When a tenant or borrower stops paying, most landlords assume they can simply “accelerate the debt,” sue, and recover attorney’s fees. But a recent Florida appellate decision shows how one misstep in that process can erase your right to recover tens of thousands of dollars—even when you win the case.
In Miller v. ARCPE Bahamas, LLC (Fla. 5th DCA 2025), a creditor successfully collected on two promissory notes after years of nonpayment. But when it asked the court to award more than $168,000 in attorney’s fees, the appellate court reversed the award entirely. The reason? The creditor never actually accelerated the debt, even though the promissory notes required proper acceleration before fees could be awarded.
The creditor had sent default notices years earlier, but never followed through with a clear, documented demand requiring immediate payment in full. Worse, during the litigation, the creditor had argued the opposite—that the debt was not accelerated—because that argument helped defeat a statute of limitations defense. After winning the case on that theory, it switched positions and claimed the debt was accelerated after all.
The court called foul.
You cannot argue “no acceleration” to win your lawsuit and then argue “acceleration” to win attorney’s fees.
For landlords who use promissory notes, payment plans, or lease-based repayment agreements, the lesson is simple but critical:
If you want attorney’s fees, default interest, or stronger collection rights, you must accelerate correctly—clearly, in writing, and consistently.
This case is a sharp warning to landlords, property managers, and anyone using repayment agreements with tenants: your contracts must be drafted carefully, your notices must be unmistakable, and your litigation position must not change midstream. One small oversight can cost you your entire fee claim.
Want the full analysis, lessons for landlords, and acceleration strategies that protect your legal rights?