The Florida Senate
BILL ANALYSIS AND FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT
(This document is based on the provisions contained in the legislation as of the latest date listed below.)
Prepared By: The Professional Staff of the Committee on Judiciary
BILL: SB 1466
INTRODUCER: Senator Grall
SUBJECT: Residential Tenancies
DATE: January 12, 2024
ANALYST STAFF DIRECTOR REFERENCE ACTION
1. Collazo Cibula JU Favorable
2. BI
3. RC
I. Summary:
SB 1466 amends s. 83.43, F.S., to define the term “Florida banking institution” for purposes of
the Florida Residential Landlord and Tenant Act. Specifically, the bill defines “Florida banking
institution” to mean a bank, an industrial savings bank, a savings and loan association, or a trust
company organized under the laws of this state, any other state, or by the U.S., and doing
business in this state.
The effect of this change is to expressly permit landlords to comply with the Act by depositing
their tenants’ security deposits in any qualifying bank in Florida, regardless of where the bank
was chartered or is headquartered.
The bill takes effect July 1, 2024.
II. Present Situation:
Under the Florida Residential Landlord and Tenant Act (the Act),
1
if a tenant deposits with, or
advances money to, the landlord as security for performance of the rental agreement, or advances
rent to the landlord for other than the next immediate rental period, the landlord has the option of
depositing the money in a separate, non-interest-bearing account in a “Florida banking
institution” for the benefit of the tenant.
2
The Act, however, does not define what constitutes a
Florida banking institution.
1
Chapter 83, Part II, F.S. See s. 83.40, F.S. (providing the short title).
2
Section 83.49(1)(a), F.S.
REVISED: BILL: SB 1466 Page 2
In at least one recent court filing alleging violations of the Act (the Palm Beach Court Case),
3
the
plaintiff relied upon a statutory definition for the term “Florida banking institution” that once
existed in chapter 658, Florida Statutes,
4
but was repealed over a decade ago.
5
Specifically, the repealed statute defined “Florida banking institution” to mean “a bank whose
home state is this state,”
6
and defined “home state” to mean:
With respect to a state bank, the state by which the bank is chartered.
With respect to a national bank, the state in which the main office of the bank is located.
With respect to a foreign bank, the state determined to be the home state of such foreign bank
under 12 U.S.C. s. 3103(c).
7
The plaintiff in the Palm Beach Case – a limited liability company that had been assigned the
rights to a $500 deposit by the defendant landlord’s former tenants – cited to this definition and
alleged that the defendant landlord had violated the Act by depositing the tenants’ security
deposit with JPMorgan Chase Bank, which is not a Florida chartered bank nor headquartered in
Florida.
8
JPMorgan Chase, however, is the largest financial institution in the United States.
9
As
of September 30, 2023, JPMorgan Chase had $3.38 trillion in assets, 80 million customer
accounts, and 4,700 branches.
10
Then based upon this alleged violation, the plaintiff sought to
recover its attorney fees and court costs from the defendant landlord as permitted under the
Act.
11
Although the definition of “Florida banking institution” relied upon by the plaintiff in the Palm
Beach Court Case has been repealed, a similar definition still exists in chapter 658, Florida
Statutes.
12
This fact, combined with the fact that the Act does not define “Florida banking
institution,” suggests that similar lawsuits seeking the recovery of attorney fees and court costs
may be filed again in the future.
III. Effect of Proposed Changes:
The bill amends s. 83.43, F.S., to define the term “Florida banking institution” for purposes of
the Act. Specifically, the bill defines “Florida banking institution” to mean a bank, an industrial
savings bank, a savings and loan association, or a trust company organized under the laws of this
state, any other state, or by the U.S. and doing business in this state.
3
KAC 2021-1 LLC As Assignee to Erole Emmanuel and Marie Joseph v. Eatmira II LLC d/b/a Catalina at Miramar,
Uniform Case No. 50-2023-SC-005770-XXXX-WB (Small Claims Court of the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach
County, Apr. 13, 2023) [hereinafter “Palm Beach County Case”].
4
This chapter regulates banks and trust companies doing business in Florida.
5
See Palm Beach County Case, supra at note 3; see also ch. 2011-194, s. 24, Laws of Fla. (repealing s. 658.295, F.S.
(2010)).
6
Section 658.295(2)(m), F.S. (2010).
7
Section 658.295(2)(o), F.S. (2010).
8
Palm Beach County Case, supra at note 3, Count II.
9
Christopher Murray, The Biggest Banks in the 2024, MARKETWATCH GUIDES (updated Jan. 10, 2024),
https://www.marketwatch.com/guides/banking/largest-banks-in-the-us/#:~:text=Chase%20is%20the%
20largest%20bank,over%20%241.7%20trillion%20in%20assets.
10
Id.
11
Id.; see also s. 83.48, F.S. (entitling prevailing parties to recover attorney fees and court costs in civil actions to enforce the
provisions of the Act).
12
See s. 658.2953(3)(c), F.S. (providing that “Florida Bank” means “a bank whose home state is this state”). BILL: SB 1466 Page 3
The effect of this change is to expressly permit landlords to comply with the Act by depositing
their tenants’ security deposits in any qualifying bank in Florida, regardless of where the bank
was chartered or is headquartered.
The bill takes effect July 1, 2024.
IV. Constitutional Issues:
A. Municipality/County Mandates Restrictions:
None.
B. Public Records/Open Meetings Issues:
None.
C. Trust Funds Restrictions:
None.
D. State Tax or Fee Increases:
None.
E. Other Constitutional Issues:
None.
V. Fiscal Impact Statement:
A. Tax/Fee Issues:
None.
B. Private Sector Impact:
Because the bill expressly permits landlords to comply with the Act by depositing their
tenants’ security deposits in any qualifying bank in Florida, regardless of where the bank
was chartered or is headquartered, fewer lawsuits alleging “Florida banking institution”
violations of the Act will be filed, reducing the costs to both plaintiffs and defendants in
landlord-tenant disputes. Additionally, banking institutions that are not chartered or
headquartered in Florida may benefit from receiving additional security deposits.
C. Government Sector Impact:
Because the bill expressly permits landlords to comply with the Act by depositing their
tenants’ security deposits in any qualifying bank in Florida, regardless of where the bank
was chartered or is headquartered, fewer lawsuits alleging “Florida banking institution” BILL: SB 1466 Page 4
violations of the Act will be filed. As a result, the bill is likely to reduce the caseload
burden on small claims, county, and circuit courts.
VI. Technical Deficiencies:
None.
VII. Related Issues:
None.
VIII. Statutes Affected:
This bill substantially amends the following sections of the Florida Statutes: 83.43, 83.491, and
553.895.
IX. Additional Information:
A. Committee Substitute – Statement of Changes:
(Summarizing differences between the Committee Substitute and the prior version of the bill.)
None.
B. Amendments:
None.
This Senate Bill Analysis does not reflect the intent or official position of the bill’s introducer or the Florida Senate.