Florida Statute 520.92 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research

The 2024 Florida Statutes

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

Chapter 520
RETAIL INSTALLMENT SALES

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 520.92

520.92 Compensation of other than licensee prohibited.—No home improvement finance seller shall pay, credit, or allow any consideration or compensation of any kind to any other home improvement finance seller, other than a licensee, for or on account of the performance of home improvement work or services except when the person or transaction to or for whom the consideration is to be paid is not subject to or is exempted from the licensing requirements of this act. However, after termination or revocation of a license, the licensee shall not be relieved of outstanding obligations and shall complete and be paid upon contracts made but not performed at the date of the termination or revocation.

History.—s. 1, ch. 69-44; s. 3, ch. 76-168; s. 1, ch. 77-457; s. 21, ch. 80-256; s. 2, ch. 81-318; s. 27, ch. 87-91; ss. 32, 35, 36, ch. 90-103; s. 4, ch. 91-429.

F.S. 520.92 on Google Scholar

F.S. 520.92 on Casetext

Amendments to 520.92

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 520.92

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 520.92.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 520.92

Total Results: 9

Williams v. State

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2009-11-06

Citation: 22 So. 3d 688, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 16557, 2009 WL 3674576

Snippet: attorney. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520, 92 S.Ct. 594, 30 L.Ed.2d 652 (1972). However, a defendant

Mehl v. Office of Financial Regulation

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2003-11-25

Citation: 859 So. 2d 1260, 2003 WL 22768431

Snippet: legislation." Gooding v. Wilson, 405 U.S. 518, 520, 92 S.Ct. 1103, 31 L.Ed.2d 408 (1972) (quoting United

B.S. v. State

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2003-09-17

Citation: 862 So. 2d 15, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 13958

Snippet: challenges. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520, 92 S.Ct. 594, 30 L.Ed.2d 652 (1972) (noting that the

BS v. State

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2003-09-17

Citation: 862 So. 2d 15, 2003 WL 22136809

Snippet: challenges. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520, 92 S.Ct. 594, 30 L.Ed.2d 652 (1972) (noting that the

Barrett v. City of Margate

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1999-10-20

Citation: 743 So. 2d 1160, 1999 WL 966739

Snippet: technical matters. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520, 92 S.Ct. 594, 30 L.Ed.2d 652 (1972). Dismissing an

Doe v. Mortham

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1998-03-19

Citation: 708 So. 2d 929, 1998 WL 120280

Snippet: "). [10] See Gooding v. Wilson, 405 U.S. 518, 520, 92 S.Ct. 1103, 1105, 31 L.Ed.2d 408 (1972) ("Only

Porter v. Music

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1986-12-31

Citation: 502 So. 2d 1265, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 11130, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 165

Snippet: ’” Id. (quoting Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520, 92 S.Ct. 594, 596, 30 L.Ed.2d 652 (1972)). I shall

Hall v. Key

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1985-10-17

Citation: 476 So. 2d 787, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2365

Snippet: drafted by lawyers". Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520, 92 S.Ct. 594, 596, 30 L.Ed.2d 652 (1972). Accordingly

Howell v. State

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1982-08-31

Citation: 418 So. 2d 1164

Snippet: foregoing category. Barker, supra, at 407 U.S. at 519-520, 92 S.Ct. at 2186-87. Perhaps the greatest evil which