FLORIDA. State inspectors cited a Burger King at 2728 N. Pine St. in Ocala with eight high-severity violations in the past 90 days, the worst performance of any Burger King location in Florida during that stretch, a review of state inspection records shows.
The violations at the Pine Street location covered nearly every category that regulators treat as the most dangerous. Inspectors found toxic chemicals improperly stored or labeled, food contact surfaces that had not been properly cleaned or sanitized, and no consumer advisory posted for raw or undercooked foods. There was no person in charge present or performing duties during the inspection. An employee had not reported symptoms of illness as required. Handwashing technique was flagged as improper.
Two of the eight high-severity citations at the Pine Street location are unusual for a fast-food restaurant: inadequate shell stock identification records and no consumer advisory for raw or undercooked foods. Burger King does not serve oysters or raw fish on its standard menu, which makes those citations worth noting, though the inspection record does not explain the context.
Worst Burger King Locations in Florida: High-Severity Violations (Jan 25 – Apr 24, 2026)
A Second Ocala Location, a Different Set of Problems
A mile and a half away, a second Ocala Burger King drew its own serious inspection. The location at 2240 SW Hwy 484 accumulated seven high-severity violations and two intermediate citations, including one that stands out even among the worst performers in this review: food not cooked to the required minimum temperature.
Undercooking at a burger chain is not a paperwork problem. It means Salmonella in poultry or E. coli in beef can survive to the plate. The SW Hwy 484 location also drew citations for parasite destruction procedures not followed, improperly stored toxic chemicals, and food contact surfaces not properly cleaned or sanitized.
Inspectors also cited the location for improper sewage or wastewater disposal, one of only two locations in this review to receive that intermediate violation.
The Pattern Across the State
Ocala is not the only city with a struggling location. The Burger King at 3444 US Hwy 19 N in Holiday drew six high-severity violations, including an employee not reporting illness symptoms, parasite destruction procedures not followed, and toxic chemicals improperly stored. Multi-use utensils were cited as not properly cleaned, an intermediate violation that compounds the risk when surface sanitation is already compromised.
The location at 2024 S. Waukesha St. in Bonifay also reached six high-severity violations. Inspectors there found food in poor condition, mislabeled, or adulterated, a citation that does not appear at any other location in this review. No allergen awareness was demonstrated, a violation with immediate consequences for customers with food allergies.
In Port Orange, the Burger King at 3811 Nova Rd. drew six high-severity violations, including no person in charge present or performing duties and food not cooked to the required minimum temperature. Those two citations together, an absent manager and undercooked food, represent the combination regulators most associate with cascading failures during a single shift.
The location at 6590 Park Blvd. in Pinellas Park drew four high-severity violations, but one of them is among the most serious in the entire dataset: food from an unapproved or unknown source. That citation means inspectors could not verify where some food at that location originated, bypassing federal safety inspections entirely.
The Burger King at 3211 Howland Blvd. in Deltona was cited for both inadequate handwashing and improper handwashing technique in the same inspection, a double citation in the same category that suggests inspectors observed failures at multiple points during a single visit.
The location at 780 E. Hwy 50 in Clermont accumulated the most total violations of any location in this review: five high-severity and five intermediate. Citations there included improper sewage disposal, improperly reused single-use items, and no allergen awareness demonstrated.
The Burger King at 1309 NW 20 St. in Miami drew five high-severity violations, including parasite destruction procedures not followed and multi-use utensils not properly cleaned.
Statewide, Burger King's 429 Florida locations averaged 4.30 violations per inspection across 7,016 inspections on record. The chain's pass rate sits at 87.41 percent. No emergency closures were recorded in the current year.
What These Violations Mean
The most common high-severity violation across this review is improperly stored or labeled toxic chemicals, cited at seven of the ten locations. At a fast-food restaurant, cleaning chemicals, sanitizers, and degreasers are stored in close proximity to food preparation surfaces and food packaging. When those chemicals are not clearly labeled or are stored above or near food, a mislabeled container or a spill can contaminate food directly. Chemical poisoning from this pathway does not produce the slow-onset symptoms of bacterial illness. It can be immediate.
Improper handwashing technique, cited at six locations including both Ocala locations, the Holiday location, Port Orange, Pinellas Park, Deltona, and Clermont, is distinct from simply skipping handwashing. It means an employee made an attempt to wash their hands but did so incorrectly, leaving pathogens on their hands anyway. That distinction matters because it reflects a training failure, not just a lapse.
At two locations, Port Orange and Ocala on Pine Street, inspectors found no person in charge present or performing active oversight duties. CDC data cited in the inspection records shows establishments without active managerial control have three times the rate of critical violations. When a manager is absent during a shift, the violations documented at those two locations, undercooked food, improperly stored chemicals, and inadequate handwashing, become more likely, not less.
The food not cooked to required minimum temperature citation at the SW Hwy 484 Ocala location and the Port Orange location carries direct pathogen risk. Salmonella in poultry survives below 165 degrees Fahrenheit. At a chain that serves chicken sandwiches and nuggets at volume, a temperature violation is not an administrative finding. It is a direct transmission risk.
The Longer Record
Burger King's statewide inspection record spans 7,016 documented inspections across 429 Florida locations, a volume that reflects decades of regulatory contact. The chain's 87.41 percent pass rate means roughly one in eight inspections results in a failed outcome. Across a chain this size, that fraction represents dozens of locations in any given quarter.
The current review does not include per-location historical inspection counts for each facility featured. What the statewide data shows is that the chain's average of 4.30 violations per inspection, taken across more than 7,000 inspections, is not driven by a handful of outliers. The ten worst locations in this 90-day window accumulated between five and ten total violations each, well above that average.
The Clermont location's ten total violations, five high-severity and five intermediate, place it at more than twice the chain's per-inspection average in a single inspection period. The combination of sewage disposal problems, improperly reused single-use items, and no allergen awareness at one location suggests failures distributed across multiple operational systems, not a single point of breakdown.
The Bonifay location's citation for food in poor condition or adulterated, the only such citation in this review, and its missing allergen awareness documentation represent two categories that most Burger King locations in this dataset did not trigger. That location also had no consumer advisory for raw or undercooked foods, a third citation that compounds the risk for customers who cannot make informed choices about what they are eating.
The Pinellas Park location's citation for food from an unapproved or unknown source remains the single most unresolved finding in this dataset. No follow-up inspection outcome is included in the records reviewed, and the source of that food has not been publicly identified.