Florida Statutes
Fla. Stat. § 162.09 (2025)
Administrative fines; costs of repair; liens.
✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
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.
(c) An enforcement board may reduce a fine imposed pursuant to this section.
(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.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 51
cases (10 in the last 5 years), 1988–2026 · leading case: Massey v. Charlotte Cnty., 842 So. 2d 142 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003).
Massey v. Charlotte Cnty., 842 So. 2d 142 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). “A fine may become a lien on your property pursuant to Section 162.09, Florida Statutes. On November 13, 2000, a building inspections supervisor, Mr.”
City of Palm Bay v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 114 So. 3d 924 (Fla. 2013). “Because I disagree that the ordinance irreconcilably conflicts with the mechanical recording statute provided in section 162.09, Florida Statutes (2004), or that the Florida Legislature has expressed a scheme “so pervasive as to evidence an intent to preempt the particular…”
Stratton v. Sarasota Cnty., 983 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008). “Section 162.09(1), Florida Statutes (2004), permits a local code enforcement board to impose fines against a property owner who fails to correct conditions constituting code violations on his or her property.”
Wilson v. Cnty. of Orange, 881 So. 2d 625 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). “Specifically, Count II alleged that section 162.09(1), Florida Statutes [1] and section 11-37(a), Orange County Code, were facially unconstitutional for authorizing imposition of fines and liens against property without providing for notice and an opportunity to be heard.”
Kirby v. City of Archer, 790 So. 2d 1214 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). “Kirby appeals a summary final judgment of foreclosure authorizing *1215 the sale of real property owned by him to satisfy a lien in favor of appellee, City of Archer, created pursuant to section 162.09(3), Florida Statutes (1997).”
City of Gainesville Code Enf't Bd. v. Lewis, 536 So. 2d 1148 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). “85-84 (October 25, 1985) ("AGO 85-84") which interpreted § 162.09 to mean that a code enforcement board must find that the same violation has been repeated by the same violator before it can impose a fine for each day the repeated violation continues past the date set for…”
City of Boynton Beach v. Janots, 101 So. 3d 864 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012). “§ 162.09(3), Fla. Stat. (1998). Accordingly, the code enforcement liens attached to all real and personal property owned by Ryan, including Parcel 2.”
City of Tampa v. Braxton, 616 So. 2d 554 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). “On appeal the City contends that the legislature intended to confer the right to maintain an action at law to collect the fine when it enacted section 162.09(3), Florida Statutes (1987), as amended October 1, 1989.”
Henley v. MacDonald, 971 So. 2d 998 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). “The violations in question were rendered pursuant to section 162.09(1), Florida Statutes (2005), which entitles county organizations to fine those who violate county code ordinances.”
Osborne v. Dumoulin, 55 So. 3d 577 (Fla. 2011). “5th DCA 1993) (“Although the statute [§ 162.09, Fla. Stat. (1991) ] merely provides that any lien created pursuant to an administrative fine may not be foreclosed on real property which is homestead, the Constitution itself goes much farther: No such lien exists as to such…”
Ciolli v. City of Palm Bay, 59 So. 3d 295 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011). “Ciolli allegedly failed to cure the violations and on February 12, 2004, the City filed a certified copy of the Code Enforcement Board’s order in the public records in an attempt to create a lien in favor of the City pursuant to section 162.09, Florida Statutes (2003). 2…”
City of Riviera Beach v. J & B Motel Corp., 213 So. 3d 1102 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017). “§ 162.09(1), Fla. Stat. (2003). If the viola *1103 tor does not pay the ordered fíne, then the local government may record “a certified copy of an order imposing a fine” in the public records.”
— 162.09(1) — 9 cases
Wilson v. Cnty. of Orange, 881 So. 2d 625 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). “Specifically, Count II alleged that section 162.09(1), Florida Statutes [1] and section 11-37(a), Orange County Code, were facially unconstitutional for authorizing imposition of fines and liens against property without providing for notice and an opportunity to be heard.”
Massey v. Charlotte Cnty., 842 So. 2d 142 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). “A fine may become a lien on your property pursuant to Section 162.09, Florida Statutes. On November 13, 2000, a building inspections supervisor, Mr.”
Stratton v. Sarasota Cnty., 983 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008). “Section 162.09(1), Florida Statutes (2004), permits a local code enforcement board to impose fines against a property owner who fails to correct conditions constituting code violations on his or her property.”
Henley v. MacDonald, 971 So. 2d 998 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). “The violations in question were rendered pursuant to section 162.09(1), Florida Statutes (2005), which entitles county organizations to fine those who violate county code ordinances.”
City of Riviera Beach v. J & B Motel Corp., 213 So. 3d 1102 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017). “§ 162.09(1), Fla. Stat. (2003). If the viola *1103 tor does not pay the ordered fíne, then the local government may record “a certified copy of an order imposing a fine” in the public records.”
— 162.09(2) — 2 cases
Stratton v. Sarasota Cnty., 983 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008). “Section 162.09(1), Florida Statutes (2004), permits a local code enforcement board to impose fines against a property owner who fails to correct conditions constituting code violations on his or her property.”
Sawyer v. Code Enf't Bd., 42 Fla. Supp. 2d 70 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1990).
— 162.09(2)(a) — 2 cases
Massey v. Charlotte Cnty., 842 So. 2d 142 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). “A fine may become a lien on your property pursuant to Section 162.09, Florida Statutes. On November 13, 2000, a building inspections supervisor, Mr.”
Stratton v. Sarasota Cnty., 983 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008). “Section 162.09(1), Florida Statutes (2004), permits a local code enforcement board to impose fines against a property owner who fails to correct conditions constituting code violations on his or her property.”
— 162.09(2)(b) — 3 cases
Massey v. Charlotte Cnty., 842 So. 2d 142 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). “A fine may become a lien on your property pursuant to Section 162.09, Florida Statutes. On November 13, 2000, a building inspections supervisor, Mr.”
Stratton v. Sarasota Cnty., 983 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008). “Section 162.09(1), Florida Statutes (2004), permits a local code enforcement board to impose fines against a property owner who fails to correct conditions constituting code violations on his or her property.”
Club Madonna Inc v. City of Miami Beach (S.D. Fla. 2020).
— 162.09(2)(c) — 1 case
Massey v. Charlotte Cnty., 842 So. 2d 142 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). “A fine may become a lien on your property pursuant to Section 162.09, Florida Statutes. On November 13, 2000, a building inspections supervisor, Mr.”
— 162.09(2)(d) — 1 case
Stratton v. Sarasota Cnty., 983 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008). “Section 162.09(1), Florida Statutes (2004), permits a local code enforcement board to impose fines against a property owner who fails to correct conditions constituting code violations on his or her property.”
— 162.09(3) — 26 cases
City of Palm Bay v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 114 So. 3d 924 (Fla. 2013). “Because I disagree that the ordinance irreconcilably conflicts with the mechanical recording statute provided in section 162.09, Florida Statutes (2004), or that the Florida Legislature has expressed a scheme “so pervasive as to evidence an intent to preempt the particular…”
Kirby v. City of Archer, 790 So. 2d 1214 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). “Kirby appeals a summary final judgment of foreclosure authorizing *1215 the sale of real property owned by him to satisfy a lien in favor of appellee, City of Archer, created pursuant to section 162.09(3), Florida Statutes (1997).”
City of Boynton Beach v. Janots, 101 So. 3d 864 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012). “§ 162.09(3), Fla. Stat. (1998). Accordingly, the code enforcement liens attached to all real and personal property owned by Ryan, including Parcel 2.”
City of Tampa v. Braxton, 616 So. 2d 554 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). “On appeal the City contends that the legislature intended to confer the right to maintain an action at law to collect the fine when it enacted section 162.09(3), Florida Statutes (1987), as amended October 1, 1989.”
City of Riviera Beach v. J & B Motel Corp., 213 So. 3d 1102 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017). “§ 162.09(1), Fla. Stat. (2003). If the viola *1103 tor does not pay the ordered fíne, then the local government may record “a certified copy of an order imposing a fine” in the public records.”
— 162.09(8) — 1 case
Broward Cnty. v. Recupero, 949 So. 2d 274 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007).
— 162.09(b) — 1 case
Schwarz v. City of Treasure Island, 521 F. Supp. 2d 1307 (M.D. Fla. 2007).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.