In Washington, what is the effect of RCW 19.100.180 on provisions in the Dryject franchise agreement?
Dryject Franchise · 2025 FDDAnswer from 2025 FDD Document
r of the franchise is a resident of Washington; and/or (c) the franchised business that is the subject of the sale is to be located or operated, wholly or partly, in Washington.
-
- 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.
-
- 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.
-
- 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.
Source: Item 8 — BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP (FDD pages 68–229)
What This Means (2025 FDD)
According to the 2025 Dryject FDD, 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. This includes areas such as termination and renewal of the franchise. Additionally, court decisions may also supersede the franchise agreement or related agreements regarding the franchisee's relationship with the franchisor. Franchise agreement provisions, including those summarized in Item 17 of the Franchise Disclosure Document, are subject to state law. This means that certain terms in the franchise agreement might not be enforceable if they conflict with Washington state law.
Specifically, any provision in the Dryject franchise agreement or related agreements that prohibits a franchisee from communicating with or complaining to regulators is inconsistent with the express instructions in the Franchise Disclosure Document and is unlawful under RCW 19.100.180(2)(h). This ensures that franchisees can freely communicate with regulatory bodies without fear of reprisal from the franchisor.
Furthermore, the FDD states that Dryject is prohibited 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. This protects the franchisee's ability to hire employees from within the Dryject network.