687.04
Penalty for usury; not to apply in certain situations.
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
687.04 Penalty for usury; not to apply in certain situations.—Any person, or any agent, officer, or other representative of any person, willfully violating the provisions of s. 687.03 shall forfeit the entire interest so charged, or contracted to be charged or reserved, and only the actual principal sum of such usurious contract can be enforced in any court in this state, either at law or in equity; and when said usurious interest is taken or reserved, or has been paid, then and in that event the person who has taken or reserved, or has been paid, either directly or indirectly, such usurious interest shall forfeit to the party from whom such usurious interest has been reserved, taken, or exacted in any way double the amount of interest so reserved, taken, or exacted. However, the penalties provided for by this section shall not apply:
(1) To a bona fide endorsee or transferee of negotiable paper purchased before maturity, unless the usurious character should appear upon its face, or unless the said endorsee or transferee shall have had actual notice of the same before the purchase of such paper, but in such event double the amount of such usurious interest may be recovered after payment, by action against the party originally exacting the same, in any court of competent jurisdiction in this state, together with an attorney’s fee, as provided in s. 687.06; or
(2) If, prior to the institution of an action by the borrower or the filing of a defense under this chapter by the borrower or receipt of written notice by the lender from the borrower that usury has been charged or collected, the lender notifies the borrower of the usurious overcharge and refunds the amount of any overcharge taken, plus interest on the overcharge taken at the maximum lawful rate in effect at the time the usurious interest was taken, to the borrower and makes whatever adjustments in the appropriate contract or account as are necessary to ensure that the borrower will not be required to pay further interest in excess of the amount permitted by s. 687.03.
History.—s. 3, ch. 4022, 1891; GS 3106; s. 3, ch. 5960, 1909; RGS 4852; CGL 6939; s. 1, ch. 79-90.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 71
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1952–2026 · leading case: North Am. Mtg. Investors v. Cape San Blas
North Am. Mtg. Investors v. Cape San Blas (1979)
“[3] § 687.04, Fla. Stat. (1975): 687.04 Penalty for usury, not to apply to transferee of negotiable paper unless usury appears on face.”
Jersey Palm-Gross, Inc. v. Paper (1994)
“See § 687.04, Fla. Stat. (1993). In the case of either criminal or civil usury, the lender's willfulness to charge an excessive interest rate is determined by considering all of the circumstances surrounding the transaction.”
Rollins v. Odom (1988)
“§ 687.04, Fla. Stat. (1981). [1] A lender guilty of criminal usury, that is, a loan obligation that bears an interest rate in excess of 25 percent per year but not in excess of 45 percent per year, forfeits the right to collect the debt.”
Tel Service Co. v. General Capital Corporation (1969)
“Section 687.04 provides that any lender wilfully violating the provisions of Section 687.”
Beausejour Corp. v. Offshore Development Corp. (In Re Offshore Development Corp.) (1984)
“Having decided that the loan was in excess of the 45% maximum allowed by law and, therefore, criminally usurious, this Court must now determine whether Beau-sejour purged the transaction of criminal usury by sending a notice pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 687.04 . This Section…”
Woodgate Development Corp. v. Hamilton Investment Trust (1977)
“Section 687.04, Florida Statutes, provided that any person willfully violating the provisions of Section 687.”
Beausejour Corporation, N v. V. Offshore Development Company, Inc. (1986)
“071(7) could not have been avoided by a timely cure notice pursuant to Fla.Stat. § 687.04(2); and (3) that, assuming the civil penalty for criminal usury could be avoided by a timely cure notice, Beausejour’s “cure notice” did not comply with the requirements of the Florida law.”
Brown v. Home Credit Co. (1962)
“03 in conjunction with § 687.04. See Ayvas v. Green, Fla. 1952, 57 So.”
Cerrito v. Kovitch (1984)
“03 shall forfeit the entire interest so charged, or contracted to be charged or reserved, and only the actual principal sum of such usurious contract can be enforced in any court in this state, either at law or in equity; and when said usurious interest is taken or reserved, or…”
Gordon v. West Florida Enterprises of Pensacola, Inc. (1965)
“, which makes it unlawful for any person to reserve, except upon an obligation of a corporation, a rate of interest greater than 10% per annum, and defendant asserted that she was entitled under Section 687.04, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., to exact against the plaintiff, as a…”
Continental Mortg. Investors v. Sailboat Key, Inc. (1981)
“03(1), Florida Statutes (1975), or to the transfers of negotiable paper in certain cases, section 687.04, Florida Statutes (1975). The legislature recently raised the maximum interest rates allowable under the usury laws, demonstrating that this public policy is at very least…”
Velletri v. Dixon (2010)
“See § 687.04. The civil penalty for criminal usury is significantly greater: forfeiture of the right to collect the debt at all.”
— 687.04(1) — 2 cases
— 687.04(2) — 7 cases
Jersey Palm-Gross, Inc. v. Paper (1994)
“See § 687.04, Fla. Stat. (1993). In the case of either criminal or civil usury, the lender's willfulness to charge an excessive interest rate is determined by considering all of the circumstances surrounding the transaction.”
Beausejour Corporation, N v. V. Offshore Development Company, Inc. (1986)
“071(7) could not have been avoided by a timely cure notice pursuant to Fla.Stat. § 687.04(2); and (3) that, assuming the civil penalty for criminal usury could be avoided by a timely cure notice, Beausejour’s “cure notice” did not comply with the requirements of the Florida law.”
Beausejour Corp. v. Offshore Development Corp. (In Re Offshore Development Corp.) (1984)
“Having decided that the loan was in excess of the 45% maximum allowed by law and, therefore, criminally usurious, this Court must now determine whether Beau-sejour purged the transaction of criminal usury by sending a notice pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 687.04 . This Section…”
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.