What specific law must be violated for a Sonesta Simply Suites franchisee in Washington to bring an action?
Sonesta_Simply_Suites Franchise · 2025 FDDAnswer from 2025 FDD Document
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.
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).
Provisions contained in the franchise agreement or related agreements that unreasonably restrict or limit the statute of limitations period for claims under the Washington Franchise Investment Protection Act, or rights or remedies under the Act such as a right to a jury trial, may not be enforceable.
Source: Item 23 — RECEIPTS (FDD pages 80–246)
What This Means (2025 FDD)
According to the 2025 Sonesta Simply Suites FDD, a franchisee in Washington may bring an action or proceeding if there is a violation of the Washington Franchise Investment Protection Act. Additionally, such action can arise out of or in connection with the sale of franchises. This means Sonesta Simply Suites franchisees in Washington have legal recourse if the franchisor violates this specific state law in the course of selling the franchise or in other related dealings.
This protection is further reinforced by the disclosure that any release or waiver of rights that requires a franchisee to waive compliance with any provision under the Washington Franchise Investment Protection Act is void. The only exception is if the release is executed pursuant to a negotiated settlement after the franchise agreement is in effect, and both parties are represented by independent counsel, in accordance with RCW 19.100.220(2). This ensures that franchisees cannot be forced to unknowingly give up their rights under the Act.
Moreover, any provisions in the franchise agreement or related agreements that unreasonably restrict or limit the statute of limitations period for claims under the Washington Franchise Investment Protection Act, or rights or remedies under the Act such as a right to a jury trial, may not be enforceable. This safeguards the franchisee's ability to pursue legal claims within a reasonable timeframe and with full access to legal remedies.