Florida Statutes
Fla. Stat. § 723.071 (2025)
Sale of mobile home parks.
✓ 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
723.071 Sale of mobile home parks.—
(1)(a) If a mobile home park owner offers a mobile home park for sale, she or he shall notify the officers of the homeowners’ association created pursuant to ss. 723.075-723.079 of the offer, stating the price and the terms and conditions of sale.
(b) The mobile home owners, by and through the association defined in s. 723.075, shall have the right to purchase the park, provided the home owners meet the price and terms and conditions of the mobile home park owner by executing a contract with the park owner within 45 days, unless agreed to otherwise, from the date of mailing of the notice and provided they have complied with ss. 723.075-723.079. If a contract between the park owner and the association is not executed within such 45-day period, then, unless the park owner thereafter elects to offer the park at a price lower than the price specified in her or his notice to the officers of the homeowners’ association, the park owner has no further obligations under this subsection, and her or his only obligation shall be as set forth in subsection (2).
(c) If the park owner thereafter elects to offer the park at a price lower than the price specified in her or his notice to the home owners, the home owners, by and through the association, will have an additional 10 days to meet the price and terms and conditions of the park owner by executing a contract.
(2) If a mobile home park owner receives a bona fide offer to purchase the park that she or he intends to consider or make a counteroffer to, the park owner’s only obligation shall be to notify the officers of the homeowners’ association that she or he has received an offer and disclose the price and material terms and conditions upon which she or he would consider selling the park and consider any offer made by the home owners, provided the home owners have complied with ss. 723.075-723.079. The park owner shall be under no obligation to sell to the home owners or to interrupt or delay other negotiations and shall be free at any time to execute a contract for the sale of the park to a party or parties other than the home owners or the association.
(3)(a) As used in subsections (1) and (2), the term “notify” means the placing of a notice in the United States mail addressed to the officers of the homeowners’ association. Each such notice shall be deemed to have been given upon the deposit of the notice in the United States mail.
(b) As used in subsection (1), the term “offer” means any solicitation by the park owner to the general public.
(4) This section does not apply to:
(a) Any sale or transfer to a person who would be included within the table of descent and distribution if the park owner were to die intestate.
(b) Any transfer by gift, devise, or operation of law.
(c) Any transfer by a corporation to an affiliate. As used herein, the term “affiliate” means any shareholder of the transferring corporation; any corporation or entity owned or controlled, directly or indirectly, by the transferring corporation; or any other corporation or entity owned or controlled, directly or indirectly, by any shareholder of the transferring corporation.
(d) Any transfer by a partnership to any of its partners.
(e) Any conveyance of an interest in a mobile home park incidental to the financing of such mobile home park.
(f) Any conveyance resulting from the foreclosure of a mortgage, deed of trust, or other instrument encumbering a mobile home park or any deed given in lieu of such foreclosure.
(g) Any sale or transfer between or among joint tenants or tenants in common owning a mobile home park.
(h) Any exchange of a mobile home park for other real property, whether or not such exchange also involves the payment of cash or other boot.
(i) The purchase of a mobile home park by a governmental entity under its powers of eminent domain.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8
cases, 1987–2020 · leading case: Harris v. Martin Regency, Ltd., 576 So. 2d 1294 (Fla. 1991).
Harris v. Martin Regency, Ltd., 576 So. 2d 1294 (Fla. 1991). “In closing a park with the intent of selling the property as vacant land, the owner is not seeking to "evade" the provisions of section 723.071. Were the statute applicable to this situation, the park owner would have no incentive to avoid its requirements.”
Brate v. Chulavista Mobile Home Park Owners Ass'n, Inc., 559 So. 2d 1190 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). “Our review of the record compels the conclusion that the trial court was in error in its finding that Britt and Brate solicited the sale to Neptune, as a member of the general public, with the result that the sale was governed by subsection (1) of section 723.071, Florida…”
Manufactured Hous. Communities v. State, 13 P.3d 183 (Wash. 2000). “Fla. Stat. Ann. § 723.071 (West 1988) gives mobile home park tenants the right of first refusal on proposed sale of park.”
Ell-Cap/Diversified 75 Naples Estates v. Naples Estates Homeowners Ass'n, 975 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008). “Finally, NEHA seeks to enforce a statutory right of first refusal pursuant to section 723.071(1)(b), Florida Statutes (1997).”
Harris v. Martin Regency, Ltd., 550 So. 2d 1160 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). “061(l)(d), FLORIDA STATUTES (1985)? Finally, appellants contend that a question of fact exists concerning whether ap-pellee intended in good faith to change the use of the land from mobile home lot rentals to some other use pursuant to section 723.”
Bahrakis v. Zimmerman (M.D. Fla. 2020). “Plaintiffs contend that the Holdens recorded the warranty deed evidencing their sale of the Park in Pasco County on July 11, 2002, and the warranty deed included a fraudulent affidavit stating that they had complied with Florida Statute § 723.071. Section 723.071 provides that…”
Johnson v. Brannon, 23 Fla. Supp. 2d 102 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1987). “BRANNON, offered the mobile home park for sale and was required as a condition precedent under Section 723.071, Fla.Stat., to have offered it to the defendant.”
ell-cap/naples Estates v. Naples Homeowners Ass'n., 993 So. 2d 1009 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008). “Finally, NEHA seeks to enforce a statutory right of first refusal pursuant to section 723.071(1)(b), Florida Statutes (1997).”
— 723.071(1) — 2 cases
Harris v. Martin Regency, Ltd., 576 So. 2d 1294 (Fla. 1991). “In closing a park with the intent of selling the property as vacant land, the owner is not seeking to "evade" the provisions of section 723.071. Were the statute applicable to this situation, the park owner would have no incentive to avoid its requirements.”
Brate v. Chulavista Mobile Home Park Owners Ass'n, Inc., 559 So. 2d 1190 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). “Our review of the record compels the conclusion that the trial court was in error in its finding that Britt and Brate solicited the sale to Neptune, as a member of the general public, with the result that the sale was governed by subsection (1) of section 723.071, Florida…”
— 723.071(1)(a) — 1 case
Brate v. Chulavista Mobile Home Park Owners Ass'n, Inc., 559 So. 2d 1190 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). “Our review of the record compels the conclusion that the trial court was in error in its finding that Britt and Brate solicited the sale to Neptune, as a member of the general public, with the result that the sale was governed by subsection (1) of section 723.071, Florida…”
— 723.071(1)(b) — 3 cases
Brate v. Chulavista Mobile Home Park Owners Ass'n, Inc., 559 So. 2d 1190 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). “Our review of the record compels the conclusion that the trial court was in error in its finding that Britt and Brate solicited the sale to Neptune, as a member of the general public, with the result that the sale was governed by subsection (1) of section 723.071, Florida…”
Ell-Cap/Diversified 75 Naples Estates v. Naples Estates Homeowners Ass'n, 975 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008). “Finally, NEHA seeks to enforce a statutory right of first refusal pursuant to section 723.071(1)(b), Florida Statutes (1997).”
ell-cap/naples Estates v. Naples Homeowners Ass'n., 993 So. 2d 1009 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008). “Finally, NEHA seeks to enforce a statutory right of first refusal pursuant to section 723.071(1)(b), Florida Statutes (1997).”
— 723.071(2) — 1 case
Johnson v. Brannon, 23 Fla. Supp. 2d 102 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1987). “BRANNON, offered the mobile home park for sale and was required as a condition precedent under Section 723.071, Fla.Stat., to have offered it to the defendant.”
— 723.071(3)(b) — 2 cases
Brate v. Chulavista Mobile Home Park Owners Ass'n, Inc., 559 So. 2d 1190 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). “Our review of the record compels the conclusion that the trial court was in error in its finding that Britt and Brate solicited the sale to Neptune, as a member of the general public, with the result that the sale was governed by subsection (1) of section 723.071, Florida…”
Harris v. Martin Regency, Ltd., 576 So. 2d 1294 (Fla. 1991). “In closing a park with the intent of selling the property as vacant land, the owner is not seeking to "evade" the provisions of section 723.071. Were the statute applicable to this situation, the park owner would have no incentive to avoid its requirements.”
— 723.071(4) — 1 case
Brate v. Chulavista Mobile Home Park Owners Ass'n, Inc., 559 So. 2d 1190 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). “Our review of the record compels the conclusion that the trial court was in error in its finding that Britt and Brate solicited the sale to Neptune, as a member of the general public, with the result that the sale was governed by subsection (1) of section 723.071, Florida…”
— 723.071(a)(a) — 1 case
Johnson v. Brannon, 23 Fla. Supp. 2d 102 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1987). “BRANNON, offered the mobile home park for sale and was required as a condition precedent under Section 723.071, Fla.Stat., to have offered it to the defendant.”
— 723.071(l)(a) — 1 case
Johnson v. Brannon, 23 Fla. Supp. 2d 102 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1987). “BRANNON, offered the mobile home park for sale and was required as a condition precedent under Section 723.071, Fla.Stat., to have offered it to the defendant.”
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.