If the offer or sale of the Apricot Lane franchise was made in Washington, is the addendum required?
Apricot_Lane Franchise · 2025 FDDAnswer from 2025 FDD Document
nually for inflation). As a result, any provisions contained in the franchise agreement or elsewhere that conflict with these limitations are void and unenforceable in Washington.
RCW 49.62.060 prohibits a franchisor from restricting, restraining, or prohibiting a franchisee from (i) soliciting or hiring any employee of a franchisee of the same franchisor or (ii) soliciting or hiring any employee of the franchisor. As a result, any such provisions contained in the franchise agreement or elsewhere are void and unenforceable in Washington.
ADDENDUM TO THE COUNTRY VISIONS FRANCHISE AGREEMENT AS REQUIRED BY THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
| This Addendum is made and entered into as of, 20 by and between COUNTRY |
|---|
| VISIONS, INC., |
| a |
| California |
| corporation |
| ("Franchisor"), and |
| , a |
| ("Franchisee"). |
| 1. |
| Background. Franchisor and Franchisee are parties to that certain Franchise Agreement |
| dated, 20 that has been signed concurrently with the signing of this |
| Addendum. This Addendum is annexed to and forms part of the Franchise Agreement. This Addendum is |
| being signed because (a) |
| the offer or sale of the franchise for the Store Franchisee will operate under the |
| Franchise Agreement was made in the State of Washington, (b) |
| Franchisee is a resident of Washington, |
| and/or (c) |
| Store will be located or operated in Washington. |
- Addition of Paragraphs. The following paragraphs are added to the end of the Franchise Agreement:
In the event of a conflict of laws, the provisions of the Washington Franchise Investment Protection Act, Chapter 19.100 RCW will prevail.
RCW 19.100.180 may supersede the franchise agreement in your relationship with the franchisor including the areas of termination and renewal of your franchise. There may also be court decisions which may supersede the franchise agreement in your relationship with the franchisor including the areas of termination and renewal of your franchise.
In any arbitration or mediation involving a franchise purchased in Washington, the arbitration or mediation site will be either in the state of Washington, or in a place mutually agreed upon at the time of the arbitration or mediation, or as determined by the arbitrator or mediator at the time of the arbitration or mediation. In addition, if litigation is not precluded by the franchise agreement, a franchisee may bring an action or proceeding arising out of or in connection with the sale of franchises, or a violation of the Washington Franchise Investment Protection Act, in Washington.
Source: Item 23 — RECEIPTS (FDD pages 51–222)
What This Means (2025 FDD)
According to the 2025 Apricot Lane FDD, an addendum to the franchise agreement is required if the offer or sale of the franchise was made in Washington. The addendum is also required if the franchisee is a resident of Washington, or if the store will be located or operated in Washington. This addendum ensures compliance with the Washington Franchise Investment Protection Act.
The Washington addendum includes specific stipulations. In the event of conflicting laws, the Washington Franchise Investment Protection Act (Chapter 19.100 RCW) takes precedence. RCW 19.100.180 may also supersede the franchise agreement, particularly in areas concerning termination and renewal. Court decisions may also override the franchise agreement in these areas.
For any arbitration or mediation involving an Apricot Lane franchise purchased in Washington, the venue must be in Washington or a location mutually agreed upon. Franchisees also have the right to bring legal action in Washington for issues related to the sale of the franchise or violations of the Washington Franchise Investment Protection Act, provided litigation isn't precluded by the franchise agreement. Furthermore, any release or waiver of rights by the franchisee cannot include rights under the Washington Franchise Investment Protection Act unless it's part of a negotiated settlement with independent counsel after the agreement is in effect. Provisions that unreasonably limit the statute of limitations or rights under the Act, such as the right to a jury trial, may not be enforceable. Transfer fees are collectable only to the extent that they reflect Apricot Lane's reasonable costs in effecting a transfer.