personal property which is covered under s. 4(a), Art. X of the State Constitution.

History.—s. 1, ch. 80-300; s. 8, ch. 82-37; s. 2, ch. 85-150; s. 8, ch. 86-201; s. 2, ch. 87-391; s. 8, ch. 89-268; s. 4, ch. 94-291; s. 1, ch. 95-297; s. 5, ch. 99-360; s. 1, ch. 2000-125; s. 65, ch. 2004-11; s. 1, ch. 2025-87.

Note.—Former s. 166.059.

F.S. 162.09 on Google Scholar

F.S. 162.09 on CourtListener

Amendments to 162.09

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 162.09

Total Results: 62

Massey v. Charlotte County

842 So. 2d 142, 2003 WL 255453

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 7, 2003 | Docket: 1932131

Cited 13 times | Published

become a lien on your property pursuant to Section 162.09, Florida Statutes. On November 13, 2000, a

Wilson v. County of Orange

881 So. 2d 625, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 11655, 2004 WL 1750703

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 6, 2004 | Docket: 1465863

Cited 12 times | Published

ordinances. Specifically, Count II alleged that section 162.09(1), Florida Statutes[1] and section 11-37(a)

Kirby v. City of Archer

790 So. 2d 1214, 2001 WL 877397

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 6, 2001 | Docket: 1734466

Cited 11 times | Published

appellee, City of Archer, created pursuant to section 162.09(3), Florida Statutes (1997). For the reasons

Verdi v. Metropolitan Dade County

684 So. 2d 870, 1996 WL 724135

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 18, 1996 | Docket: 1481826

Cited 10 times | Published

repeated violation continues to exist. [3] Section 162.09(1) provides: An enforcement board, upon notification

Demura v. County of Volusia

618 So. 2d 754, 1993 WL 134078

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 30, 1993 | Docket: 1720346

Cited 9 times | Published

exists." Section 162.02, Fla. Stat. (1991). Section 162.09(3), Florida Statutes (1991), provides in pertinent

Sarasota County v. Andrews

573 So. 2d 113, 1991 WL 518

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 4, 1991 | Docket: 1518697

Cited 8 times | Published

administrative fines and other noncriminal penalties. Section 162.09 provides that the recording of a certified

City of Palm Bay v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

114 So. 3d 924, 38 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 322, 2013 WL 2096257, 2013 Fla. LEXIS 1000

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: May 16, 2013 | Docket: 60232017

Cited 7 times | Published

the mechanical recording statute provided in section 162.09, Florida Statutes (2004), or that the Florida

City of Tampa v. Braxton

616 So. 2d 554, 1993 WL 95600

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 31, 1993 | Docket: 1726498

Cited 7 times | Published

at law to collect the fine when it enacted section 162.09(3), Florida Statutes (1987), as amended October

Miskin v. City of Fort Lauderdale

661 So. 2d 415, 1995 WL 608514

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 18, 1995 | Docket: 1526495

Cited 6 times | Published

*416 lien in the public records pursuant to section 162.09, Florida Statutes (1993). Thereafter, on January

Henley v. MacDonald

971 So. 2d 998, 2008 WL 80226

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 9, 2008 | Docket: 1445378

Cited 5 times | Published

violations in question were rendered pursuant to section 162.09(1), Florida Statutes (2005), which entitles

City of Gainesville Code Enforcement Bd. v. Lewis

536 So. 2d 1148, 1988 WL 139520

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 28, 1988 | Docket: 415743

Cited 5 times | Published

(January 29, 1986) ("AGO 86-10") which interpreted section 162.09 to mean that a municipality may not provide

Stratton v. Sarasota County

983 So. 2d 51, 2008 WL 1960274

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 7, 2008 | Docket: 1661562

Cited 4 times | Published

actually incurs in correcting code violations. Section 162.09(1), Florida Statutes (2004), permits a local

Town of Lake Park v. Grimes

963 So. 2d 940, 2007 WL 2480983

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 5, 2007 | Docket: 1328454

Cited 3 times | Published

instrument of fraud or imposition on creditors. Id. Section 162.09, Florida Statutes, authorizes county or municipal

Jones v. STATE EX REL. CITY OF WINTER HAVEN

870 So. 2d 52, 2003 WL 22415356

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 24, 2003 | Docket: 1330680

Cited 3 times | Published

against the property by operation of law. See § 162.09(3), Fla. Stat. (2000). Despite the City's and

City of Tampa v. WA BROWN

711 So. 2d 1188, 1998 WL 193137

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 24, 1998 | Docket: 1337185

Cited 3 times | Published

fine may be imposed for failure to comply. See § 162.09, Fla. Stat. (1995). The statute does not require

Jones v. Seminole County

670 So. 2d 95, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 1353, 1996 WL 64792

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 16, 1996 | Docket: 1245760

Cited 3 times | Published

against real or personal property,[1] presumably section 162.09 would be interpreted to permit the presentment

City of Boynton Beach v. Janots

101 So. 3d 864, 2012 WL 4795639, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 17445

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 10, 2012 | Docket: 60226427

Cited 2 times | Published

the orders in the public record pursuant to section 162.09(3), Florida Statutes, which states: A certified

Mathieu v. City of Lauderdale Lakes

961 So. 2d 363, 2007 WL 2119203

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 25, 2007 | Docket: 1515791

Cited 2 times | Published

municipalities." § 162.02, Fla. Stat. (2003). Section 162.09(3), Florida Statutes (2003), provides the mechanism

City of Riviera Beach v. J & B Motel Corp.

213 So. 3d 1102, 2017 WL 1018521, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 3435

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 15, 2017 | Docket: 60263443

Cited 1 times | Published

property owners. One such way is to impose a fine. § 162.09(1), Fla. Stat. (2003). If the viola*1103tor does

Ciolli v. City of Palm Bay

59 So. 3d 295, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 5418, 2011 WL 1431515

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 15, 2011 | Docket: 60299671

Cited 1 times | Published

create a lien in favor of the City pursuant to section 162.09, Florida Statutes (2003).2 Approximately one

In Re Nease

391 B.R. 470, 21 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. B 398, 2008 Bankr. LEXIS 2033, 2008 WL 2900955

United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Apr 1, 2008 | Docket: 1491286

Cited 1 times | Published

property owned by the violator, pursuant to section 162.09, Florida Statutes. It is without dispute that

Schwarz v. City of Treasure Island

521 F. Supp. 2d 1307, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74089, 2007 WL 2908741

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Oct 3, 2007 | Docket: 2452310

Cited 1 times | Published

United States and Florida Constitutions, and Section 162.09 of the Florida Statutes. The Court, having

Fong v. Town of Bay Harbor Islands

864 So. 2d 76, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 19524, 2003 WL 23008817

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 24, 2003 | Docket: 1727588

Cited 1 times | Published

corrected by [Fong]." This was error under section 162.09(3), Florida Statutes (2000), which provides

Monroe County v. McCormick

752 So. 2d 1239, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 2016, 2000 WL 227974

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 1, 2000 | Docket: 1279817

Cited 1 times | Published

based on a code enforcement lien, pursuant to section 162.09(3), Florida Statutes (1995), against McCormick's

County Collection Services, Inc. v. Allen

650 So. 2d 650, 1995 WL 40358, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 791

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 3, 1995 | Docket: 1702930

Cited 1 times | Published

jurisdiction. We note further that because section 162.09(3), Florida Statutes (1993), provides for the

Mark H. Schofield v. Monroe County, Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 4, 2024 | Docket: 69435421

Published

and a daily $550 fine as of March 18, 2011. See § 162.09(3), Fla. Stat. (2024) (“A certified copy of an

City of Fellsmere, Florida v. Elias Almanza

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 6, 2024 | Docket: 68313542

Published

and the order was recorded as a lien under section 162.09(3), Florida Statutes (2018). The City

Green Terrace E33, LLC v. Joseph Abruzzo, as Clerk and Comptroller for Palm Beach County, Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 21, 2024 | Docket: 68029144

Published

stated that a lien was being imposed pursuant to section 162.09, Florida Statutes (2006), and that once recorded

Club Madonna Inc. v. City of Miami Beach

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Aug 1, 2022 | Docket: 64858991

Published

refusing to consider the Club’s argument that Section 162.09 of the Florida Statutes preempts the fines

NICHOLAS SHECKLER v. MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 2, 2022 | Docket: 63127989

Published

“bypassed the statutory requirements of Fla. Stat. § 162.09” and violated the procedure 1 Specifically