Among other disclosures, the notice stated that the lien was subject to enforcement pursuant to Florida Statutes Section 713.78 and that the Jeep would be sold at a public sale at 10 a.m. on April 21, 2014 unless it was redeemed from Mr. Dowell by payment “as allowed by law.”

The sale proceeded as planned and Mr. Dowell was the sole bidder. Afterward, he obtained a certificate of title to the Jeep issued by the State of Florida.

According to Mr. Dowell, State Farm, the Jeep's insurer, subsequently applied for and received a “salvage vehicle” title certificate from the State of Georgia, despite knowing about Mr. Dowell's possession and ownership of the Jeep.

Mr. Dowell, having no knowledge of the salvage title, repaired the Jeep for resale.

About a year later, Mr. Dowell discovered the existence of the salvage title.

Mr. Dowell sued State Farm, asserting that its intentional and wrongful registration of the Jeep as a salvage vehicle destroyed essentially all of its marketable value as a used automobile. He sought damages for conversion and slander of title and, in the alternative, foreclosure of his lien for towing and storage charges.

State Farm moved for summary judgment, arguing that the public sale of the Jeep was not valid because Mr. Dowell had not complied with Florida Statutes Section 713.78, the statute on which Mr. Dowell based his claim of lien and ownership of the vehicle.

The trial court agreed, finding that the public sale was null and void because Mr. Dowell failed to meet a statutory notice requirement. The trial court granted State Farm's motion for summary judgment because Mr. Dowell's claims depended on his ownership of the Jeep and, in the absence of a valid public sale, Mr. Dowell could not prevail.

Mr. Dowell appealed.

The Appellate Court's Decision

The appellate court affirmed.

In its decision, the appellate court explained that Section 713.78 grants a towing-storage operator, such as Mr. Dowell, a lien on a vehicle for reasonable towing and storage charges incurred at the request of law enforcement. The appellate court added that the statute also set forth the procedure by which a towing-storage operator could enforce a lien by public sale.

Among other things, the appellate court continued, subsection (4) provided that a person who claimed a lien “for recovery, towing, or storage services” must give notice to the registered owner of the vehicle, the insurance company insuring the vehicle, and to all persons claiming a lien against the vehicle “within 7 business days after the date of storage of the vehicle[.]”

In addition, the appellate court continued, the notice must disclose the following:

the fact of possession of the vehicle or vessel, that a lien as provided in subsection (2) is claimed, that charges have accrued and the amount thereof, that the lien is subject to enforcement pursuant to law, and that the owner or lienholder, if any, has the right to a hearing as set forth in subsection (5), and that any vehicle or vessel which remains unclaimed, or for which the charges for recovery, towing, or storage services remain unpaid, may be sold free of all prior liens after 35 days if the vehicle or vessel is more than 3 years of age or after 50 days if the vehicle or vessel is 3 years of age or less.

Moreover, the appellate court added, the statute further provides that “[i]f the date of the sale was not included in the notice required in subsection (4),” the towing-storage operator must provide notice of the sale to the registered owner and lienholders by certified mail at least 15 days before the date of the sale. The towing-storage operator also must provide public notice of the time and place of sale in a newspaper of general circulation in the county in which the sale is to be held.

Here, the appellate court reasoned, Mr. Dowell failed to send the required notice to the vehicle owner within seven business days after the initial date of storage, contrary to the mandatory language of subsection (4). (There were no lienholders.)

The appellate court then rejected Mr. Dowell's contention that the only sanction or penalty for missing the notice deadline was that he forfeited his right to collect storage fees. Rather, the appellate court decided, he was “not entitled to proceed with enforcement of the lien by public sale when the required notice of the lien and public sale was untimely.”

The appellate court concluded that, based on the “plain language of the statute,” timely notice was mandatory.

The case is Dowell v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co., No. 1D17-5193 (Fla. Ct. App. May 2, 2019). Attorneys involved include: Danny L. Kepner and Louis “Trip” Maygarden of Shell, Fleming, Davis & Menge, P.A., Pensacola, for Appellant. Jared P. Gann of Kirkland, McGhee & Gann, Pensacola, for Appellee.