Post-Surfside Florida law imposes mandatory structural milestone inspections and reserve funding requirements on multistory condominium buildings — and board members and unit owners who ignore these requirements now face statutory and civil liability exposure that did not exist before 2022.
I. Doctrinal Framing
The June 24, 2021, collapse of the Champlain Towers South condominium in Surfside, Florida — which killed ninety-eight people — exposed a systemic failure at the intersection of building maintenance, reserve fund adequacy, and governance accountability in Florida's condominium sector. The collapse triggered the most significant legislative overhaul of Florida's Condominium Act, Fla. Stat. ch. 718, in decades: first through Senate Bill 4-D in a May 2022 special session, then through additional refinements in Senate Bill 154 in 2023.
The resulting framework — mandatory structural milestone inspections (SMI), mandatory structural integrity reserve studies (SIRS), and prohibition on waiving reserves for certain structural components — represents both a new standard of care for condominium governance and a new landscape of exposure for associations, board members, engineers, and property managers.
For practitioners representing unit owners, survivors or estates of fatality victims, or purchasers who acquired units from associations that concealed structural conditions, the post-Surfside legislative framework establishes both the substantive standard against which conduct is measured and, in some cases, provides direct statutory causes of action.
II. The Structural Milestone Inspection Requirement
A. When Inspections Are Required
Florida's post-Surfside legislation requires condominium associations to obtain a Structural Milestone Inspection (SMI) for each building on their condominium property that is three stories or more in height. The inspection timeline is:
- Buildings aged 30 years or more (or 25 years or more if the building is located within three miles of a coastline): the initial SMI must be completed by December 31, 2024, or no later than the building's year of milestone eligibility.
- After the initial SMI, buildings must be re-inspected every ten years.
For buildings that had already reached or passed their thirty-year (or twenty-five-year coastal) threshold when the legislation was enacted, compliance deadlines were phased in; practitioners should verify current compliance status for any building built before 1995 or, if within three miles of a coastline, before 2000.
B. Phase 1 and Phase 2 Inspection Process
The SMI is a two-phase process:
Phase 1 is a visual inspection conducted by a licensed engineer or architect. The Phase 1 inspector evaluates the building's structural components and determines whether the building appears to be in substantial structural deterioration.
Phase 2 is triggered if the Phase 1 inspector determines that substantial structural deterioration may exist. Phase 2 is a more detailed investigation — potentially including material sampling, probing, and engineering analysis — to evaluate the nature and extent of the deterioration and to provide recommendations for remediation.
The inspector submits a report to both the condominium association and to the local building official. The building official receives the report and may take independent action — including ordering evacuation or imposing occupancy restrictions — if the inspection reveals imminent structural concerns.
Notice obligations: Within forty-five days of receiving a Phase 1 SMI report indicating no substantial deterioration, the association must distribute the summary to all unit owners. If substantial deterioration is found or remediation is required, the distribution is also mandatory and must include the Phase 2 findings and the timeline for remediation.
III. Structural Integrity Reserve Studies — SIRS
A. What a SIRS Requires
Beginning December 31, 2024, condominium associations for buildings of three or more stories must have a Structural Integrity Reserve Study (SIRS) conducted every ten years. The SIRS is a comprehensive study conducted by a licensed engineer or architect (or a licensed community association manager with specified credentials, in limited circumstances) that:
- Identifies the condominium's structural components subject to the reserve funding requirement;
- Estimates the current replacement cost for each component;
- Evaluates the remaining useful life of each component; and
- Calculates the annual reserve contribution necessary to fund replacement.
The components that must be covered in the SIRS and funded in reserves include: roof, load-bearing walls and other primary structural members, floor, foundation, fireproofing and fire protection systems, plumbing, electrical systems, waterproofing and exterior painting, windows, and any other item exceeding $10,000 in deferred maintenance or replacement cost identified in the study.
B. The Reserve Waiver Prohibition
Before the post-Surfside legislation, Florida condominium associations could vote to waive or reduce reserve funding annually by a majority vote of unit owners — a practice that had resulted in severe underfunding of reserves across Florida's aging condominium stock. The Champlain Towers South association had waived reserves for years; engineers had identified deteriorating structural conditions as early as 2018.
The post-Surfside legislation prohibits waiving or reducing reserve funding for SIRS components. Unlike pre-existing reserves that remain waivable by owner vote, reserves for items identified in a SIRS as structural components subject to the requirement are now mandatory. This is the single most significant financial change for Florida condominium associations: reserve funding for roofs, foundations, load-bearing walls, and other structural elements is no longer optional.
Practical implication for unit owners: In buildings that had chronically underfunded reserves, full SIRS-compliant reserve funding requires large special assessments or substantial increases in regular assessments. Boards that adopted SIRS plans but failed to fund them — or that adopted plans designed to minimize required funding through optimistic useful-life estimates — may face claims that they have not fulfilled their statutory obligations.
IV. Board Member Liability and the Statutory Standard of Care
A. Pre-Champlain Standards
Under pre-Surfside law, Florida condominium board members were afforded the protection of the business judgment rule: courts generally would not substitute their judgment for the board's on issues of maintenance and reserve funding so long as the board acted in good faith and within its authority. The business judgment rule is not abolished by the post-Surfside legislation, but it now operates against the backdrop of mandatory statutory requirements that cannot be satisfied by good-faith judgment.
A board that makes a reasonable but erroneous judgment about reserve adequacy is protected by the business judgment rule. A board that ignores a SIRS engineer's recommendation, fails to fund required reserves, or fails to commission a required SMI is not making a judgment call — it is violating a statutory mandate.
B. Individual Board Member Exposure
Under Fla. Stat. § 718.111, condominium directors generally have a fiduciary duty to unit owners. Breach of that fiduciary duty — including by ignoring known structural deficiencies, failing to fund required reserves, or misrepresenting the building's condition to unit owners — can support a derivative claim by unit owners against the board. Post-Surfside, the statutory obligations regarding SMI and SIRS provide specific, measurable benchmarks against which board conduct can be evaluated: a board that received a Phase 2 SMI report documenting structural deterioration and took no remediation action will struggle to invoke business judgment protection.
C. Disclosure Obligations in Unit Transfers
Florida law requires sellers of condominium units to disclose known material defects. Post-Surfside, a seller who has received SMI reports or SIRS documentation revealing structural deterioration or significant reserve deficiencies has a disclosure obligation that extends to the buyer. Associations also have obligations to provide certain documents to prospective purchasers. Failure to disclose known SMI or SIRS findings in a transaction may support fraud or negligent misrepresentation claims against both the selling unit owner and the association.
V. Pre-Surfside Structural Claims — Applicable Doctrine
For practitioners whose clients have claims arising from structural failures or long-deferred maintenance that predates the post-Surfside legislation, the existing liability framework under Fla. Stat. ch. 718 (pre-2022) applies.
A. White Egret Condo., Inc. v. Franklin, 379 So. 2d 346 (Fla. 1979)
White Egret Condominium, Inc. v. Franklin, 379 So. 2d 346 (Fla. 1979), established that condominium restrictions and governance obligations must be enforced uniformly and that courts scrutinize overly broad restrictions that impair the fundamental right to own and use real property. While White Egret is primarily cited in the context of association enforcement power (discussed further in Post 75), its broader principle — that association authority is constrained by both the governing documents and statutory requirements — applies in structural deficiency litigation where an association claims it acted within its discretion in deferring maintenance.
B. The Fiduciary Duty Standard Before 2022
Pre-Surfside, the applicable standard for association structural maintenance obligations arose from the governing documents (typically requiring the association to maintain common elements in good condition and repair), the fiduciary duty owed under § 718.111, and the business judgment rule. Claims against associations for failure to maintain structural components — spalling concrete, failing balconies, compromised pool decks — were governed by this framework.
Post-Surfside legislation strengthened these existing obligations rather than replacing them. Practitioners pursuing claims for pre-2022 structural failures should plead both the common-law/pre-existing statutory framework and, where the claim involves conduct continuing after July 1, 2022, the new statutory requirements.
VI. Practice Notes
Obtain the SMI and SIRS documents early. For any case involving a condominium building of three or more stories constructed before approximately 1995, a threshold inquiry is whether a Structural Milestone Inspection and/or SIRS has been conducted. These documents are official records of the association under § 718.111(12) and are accessible to unit owners (and arguably to litigation counsel with appropriate authorization). Request them in any pre-suit records request.
Engineer-expert early. Post-Surfside structural claims require a licensed structural engineer to evaluate the SMI and SIRS findings, opine on whether the identified deficiencies constitute the conditions that caused the client's harm, and establish the causal link between deficiencies and the failure event.
Special assessment injury claims. Unit owners who have been assessed special assessments as a result of previously deferred maintenance — including assessments triggered by SIRS findings — may have claims against prior boards that chronically waived reserves and passed the deferred liability to current owners. These "legacy reserve waiver" claims are an emerging theory in Florida condominium litigation.
Statute of limitations. In Florida, negligence-based claims have a four-year statute of limitations (reduced to two years for claims accruing after March 24, 2023, under 2023 tort reform). Construction defect claims affecting improvements to real property have a four-year limitations period and a ten-year statute of repose under Fla. Stat. § 95.11(3). Claims arising from structural failures should be analyzed under both limitations frameworks.
VII. Open Questions
The most significant unresolved question is whether SIRS-compliant reserve funding requirements will trigger disproportionate financial hardship for low-income and fixed-income unit owners in older coastal buildings, potentially forcing involuntary terminations of condominium associations and conversion of the properties to rentals or redevelopment. The Legislature has acknowledged this concern but has not provided relief from the mandatory funding requirements. Litigation over whether boards adequately communicated the financial implications of SIRS compliance before imposing large special assessments is likely to increase.
VIII. Closing
The post-Surfside legislative framework establishes specific, enforceable obligations for Florida condominium associations with respect to structural inspections and reserve funding. These obligations are not aspirational; they are mandatory, and boards that ignore them operate without the protection of the business judgment rule. For plaintiffs' counsel, the SMI and SIRS framework provides a specific, measurable standard of care against which association and board conduct can be evaluated — which is precisely what structural failure litigation has always needed.
Talk to Yates Anderson
If you are litigating a matter in this area — or weighing whether to — the working analysis above only goes so far. Request a case evaluation and a Yates Anderson attorney will respond within one business day.
Informational only. Not legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is created by reading this post. Consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.