Why is it always the franchisees fault when they go out of business?

It has been over two years since we went out of business?  There is still many questions in my mind.  Why does the franchisors get away with taking peoples life's savings, house or houses and retirement?

It does not seem logical that many rogue symstems can get away with taking advantage of decent people.  Zors salesmen disclose things that are verified on the enternet.  They tell you that the most a franchise would cost is what is disclosed in the FDD.  Then when it is twice as much they say,  "We really don't know the average cost."  What happens next is the zee is thrown into a desperate situation.  Doesn't it seem logical that they would know how much the average start up cost would be?  Why do they get away with misrepresentation?  

The lawyers here would say it is because of the wording on the FDD.  The words could and may are very harmful when one signs a contract.  

What amazes me is many franchisors get away with false advertising, and verbally misrepresenting material facts because it is not in writing. Then you have to put up with people telling you , "You made a bad business decision." "You were stupid you did not do your due diligence."  How many zees out there loathe those statements?  They make their money up front and that is how it is done with rogue zors.  

They puposely write a disclosure document that relieves them of all responsibility.  They are given a free ride to lie, steal and cheat people of everything they work for, because it is cleaveraly planned out.  

I do believe extensive due diligence is manitory.  I do not see the logic when a whole franchise system looses and the franchisor walks away like they didn't do anything wrong in the eyes of the law.  I do believe all the disclosures that is made verbally needs to be in writing.  The truth is when a franchisor is not willing to put all their verbal disclosures in writing, (even when it is in their advertising.,) they shouldn't get away with misrepresentation and fleecing their victims.

well duh...

"They puposely write a disclosure document that relieves them of all responsibility."

If this surprises or shocks you, you are too naive to own a business.

on March 6th, 2010

I was naive


Not anymore.  I do not belive you are a zee.  If you are I believe you are in with corporate.  Until we know what franchise 

you have, than I will believe you are on the up and up. 

You  seem to enjoy putting successful people down, who got to the point where they could invest.  You are a total arse in my book.

on March 7th, 2010

Denial is a powerful thing. Keep it up

Granville is an expert on here. He speaks for people who believe in personal responsibility.

Posted by Tom G on January 5th, 2011

I guess the zor's salesmen have a free ride to misrepresent

people and puff material facts.  The people selling franchises have no responsibility to be honest, open or ethical.  Is that right Tom?

on January 5th, 2011

puff material facts

Puffery generally isn't actionable.  OTOH if you relied on their material misrepresentation, then sue them.  But you probably signed a document saying you didn't rely on anything outside the FDD.  Doesn't your signature on a contract mean anything?  If you signed a written contract based on an oral representation, you have (or had) a substantial legal problem.  The naive at least need to be properly advised by counsel.

You got into a bad deal, you lost your shirt, and now you're an expert.  We've been grinding it out every day for 15 years.  You've been complaining for what, 3 or 4?

on January 6th, 2011

You didn't know what a UFOC was on and Anytime VS Snap thread

You callled it a Universal Offering Circular. That's the best you could do after 3000 preparing for your mediation, which you realized was too expensive...AFTER 3000 hours!  Barbara Jorgensen You are a joke. These attorneys here think you are a joke, but they stroke your ego because you do their dirty, menial work.

Posted by Tom G on January 9th, 2011