HB 937 creates a new section of Florida law aimed at preventing “predatory loan” structures in the consumer finance lending market. The bill prohibits any person from using a device, scheme, or artifice to evade the requirements of chapter 516, Florida’s consumer finance loan law, including by arranging or assisting a borrower to obtain a loan with interest, fees, or other charges above what the chapter allows. It also bars the receipt of payments in excess of authorized amounts, even if those payments are labeled voluntary.
The bill further provides that any consumer finance loan made in violation of these anti-evasion rules is void and uncollectible as to principal, fees, interest, charges, or other payments. It also sets out when a person will be treated as a lender subject to the law, even if that person claims to be only an agent, service provider, or other intermediary for an exempt entity. The bill takes effect July 1, 2025.
HB 937 would strengthen enforcement of Florida’s consumer finance lending limits by targeting loan origination and servicing arrangements designed to bypass chapter 516, especially where higher-cost lending is routed through third parties or exempt entities. It would expand the circumstances under which a person is deemed a lender, and it would make noncompliant loans unenforceable, which could affect lenders, brokers, fintech platforms, service providers, and other entities involved in loan programs that exceed Florida’s authorized rates or fees.
The available legislative record shows limited formal debate or recorded votes, but the bill’s purpose suggests a consumer-protection orientation focused on curbing predatory lending and regulatory evasion. Its introduction and framing indicate support for closing loopholes in consumer finance law, while its failure to advance beyond the Insurance & Banking Subcommittee suggests there was not enough committee support to move it forward, or that concerns about its scope or effects outweighed support.
The main point of contention is likely the bill’s broad anti-evasion language and its lender-deeming provisions, which could reach entities that structure loans through affiliates, agents, or service providers. Businesses involved in marketplace lending, bank-partnership models, or other indirect lending arrangements may view the bill as sweeping too broadly or creating uncertainty about when an exempt entity’s partner becomes a lender. Supporters, by contrast, would likely argue that these provisions are necessary to stop high-cost lending from being disguised through contractual form rather than substance.