For Kidokinetics franchises in Indiana, does the Franchise Agreement contain any provisions that limit litigation for breach of the agreement?
Kidokinetics Franchise · 2024 FDDAnswer from 2024 FDD Document
Despite anything to the contrary in the Franchise Agreement, the following provisions will supersede and apply to all Franchises offered and sold in the State of Indiana:
-
- The following provision will be added to the Franchise Agreement:
No Limitation on Litigation. Despite the foregoing provisions of this Agreement, any provision in the Agreement which limits in any manner whatsoever litigation brought for
breach of the Agreement will be void to the extent that any such contractual provision violates the Indiana Deceptive Franchise Practices Law.
Source: Item 23 — RECEIPT (FDD pages 59–205)
What This Means (2024 FDD)
According to Kidokinetics's 2024 Franchise Disclosure Document, for franchises offered and sold in Indiana, any provision in the Franchise Agreement that limits litigation for breach of the agreement will be void if it violates the Indiana Deceptive Franchise Practices Law. This means that while the standard Kidokinetics agreement might contain clauses that restrict the franchisee's ability to sue for breaches, these clauses are superseded by Indiana law to protect the franchisee's rights.
This modification ensures that Kidokinetics franchisees in Indiana are not unfairly restricted from pursuing legal action against the franchisor if they believe the agreement has been breached. The Indiana Deceptive Franchise Practices Law aims to protect franchisees from overreaching or deceptive practices by franchisors, and this provision reinforces that protection by nullifying any contractual attempts to limit litigation rights in a way that conflicts with the law.
For a prospective Kidokinetics franchisee in Indiana, this is a beneficial provision. It provides an added layer of security, ensuring that they have the legal recourse necessary to address any breaches of the Franchise Agreement by Kidokinetics, without being hampered by restrictive clauses that might otherwise be present. This aligns with common franchise regulations in many states that seek to balance the power dynamic between franchisors and franchisees, preventing franchisors from imposing unduly restrictive terms.