Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

You're probably overthinking it. Call a lawyer.

Call Now: 904-383-7448
Florida Statute 674.401 - Full Text and Legal Analysis Florida Statute 674.401 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
Fla. Stat. § 674.401 (2026) Copy Cite Official Site Syfertize CourtListener Amendments
674.401 When bank may charge customer’s account.
(1) A bank may charge against the account of a customer an item that is properly payable from that account even though the charge creates an overdraft. An item is properly payable if it is authorized by the customer and is in accordance with any agreement between the customer and bank.
(2) A customer is not liable for the amount of an overdraft if the customer neither signed the item nor benefited from the proceeds of the item.
(3) A bank may charge against the account of a customer a check that is otherwise properly payable from the account, even though payment was made before the date of the check, unless the customer has given notice to the bank of the postdating describing the check with reasonable certainty. The notice is effective for the period stated in s. 674.403(2) for stop-payment orders and must be received at such time and in such manner as to afford the bank a reasonable opportunity to act on it before the bank takes any action with respect to the check described in s. 674.303. If a bank charges against the account of a customer a check before the date stated in the notice of postdating, the bank is liable for damages for the loss resulting from its act. The loss may include damages for dishonor of subsequent items under s. 674.402.
(4) A bank that in good faith makes payment to a holder may charge the indicated account of its customer according to:
(a) The original terms of the altered item; or
(b) The terms of the completed item, even though the bank knows the item has been completed, unless the bank has notice that the completion was improper.
History.s. 1, ch. 65-254; s. 38, ch. 92-82.
Note.s. 4-401, U.C.C.; supersedes ss. 674.15-674.17, 675.32.

Cases Citing F.S. 674.401

Copy

·Fed. Ins. Co., Cross-Appellee v. Ncnb Nat'l Bank of North Carolina, Cross-Appellant, Ncnb Nat'l Bank of Florida, 958 F.2d 1544 (11th Cir. 1992).

Cited 16 times | Published | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | 17 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 497, 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 7572, 1992 WL 69636

...“[T]he relationship between a bank and its depositing customer is contractual.” MJZ Corp. v. Gulfstream First Bank & Trust, 420 So.2d 396, 397 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1981) (citing McCrory Stores Corp. v. Tunnicliffe, 104 Fla. 683 , 140 So. 806 (1932)). Section 401 of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) (Fla.Stat. § 674.401(1)) similarly contemplates that a bank will pay only in accordance with its contractual obligations to its customers....
0 red1 yellow9 green0 procedural
Cited "but see"(citing case) (1999)
phrase: "but see"
Cited as authority(citing case) (2004)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Cited as authority(citing case) (2004)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Copy

·Jackson Vitrified v. People's Am., 388 So. 2d 1059 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980).

Cited 11 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 30 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. (West) 281

banks for improper payment on the checks, under § 674-401, Fla. Stat. (1975), UCC § 4-401 (1962). At that
0 red0 yellow6 green0 procedural
Cited as authorityGrady (1988)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Cited as authority(citing case) (1985)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Cited as authorityKnesz (1984)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Copy

·Mjz Corp. v. Gulfstream First Bank, 420 So. 2d 396 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982).

Cited 9 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 35 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. (West) 210

...Zappone, personally and in his corporate capacity, was liable to the bank for the full amount of both checks. In its brief and at trial, the bank has argued that Article IV of Florida's Uniform Commercial Code, Section 674.101, et seq., Florida Statutes (1981), applies. Section 674.401(1), Florida Statutes (1981), states the following: "As against its customer, a bank may charge against his account any item which is otherwise properly payable from that account even though the charge creates an overdraft." This language, the bank asserts, authorized the creation of an $18,000 overdraft in Mr....
0 red0 yellow5 green0 procedural
Cited as authority(citing case) (2019)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Cited as authorityPerlman (2011)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Cited as authority(citing case) (1998)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Copy

·Dirk v. State, 305 So. 2d 187 (Fla. 1974).

Cited 4 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida

...This often results in inequitable application of the statute since favored customers are frequently permitted by the bank to overdraw their accounts without penalty, and others not so favored are subject to prosecution under the instant statute, *191 within the discretion of the bank. See Section 674.401, F.S....
0 red1 yellow2 green0 procedural
Cited "but see"Duran (1975)
phrase: "but see"
Cited as authorityFitzgerald (1976)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Cited as authorityIsom (1976)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Copy

·Burdine-Coakley v. Capital Bank, 542 So. 2d 1019 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989).

Cited 2 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 9 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 1311, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 782, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 1577, 1989 WL 27904

...Coles, Sr., but which were admittedly unauthorizedly forged by his son in a manner which was obviously "not comparable" to the one which appeared on the bank's signature cards. The only basis [1] for the denial of the bank's liability for its plainly unauthorized payments from Mr. Coles's account, see § 674.401, Fla....
0 red0 yellow1 green0 procedural
Cited as authority(citing case) (1991)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Copy

·Brown v. Lee Cnty. Bank, 501 So. 2d 702 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987).

Cited 1 times | Published | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 420, 2 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 1610, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 6508

...After North First Bank paid Finley the proceeds of the check, Lee County Bank charged Brown’s account for $40,000 and instituted this action. Following the taking of depositions, the court entered summary judgment in favor of the bank for $40,000. We affirm. Section 674.401(1), Florida Statutes (1983), provides: (1) As against its customer, a bank may charge against his account any item which is otherwise properly payable from that account even though the charge creates an overdraft....
0 red0 yellow1 green0 procedural
Cited as authority(citing case) (1993)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Copy

Arkwright Mut. Ins. Co. v. Bank of Am., N.A., 212 F.3d 1224 (11th Cir. 2000).

Published | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | 41 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 726, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 11737, 2000 WL 679165

...Any payment on such an instrument is not to the professed drawer's order and violates the drawee bank's strict duty to charge the account of its customer only for properly payable items. Perini, 553 F.2d at 404. Arkwright's U.C.C. cause of action is based on Florida Uniform Commercial Code Statute § 674.401 which provides that a bank may only charge against its customer's account an item that is properly payable from the account....
...standards by which the bank's responsibility is to be measured if those standards are not manifestly 2 674.103(1) "permits within wide limits variation of the effects of provisions of the article by Agreement."). Under Fla. Stat. § 674.401(1), a check that would not otherwise be properly payable becomes properly payable if it is authorized by the customer and is in accordance with the banking agreement....
Copy

Arkwright Mut. Ins. Co. v. Bank of Am., N.A., 212 F.3d 1224 (11th Cir. 2000).

Published | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

...Any payment on such an instrument is not to the professed drawer's order and violates the drawee bank's strict duty to charge the account of its customer only for properly payable items. Perini, 553 F.2d at 404. Arkwright’s U.C.C. cause of action is based on Florida Uniform Commercial Code Statute § 674.401 which provides that a bank may only charge against its customer’s account an item that is properly payable from the account....
...allows a bank and its customer to contract around the default rules set forth in U.C.C. Fla. Stat. § 674.103(1);2 19B Fla. Stat. Ann., U.C.C. Comment to § 674.103 (1993) (indicating that § 674.103(1) “permits within wide limits variation of the effects of provisions of the article by Agreement.”). Under Fla. Stat. § 674.401(1), a check that would not otherwise be properly payable becomes properly payable if it is authorized by the customer and is in accordance with the banking agreement....
Copy

DYNAMITE ENTERPRIESE, INC. v. Eagle Nat'l Bank of Miami, 517 So. 2d 112 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987).

Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 13 Fla. L. Weekly 29, 5 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 678, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 11791, 1987 WL 3375

...t relevant here. Plainly, a check written on an account with insufficient funds is still a payable item from the customer's account because the bank, in its discretion, may honor the overdrawn check and thereafter charge the customer's account under Section 674.401(1), Florida Statutes (1985)....

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