It is my understanding that a financial institution cannot reject a POA solely because it is not a durable POA. The reason being that pursuant to the October 1, 2011, the Florida POA statute looks to indicate a POA no longer needs to contain the “durable language provision” in the POA in order to be a valid POA.

Meaning that a POA without the durable language provision actually complies with the provisions of the statute and as long as that POA (1) is executed, witnessed and notarized properly; (2) sets forth specifically-described transactions that can be conducted at the FI; and (3) the FI has no knowledge of the incapacitation of the principal on the date of presentment of the POA.

I am inquiring because i am seeing rejection based solely on whether the POA is durable or not.

There's an excellent pamphlet from the Florida Bar Association on POA's. One section talks about what a bank would do if it refuses to accept a POA. (Sorry, it's not paginated; you will have to find it.)

Whether a bank could refuse a POA simply because it was not "durable" would depend on the facts and circumstances. For example. if the principal was still capable of executing a POA that contained the durable language, refusal of the non durable document might be reasonable. However, if the principal no longer had legal capacity to execute a POA, then a refusal probably would be deemed unreasonable.