Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 559.77 (2025)

Civil remedies.

✓ 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

559.77 Civil remedies.—

(1) A debtor may bring a civil action against a person violating the provisions of s. 559.72 in the county in which the alleged violator resides or has his or her principal place of business or in the county where the alleged violation occurred.

(2) Any person who fails to comply with any provision of s. 559.72 is liable for actual damages and for additional statutory damages as the court may allow, but not exceeding $1,000, together with court costs and reasonable attorney’s fees incurred by the plaintiff. In determining the defendant’s liability for any additional statutory damages, the court shall consider the nature of the defendant’s noncompliance with s. 559.72, the frequency and persistence of the noncompliance, and the extent to which the noncompliance was intentional. In a class action lawsuit brought under this section, the court may award additional statutory damages of up to $1,000 for each named plaintiff and an aggregate award of additional statutory damages up to the lesser of $500,000 or 1 percent of the defendant’s net worth for all remaining class members; however, the aggregate award may not provide an individual class member with additional statutory damages in excess of $1,000. The court may award punitive damages and may provide such equitable relief as it deems necessary or proper, including enjoining the defendant from further violations of this part. If the court finds that the suit fails to raise a justiciable issue of law or fact, the plaintiff is liable for court costs and reasonable attorney’s fees incurred by the defendant.

(3) A person may not be held liable in any action brought under this section if the person shows by a preponderance of the evidence that the violation was not intentional and resulted from a bona fide error, notwithstanding the maintenance of procedures reasonably adapted to avoid such error.

(4) An action brought under this section must be commenced within 2 years after the date the alleged violation occurred.

(5) In applying and construing this section, due consideration and great weight shall be given to the interpretations of the Federal Trade Commission and the federal courts relating to the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

History.—s. 23, ch. 72-81; s. 3, ch. 76-168; s. 1, ch. 77-457; s. 9, ch. 78-95; ss. 3, 6, ch. 81-314; ss. 2, 3, ch. 81-318; ss. 1, 3, ch. 83-265; ss. 10, 13, ch. 93-275; s. 820, ch. 97-103; s. 2, ch. 2001-206; s. 9, ch. 2010-127; s. 4, ch. 2025-23.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 129 cases (29 in the last 5 years), 1974–2025 · leading case: Goodin v. Bank of Am. N.A., 114 F. Supp. 3d 1197 (M.D. Fla. 2015).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Goodin v. Bank of Am. N.A., 114 F. Supp. 3d 1197 (M.D. Fla. 2015). · cites it 10× “§ 1692k(c); Fla. Stat. § 559.77 (3). Second, the Bank must show that its errors were bona fide.”

Trent v. Mortg. Elec. Reg. Sys., Inc., 618 F. Supp. 2d 1356 (M.D. Fla. 2007). · cites it 7× “Fla. Stat. § 559.77 , titled "Civil Remedies”, is the enabling statute that permits a private right of action under the FCCPA.”

Bacelli v. MFP, INC., 729 F. Supp. 2d 1328 (M.D. Fla. 2010). · cites it 8× “Fla. Stat. § 559.77 . 7 The FCCPA prohibits any person, in collecting consumer debts, from “claiming], attempting], or threatening] to enforce a debt when such person knows that the debt is not legitimate or asserting] the existence of some other legal right when such person…”

Brindise v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n, 183 So. 3d 1215 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016). · cites it 4× “See § 559.77. Those remedies, however, do not extend to section 559.”

Berg v. Merchants Ass'n Collection Div., Inc., 586 F. Supp. 2d 1336 (S.D. Fla. 2008). · cites it 7× “Plaintiff Has Stated a Claim under the FCCPA Defendant stated that it limited its analysis to the FDCPA because Fla. Stat. § 559.77 (5) states that “[i]n construing this section, due consideration and great weight shall be given to the interpretations of the Federal Trade…”

Cliff v. Payco Gen. Am. Credits, Inc., 363 F.3d 1113 (11th Cir. 2004). · cites it 2× “Fla. Stat. § 559.77 . While in some circumstances the potential award under the Florida Act might exceed the damages available under the FDCPA, all lenders, by virtue of their participation in the federal student loan program and in light of the possibility of a FDCPA claim, are…”

Castellanos v. Portfolio Recovery Assocs., LLC, 297 F. Supp. 3d 1301 (S.D. Fla. 2017). · cites it 4× “The FCCPA includes an identical bona fide error defense in Fla. Stat. § 559.77 (3), which provides: A person may not be held liable in any action brought under this section if the person shows by a preponderance of the evidence that the violation was not intentional and resulted…”

Dish Network Serv. L.L.C. v. Myers, 87 So. 3d 72 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012). · cites it 8× “Although the number of hours is high, this case was active for several years and was tried to a jury for two days. There are no obvious entries of duplicative, excessive, or unnecessary time in this file.”

Lardner v. Diversified Consultants Inc., 17 F. Supp. 3d 1215 (S.D. Fla. 2014). · cites it 4× “” Fla. Stat. § 559.77 (5). Plaintiff argues that, by violating the TCPA, Defendant necessarily violates the FDCPA.”

Harris v. Beneficial Fin. Co. of Jacksonville, 338 So. 2d 196 (Fla. 1976). · cites it 5× “Also in its amended motion to dismiss, Beneficial contended that Section 559.77(1), Florida Statutes, the remedy provision of the CCPA which allows successful plaintiffs to recover either actual damages or 0, whichever is greater, constituted an unconstitutional deprivation…”

Martin v. Allied Interstate, LLC, 192 F. Supp. 3d 1296 (S.D. Fla. 2016). · cites it 2× “” Fla. Stat. § 559.77 (5). Accordingly, the Defendants are entitled to summary judgment on the Plaintiffs FCCPA claims for the same reasons the Court granted summary judgment on the FDCPA claims.”

North Star Capital Acquisitions, LLC v. Krig, 611 F. Supp. 2d 1324 (M.D. Fla. 2009). · cites it 4× “” Fla. Stat. § 559.77 (3). The FDCPA has an almost identical provision.”

Show all 129 citing cases →

— 559.77(1) — 17 cases

Harris v. Beneficial Fin. Co. of Jacksonville, 338 So. 2d 196 (Fla. 1976). “Also in its amended motion to dismiss, Beneficial contended that Section 559.77(1), Florida Statutes, the remedy provision of the CCPA which allows successful plaintiffs to recover either actual damages or 0, whichever is greater, constituted an unconstitutional deprivation…”

Heard v. Mathis, 344 So. 2d 651 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977).

Trent v. Mortg. Elec. Reg. Sys., Inc., 618 F. Supp. 2d 1356 (M.D. Fla. 2007). “Fla. Stat. § 559.77 , titled "Civil Remedies”, is the enabling statute that permits a private right of action under the FCCPA.”

Peters v. Collision Clinics Int'l Inc., 404 So. 2d 116 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981).

Strauss v. CBE Grp., Inc., 173 F. Supp. 3d 1302 (S.D. Fla. 2016).

— 559.77(2) — 19 cases

Dish Network Serv. L.L.C. v. Myers, 87 So. 3d 72 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012). “Although the number of hours is high, this case was active for several years and was tried to a jury for two days. There are no obvious entries of duplicative, excessive, or unnecessary time in this file.”

Danow v. Law Off. of David E. Borback, P.A., 634 F. Supp. 2d 1337 (S.D. Fla. 2009).

Baldwin v. Regions Fin. Corp., 98 So. 3d 1210 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012).

Reeves v. Ace Cash Express, Inc., 937 So. 2d 1136 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006).

— 559.77(3) — 2 cases

Esther Babani v. Broward Auto., Inc. d/b/a Audi Ft. Lauderdale (Fla. 4th DCA 2022).

Medley v. Dish Network, LLC (M.D. Fla. 2022).

— 559.77(4) — 4 cases

Harrington v. Roundpoint Mortg. Servicing Corp., 290 F. Supp. 3d 1306 (M.D. Fla. 2017).

Bonner v. Radius Global Solutions (M.D. Fla. 2021).

Nabaka v. Rushmore Loan Mgmt. Servs., LLC (S.D. Fla. 2021).

Brown v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC (M.D. Fla. 2019).

— 559.77(5) — 15 cases

Brindise v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n, 183 So. 3d 1215 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016). “See § 559.77. Those remedies, however, do not extend to section 559.”

Martorella v. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co., 931 F. Supp. 2d 1218 (S.D. Fla. 2013).

Gann v. BAC Home Loans Servicing LP, 145 So. 3d 906 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014).

Bank of Am., N.A. v. Siefker, 201 So. 3d 811 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016).

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.