The broker has four ways out. The title agent has none.

The call comes after the deal has already died. The buyer wants the deposit back, the seller says it is theirs, and somebody asks the question that sounds like it should have a quick answer: who releases it?

Realtors usually reach for the escrow disbursement order, because that is the remedy their own licensing chapter gives them. It is a real remedy. It is also unavailable when a title agency is the one holding the money, and the statute governing title agency escrow does not put anything in its place.

What chapter 475 gives a broker

Florida Statute 475.25(1)(d)1. sets out what happens when a chapter 475 licensee — a broker, broker associate or sales associate — is holding escrowed property and the picture gets contested. The trigger in the statute is written two ways: the licensee "in good faith entertains doubt as to what person is entitled to the accounting and delivery" of the escrowed property, or "conflicting demands have been made upon the licensee."²

On either trigger the licensee must promptly notify the commission, and then promptly do one of four things:²

• request that the commission issue an escrow disbursement order determining who is entitled to the escrowed property
• submit the matter to arbitration, with the consent of all parties
• seek adjudication by a court, by interpleader or otherwise
• submit the matter to mediation, with the written consent of all parties

The statute attaches one number to this, and it is worth reading precisely. There is no day count on the notice or on choosing a route; both are required to be prompt. The 90 days in the statute applies to mediation only: the mediation process "must be successfully completed within 90 days following the last demand," failing which the licensee "shall promptly employ one of the other escape procedures contained in this section."² That clock binds a chapter 475 licensee. It is not a general rule about deposits.

What chapter 626 gives a title agency, which is a different thing entirely

Escrow, settlement and closing funds in the hands of a title insurance agent or agency are governed by Florida Statute 626.8473. The section is emphatic about the character of the money. These are "trust funds received in a fiduciary capacity," they belong to the persons entitled to them, and they are to be placed immediately in a qualifying financial institution located in this state.¹ They are not subject to any debts of the title insurance agency, and the agency is required to maintain separate records of all receipts and disbursements of those funds.¹

Two phrases in that section do the real work. The funds are held until "disbursement thereof is properly authorized," and they are to be used "only in accordance with the terms of the individual, escrow, settlement, or closing instructions under which the funds were accepted."¹ Authority to disburse comes from the instructions. It does not come from the agency's own reading of who ought to win.

And then there is what the section does not contain. Read it start to finish and there is no conflicting-demands procedure, no commission to notify, no order anyone can apply for, and no mechanism by which the agency resolves a contested entitlement question. The four exits chapter 475 writes out for a broker have no counterpart here. That absence is not an oversight to be worked around. The holder of trust funds is simply not given authority to adjudicate ownership of them.

How seriously the statute takes that is spelled out in the same section, which makes conversion or misappropriation of escrow, settlement or closing funds a criminal offense graded by the amount involved.¹ A disbursement the instructions do not authorize is not a judgment call with a bad outcome. It is the thing the statute criminalizes.

Why "just split it" is not on the menu

The practical suggestion that surfaces fastest is to divide the deposit, or to release it to whichever side has the stronger-sounding argument. Neither is an authorization. Under 626.8473 the disbursement has to be the one the instructions provide for, and a contested deal is contested precisely because the parties disagree about what the instructions produce on these facts.¹ A release the parties have not jointly authorized, and that no court has ordered, is a disbursement made without the authority the statute requires.

Which is why the thing that actually unlocks a disputed deposit, in the overwhelming run of cases, is the parties agreeing in writing. That is not a procedural technicality. It is the one route that does not require a courthouse.

Interpleader, and what it is

Where there is no agreement, the route that exists is the court. Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.240 provides that persons having claims against the plaintiff "may be joined as defendants and required to interplead when their claims are such that the plaintiff is or may be exposed to double or multiple liability."⁴ The rule goes on to remove the obvious objections: it is not a ground for objection that the claimants' titles "do not have a common origin or are not identical but are adverse to and independent of one another, or that the plaintiff avers that the plaintiff is not liable in whole or in part to any or all of the claimants."⁴

Separately, Florida Statute 86.011 gives the circuit and county courts jurisdiction, within their respective jurisdictional amounts, "to declare rights, status, and other equitable or legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed," and provides that such a declaration "has the force and effect of a final judgment."³

The shape of it, as practitioners describe it, is that the stakeholder deposits the disputed fund with the court and asks to be discharged, after which the claimants litigate entitlement between themselves. That is a description of practice under the rule rather than language from the rule, and whether interpleader fits any particular file is a question for the attorney on it.

The part that surprises people: the deposit can pay for the fight

Florida Realtors associate general counsel Richard Swank addressed this in September 2026. Filing an interpleader costs the escrow holder attorney fees and court costs, and the holder's attorney typically asks the court to be reimbursed. Swank reports that paragraph 13 of the FR/Bar and ASIS contracts, and paragraph 17 of the CRSP, expressly allow a closing or escrow agent who is in doubt and files an interpleader to recover reasonable costs and attorney fees.⁵

Because the deposit is usually the only reliable source of money before the court, reimbursement frequently comes out of the deposit itself, which Swank notes can significantly reduce what the buyer and seller ultimately recover — on a deposit of only a few thousand dollars, most of it could be consumed.⁵ He also notes that all three contracts require the parties to attempt informal resolution first.⁵

That is reported here as Florida Realtors reported it, and the operative document is the contract on the file rather than this page. Paragraph numbering differs between contract forms and between versions of the same form.

What a realtor can establish early

None of what follows is about winning a dispute. It is about knowing, early, which rules are going to apply.

• Know who is actually holding the deposit. Broker-held and title-agency-held funds sit under different chapters with different procedures, and the escrow disbursement order route exists only on the chapter 475 side.²¹
• Read the escrow and closing instructions as written. They are what authorizes disbursement under 626.8473, so what they say governs more than what either side believes was intended.¹
• Find the dispute-resolution paragraph in the contract before you need it — paragraph 13 of FR/Bar and ASIS, paragraph 17 of CRSP, as Florida Realtors describes those forms.⁵
• Treat a signed mutual release as the objective. It is the only route that does not involve a court.
• A client with a live dispute belongs with their own attorney, early enough that it is still cheaper than the alternative.

The short version

A chapter 475 licensee facing conflicting demands notifies the commission and picks one of four routes, including asking for an escrow disbursement order.² A title insurance agency holding the same money is under 626.8473 instead, which makes the funds fiduciary trust funds, permits disbursement only as the escrow, settlement or closing instructions authorize, and criminalizes conversion — while providing no procedure at all for deciding a contested claim.¹ So the deposit moves on a written agreement between the parties, or on a court's determination under Rule 1.240 and chapter 86.⁴³ And the fight itself can be paid for out of the deposit.⁵

We are a title agency, not a law firm, and nothing here is legal advice or an opinion about any particular deposit. If you have a transaction where the deposit is contested, that is a conversation for the parties and their attorneys. If you want to understand how escrow is structured on a file before it ever reaches that point, call us early.

Common questions

Can a Florida title company decide who gets the earnest money deposit when the buyer and seller disagree?

No. Florida Statute 626.8473 provides that escrow, settlement and closing funds received by a title insurance agent or agency are trust funds received in a fiduciary capacity, that they are to be kept in an escrow account until disbursement is properly authorized, and that they are to be used only in accordance with the terms of the individual, escrow, settlement or closing instructions under which the funds were accepted. The statute does not give the agency authority to decide a contested entitlement question, and it contains no procedure for resolving conflicting demands.

Why can a real estate broker request an escrow disbursement order from FREC but a title company cannot?

The escrow disbursement order is created by Florida Statute 475.25(1)(d)1., which applies to licensees under chapter 475, the chapter governing real estate brokers, broker associates and sales associates. A title insurance agency holding closing funds is regulated under the insurance code rather than chapter 475, and Florida Statute 475.25 does not extend that remedy to it. Florida Realtors associate general counsel Richard Swank noted in September 2026 that the escrow disbursement order option is generally unavailable to non-brokers.

What is an interpleader action in a Florida escrow dispute?

Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.240 provides that persons having claims against the plaintiff may be joined as defendants and required to interplead when their claims are such that the plaintiff is or may be exposed to double or multiple liability. In practice the party holding a disputed fund files suit, deposits the money with the court and asks to be discharged, leaving the claimants to litigate entitlement between themselves. Florida Statute 86.011 gives the circuit and county courts jurisdiction to declare rights, status and other equitable or legal relations.

Can the cost of an interpleader come out of the deposit itself?

Florida Realtors reported in September 2026 that paragraph 13 of the FR/Bar and ASIS contracts and paragraph 17 of the CRSP expressly allow a closing or escrow agent who is in doubt and files an interpleader to recover reasonable costs and attorney fees, and that because the deposit is usually the only available source of funds, reimbursement often comes from the deposit. On a small deposit that can consume a substantial part of what the parties recover. The contract the parties signed controls, so read paragraph 13 or 17 of the contract on the file.

What are the four options Florida Statute 475.25 gives a broker facing conflicting demands?

Florida Statute 475.25(1)(d)1. provides that a licensee who in good faith entertains doubt as to what person is entitled to the escrowed property, or upon whom conflicting demands have been made, shall promptly notify the commission and shall promptly either request that the commission issue an escrow disbursement order, submit the matter to arbitration with the consent of all parties, seek adjudication by a court by interpleader or otherwise, or submit the matter to mediation with the written consent of all parties. The statute sets no day count for the notice, requiring that it be prompt, and provides that mediation must be successfully completed within 90 days following the last demand or the licensee shall promptly employ one of the other procedures.

Does misusing escrow funds carry a criminal penalty in Florida?

Florida Statute 626.8473 provides that the conversion or misappropriation of escrow, settlement or closing funds is a criminal offense, graded by the amount involved. The same section provides that these funds are not subject to any debts of the title insurance agency.

Sources

Every factual claim above is drawn from the sources below. Statutory figures and deadlines were read from the official source rather than from secondary coverage. Sources last checked October 15, 2026.

1. Fla. Stat. s. 626.8473 - Escrow, settlement and closing funds held by a title insurance agent or agency. Fiduciary character, the properly-authorized disbursement standard, and the criminal provision The Florida Senate, official statutes Retrieved October 15, 2026
2. Fla. Stat. s. 475.25 - Discipline. Subsection (1)(d)1. creates the escrow disbursement order and the four options available to a chapter 475 licensee facing conflicting demands The Florida Senate, official statutes Retrieved October 15, 2026
3. Fla. Stat. s. 86.011 - Jurisdiction of trial court to declare rights, status and other equitable or legal relations The Florida Senate, official statutes Retrieved October 15, 2026
4. Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.240 - Interpleader. Text as published in the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure effective 1 April 2026 Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, reproduced by Florida Justice Retrieved October 15, 2026
5. Escrow Dispute? Legal Fees Can Reduce the Deposit, by Richard Swank, Associate General Counsel, published 29 September 2026 Florida Realtors Retrieved October 15, 2026