In the arbitration process for Big O Tires, is a reasoned opinion required from the arbitrator(s)?
Big_O_Tires Franchise · 2025 FDDAnswer from 2025 FDD Document
29.02 Arbitration. Except for actions related to or based on the Marks or the copyrights in the Materials or to enforce the provisions of Article 20 of this Agreement, which Big O, may bring in a court of competent jurisdiction, all Claims will be submitted for binding arbitration on demand of either party to either the Judicial Arbiter Group or the AAA, as selected by the party submitting the demand. Notwithstanding the language above, if the action is based on a separate agreement or instrument between Franchisee and Big O, such as a promissory note or lease, the dispute resolution procedure in that agreement or instrument will control rather than this Section 29.02; provided, that, at Big O's sole option, any claim of Big O against Franchisee based on a promissory note executed by Franchisee in favor of Big O may be brought in arbitration in conjunction with a dispute between the parties that is subject to arbitration under this Section, regardless of any provisions to the contrary contained in the promissory note. Arbitration proceedings will be conducted in Denver, Colorado and will be heard by one arbitrator in accordance with the then current rules of AAA that apply to commercial arbitration. The decision as to whether a claim is subject to mandatory arbitration shall be made by an arbitrator, not a court, except that the decision whether the arbitration may proceed as a class action shall be made by the court. The arbitration proceeding and all other hearings shall be conducted in English only, although Franchisee shall have the right, at Franchisee's option and sole expense, to have a translator present at the proceeding or other hearings. The expense of a translator shall not be considered a cost or expense related to an action pursuant to Section 29.07(b) of this Agreement. The parties further agree that, in connection with any such arbitration proceeding, each will file any compulsory counterclaim, as defined by Rule 13 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, within 30 days after the date of the filing of the claim to which it relates. Any party to an arbitration proceeding may apply to the arbitrator for reasonable discovery from the other. In this Agreement "reasonable discovery"
Source: Item 23 — RECEIPTS (FDD pages 102–535)
What This Means (2025 FDD)
According to the 2025 FDD, the Big O Tires franchise agreement does not specify whether a reasoned opinion is required from the arbitrator(s) in the arbitration process. The document outlines the arbitration process, stating that all claims, except for actions related to the Marks or copyrights in the Materials or to enforce Article 20, will be submitted for binding arbitration. The arbitration will occur either through the Judicial Arbiter Group or the American Arbitration Association (AAA), selected by the party submitting the demand. The proceedings will take place in Denver, Colorado, before a single arbitrator, following the then-current rules of the AAA that apply to commercial arbitration.
While the FDD specifies the location, arbitrator selection, and applicable rules for arbitration, it does not explicitly state whether the arbitrator is required to provide a reasoned opinion to support their decision. The absence of this requirement could mean that the arbitrator's decision may be brief and without detailed explanation, which could impact a franchisee's understanding of the outcome and their ability to appeal or challenge the decision.
Prospective Big O Tires franchisees should consider the implications of this lack of clarity regarding a reasoned opinion. Without a detailed explanation from the arbitrator, it may be more difficult to assess the fairness and accuracy of the decision. It would be prudent for potential franchisees to seek clarification from Big O Tires regarding whether a reasoned opinion is typically provided or can be requested in arbitration proceedings to ensure greater transparency and accountability in the dispute resolution process.