What item of the Mr. Sandless Franchise Disclosure Document is amended regarding binding arbitration?
Mr_Sandless Franchise · 2025 FDDAnswer from 2025 FDD Document
duce the 3 year statute of limitations afforded a franchisee for bringing a claim arising under the Maryland Franchise Registration and Disclosure Law. Item 17 of the Franchise Disclosure Document and Section 24.9 of the Franchise Agreement are amended to state that any arbitration and/or litigation claims arising under the Maryland Franchise Registration and Disclosure Law must be brought within 3 years after the grant of the franchise.
-
- Item 17 of the Franchise Disclosure Document is hereby amended to state that the Franchise Agreement requires binding arbitration, the site of which is in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the costs of which are borne by the parties equally and any issues not decided by arbitration may be brought in a court of competent jurisdiction. The law of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania governs the arbitration. However, pursuant to Section 14-216(c)(25) of the Maryland Franchise Registration and Disclosure Law, a franchisee is permitted to enter into litigation with the Franchisor in the State of Maryland, regardless of the language in the Franchise Agreement.
-
Source: Item 17 — RENEWAL, TERMINATION, TRANSFER AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION (FDD pages 30–34)
What This Means (2025 FDD)
According to the 2025 Mr. Sandless Franchise Disclosure Document, Item 17 is amended regarding binding arbitration. Specifically, for franchisees in Maryland, Item 17 is amended to state that the Franchise Agreement requires binding arbitration in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, with costs shared equally between the parties. Issues not decided by arbitration may be brought in a court of competent jurisdiction, and the law of Pennsylvania governs the arbitration.
However, the FDD also notes that pursuant to Section 14-216(c)(25) of the Maryland Franchise Registration and Disclosure Law, a franchisee in Maryland is permitted to enter into litigation with Mr. Sandless in the State of Maryland, regardless of the language in the Franchise Agreement. This suggests that while the agreement may call for arbitration in Pennsylvania, Maryland franchisees have the right to litigate in their own state.
For Mr. Sandless franchisees in North Dakota, Item 17(u) of the Disclosure Document and Article 24 of the Franchise Agreement are amended to provide that arbitration shall be held at a site that is agreeable to all parties. Item 17(v) of the Disclosure Document and the provisions of Article 24 of the Franchise Agreement which require jurisdiction of courts in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania are deleted.