Florida Statutes
Fla. Stat. § 559.552 (2025)
Relationship of state and federal law.
✓ 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
559.552 Relationship of state and federal law.—Nothing in this part shall be construed to limit or restrict the continued applicability of the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act to consumer collection practices in this state. This part is in addition to the requirements and regulations of the federal act. In the event of any inconsistency between any provision of this part and any provision of the federal act, the provision which is more protective of the consumer or debtor shall prevail.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2000–2024 · leading case: LeBlanc v. Unifund CCR Partners, 601 F.3d 1185 (11th Cir. 2010).
LeBlanc v. Unifund CCR Partners, 601 F.3d 1185 (11th Cir. 2010). “Fla. Stat. § 559.552 (emphasis added). The FCCPA also makes clear that its remedies are “cumulative to other sanctions and enforcement provisions” for any violation by an out-of-state consumer debt collector.”
Brindise v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n, 183 So. 3d 1215 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016). “See § 559.552 (providing that the FCCPA does not limit or restrict the application of the FDCPA; in the event of any inconsistency in the two acts, the more protective for the consumer or debtor prevails).”
Aluia v. Dyck-O'Neal, Inc., 205 So. 3d 768 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016). “§ 559.552, Fla. Stat. (2014). The Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act, §§ 559.”
Berg v. Merchants Ass'n Collection Div., Inc., 586 F. Supp. 2d 1336 (S.D. Fla. 2008). “Fla. Stat. § 559.552 . Thus, we interpret the FCCPA third-party communications provision separately from the FDCPA provision.”
Kelliher v. Target Nat'l Bank, 826 F. Supp. 2d 1324 (M.D. Fla. 2011). “2010) (quoting Fla. Stat. § 559.552 ). Kelliher alleges that Target retained Bonded to collect the debt and failed to notify Bonded that Kelliher was represented by counsel with regard to the debt.”
Laughlin v. Household Bank, Ltd., 969 So. 2d 509 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007). “See Fla. Stat. § 559.552 (providing that in the event of inconsistencies with the federal *513 Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the provision that is more protective of the debtor prevails).”
Arianas v. LVNV Funding LLC, 54 F. Supp. 3d 1308 (M.D. Fla. 2014). “” Fla. Stat. § 559.552 (2014). Plaintiffs interpretation is unpersuasive, as “the FDCPA clearly states that additional damages ‘in the case of any action by an individual’ [shall not exceed]
Gann v. BAC Home Loans Servicing LP, 145 So. 3d 906 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014). “” § 559.552. The trial court erred in granting the Bank’s motion to dismiss when it determined that the Bank was only trying to enforce a security interest and not trying to collect a consumer debt from Gann.”
LeBlanc v. Unifund CCR Partners, G.P., 552 F. Supp. 2d 1327 (M.D. Fla. 2008). “Fla. Stat. § 559.552 . To this end, it prohibits a number of practices that are also prohibited by the FDCPA as well as acts that are not expressly listed in the federal counterpart.”
Craig v. Park Fin. of Broward Cnty., Inc., 390 F. Supp. 2d 1150 (M.D. Fla. 2005). “The Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants' conduct violates 15 U.”
Clayton v. Bryan, 753 So. 2d 632 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000). “Section 559.552, Florida Statutes (1997), one of the sections comprising the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act, provides: Relationship of State and Federal Law.”
Conner v. Bcc Fin. Mgmt. Servs., Inc., 597 F. Supp. 2d 1299 (S.D. Fla. 2008). “See Fla. Stat. § 559.552 . Section 559.552 provides, “[i]n the event of any inconsistency between any provision of this part and any provision of the federal act, the provision which is more protective of the consumer or debtor shall prevail.”
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.