factual

If there is a conflict of laws, which law prevails in Washington regarding a Dryject franchise?

Dryject Franchise · 2025 FDD

Answer from 2025 FDD Document

    1. Conflict of Laws. In the event of a conflict of laws, the provisions of the Washington Franchise Investment Protection Act, chapter 19.100 RCW will prevail.
    1. Franchisee Bill of Rights. RCW 19.100.180 may supersede provisions in the franchise agreement or related agreements concerning your relationship with the franchisor, including in the areas of termination and renewal of your franchise. There may also be court decisions that supersede the franchise agreement or related agreements concerning your relationship with the franchisor. Franchise agreement provisions, including those summarized in Item 17 of the Franchise Disclosure Document, are subject to state law.
    1. Site of Arbitration, Mediation, and/or Litigation. 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 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.
    1. General Release. A release or waiver of rights in the franchise agreement or related agreements purporting to bind the franchisee to waive compliance with any provision under the Washington Franchise Investment Protection Act or any rules or orders thereunder is void except when executed pursuant to a negotiated settlement after the agreement is in effect and where the parties are represented by independent counsel, in accordance with RCW 19.100.220(2). In addition, any such release or waiver executed in connection with a renewal or transfer of a franchise is likewise void except as provided for in RCW 19.100.220(2).

Source: Item 8 — BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP (FDD pages 68–229)

What This Means (2025 FDD)

According to Dryject's 2025 Franchise Disclosure Document, the Washington Franchise Investment Protection Act, chapter 19.100 RCW, will prevail if there is a conflict of laws. This means that if any part of the franchise agreement contradicts Washington state law regarding franchise investments, the state law will take precedence.

This protection is significant for prospective Dryject franchisees in Washington because it ensures that their rights under state law are upheld, even if the franchise agreement attempts to limit those rights. The Franchise Investment Protection Act covers various aspects of the franchise relationship, including disclosures, termination, and renewal.

Furthermore, the FDD states that RCW 19.100.180, also known as the Franchisee Bill of Rights, may supersede provisions in the franchise agreement or related agreements concerning the franchisee's relationship with Dryject, particularly in areas like termination and renewal. Court decisions may also override the franchise agreement. This reinforces the importance of understanding both the franchise agreement and the applicable state laws to ensure full protection of franchisee rights.

Additionally, any release or waiver of rights that requires a franchisee to waive compliance with the Washington Franchise Investment Protection Act is void unless it meets specific conditions, such as being part of a negotiated settlement with independent legal representation after the agreement is in effect, as per RCW 19.100.220(2). This provision prevents Dryject from compelling franchisees to unknowingly surrender their legal protections under state law.

Disclaimer: This information is extracted from the 2025 Franchise Disclosure Document and is provided for research purposes only. It does not constitute legal or financial advice. Consult with a franchise attorney before making any investment decisions.