Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

You're probably overthinking it. Call a lawyer.

Call Now: 904-383-7448
Florida Statute 537.005 - Full Text and Legal Analysis Florida Statute 537.005 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
Fla. Stat. § 537.005 (2026) Copy Cite Official Site Syfertize CourtListener Amendments
537.005 Application for license.
(1) A verified application for licensure under this act, in the form prescribed by commission rule, shall:
(a) Contain the name and the residence and business address of the applicant. If the applicant is other than a natural person, the application shall contain the name and the residence and business address of each ultimate equitable owner of 10 percent or more of such entity and each director, general partner, and executive officer of such entity.
(b) State whether any individual identified in paragraph (a) has, within the last 10 years, pleaded nolo contendere to, or has been convicted or found guilty of, a felony, regardless of whether adjudication was withheld.
(c) Identify the county and municipality with the street and number or location where the business is to be conducted.
(d) Contain additional information as the commission determines by rule to be necessary to ensure compliance with this act.
(2) Notwithstanding subsection (1), the application need not state the full name and address of each officer, director, and shareholder if the applicant is owned directly or beneficially by a person who as an issuer has a class of securities registered pursuant to s. 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or, pursuant to s. 13 or s. 15(d) of such act, is an issuer of securities which is required to file reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission, if the person files with the office any information, documents, and reports required by such act to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
(3) An applicant for licensure shall file with the office a bond, in the amount of $100,000 for each license, with a surety company qualified to do business in this state. However, in no event shall the aggregate amount of the bond required for a single title loan lender exceed $1 million. In lieu of the bond, the applicant may establish a certificate of deposit or an irrevocable letter of credit in a financial institution, as defined in s. 655.005, in the amount of the bond. The original bond, certificate of deposit, or letter of credit shall be filed with the office, and the office shall be the beneficiary to that document. The bond, certificate of deposit, or letter of credit shall be in favor of the office for the use and benefit of any consumer who is injured pursuant to a title loan transaction by the fraud, misrepresentation, breach of contract, financial failure, or violation of any provision of this act by the title loan lender. Such liability may be enforced either by proceeding in an administrative action or by filing a judicial suit at law in a court of competent jurisdiction. However, in such court suit, the bond, certificate of deposit, or letter of credit posted with the office shall not be amenable or subject to any judgment or other legal process issuing out of or from such court in connection with such lawsuit, but such bond, certificate of deposit, or letter of credit shall be amenable to and enforceable only by and through administrative proceedings before the office. It is the intent of the Legislature that such bond, certificate of deposit, or letter of credit shall be applicable and liable only for the payment of claims duly adjudicated by order of the office. The bond, certificate of deposit, or letter of credit shall be payable on a pro rata basis as determined by the office, but the aggregate amount may not exceed the amount of the bond, certificate of deposit, or letter of credit.
(4) The office shall approve an application and issue a license if the office determines that the applicant satisfies the requirements of this act.
History.s. 5, ch. 2000-138; s. 642, ch. 2003-261.

Cases Citing F.S. 537.005

Copy

·United Yacht Brokers, Inc. v. Gillespie, 377 So. 2d 668 (Fla. 1979).

Cited 29 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 1979 Fla. LEXIS 4877

court inherently passed on the validity of section 537.05, Florida Statutes. We have jurisdiction.[1]
0 red0 yellow16 green0 procedural
Cited as authority(citing case) (2018)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Cited as authorityMembreno (2016)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Cited as authorityBennett (2015)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Copy

·In Re Est. of Gainer, 466 So. 2d 1055 (Fla. 1985).

Cited 10 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 10 Fla. L. Weekly 116

Inc. v. Gillespie, we upheld the validity of section 537.05(2) against an equal protection challenge. This
0 red0 yellow5 green0 procedural
Cited as authority(citing case) (2003)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Cited as authorityKing (1989)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Cited as authorityPolakoff (1989)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Copy

·CHANDRIS, SA v. Yanakakis, 668 So. 2d 180 (Fla. 1995).

Cited 37 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 1996 A.M.C. 2668, 1995 Fla. LEXIS 2037, 1995 WL 752306

contract was unenforceable under the provisions of section 537.05(2), Florida Statutes (1977), requiring brokerage
3 red0 yellow29 green0 procedural
Disapproved(citing case) (2020)
phrase: "disapproved by"
OverruledSantini (2011)
phrase: "overruling"
DisapprovedNoris (1997)
phrase: "disapproving"
Copy

·Dugas v. Dubois, 221 So. 2d 771 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1969).

Published | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 5976

1965, and which took effect on June 25, 1965. Section 537.05(2), F.S.1965, F.S.A. The Act provides: “537
0 red0 yellow1 green0 procedural
Cited as authorityGillespie (1979)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Copy

Hatteras of Lauderdale, Inc. v. Erisman, 383 So. 2d 985 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1980).

Published | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 16259

prejudice because of failure to comply with Section 537.05(2), Florida Statute (1977) which legislation
Copy

United Yacht Brokers, Inc. v. Gillespie, 353 So. 2d 574 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1977).

Published | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 16855

following language: [T]he plaintiff alleges that § 537.05 is unique in the field of regulatory legislation

This Florida statute resource is curated by Graham Syfert, a Jacksonville, Florida personal injury and workers' compensation attorney (Florida Bar No. 39104). For legal consultation, call 904-383-7448.