Waves Coffee: 2016 Litigation List

Waves Coffee: 2016 Litigation List

Ever wondered who is suing who in the coffee franchise industry in Vancouver, BC, Canada?

For your convenience, we’ve put it all together for you into one convenient PDF file.

CLICK HERE TO OPEN THE 2016 WAVES COFFEE LITIGATION LIST

As of December, 2016, just click this link for a complete download of all the lawsuits filed in BC related to WAVES COFFEE, WAVES COFFEE INC,

As of December, 2016, there are 7 lawsuits filed.

Blenz Coffee: 2016 Litigation List

Blenz Coffee: 2016 Litigation List

Ever wondered who is suing who in the coffee franchise industry in Vancouver, BC, Canada?

For your convenience, we’ve put it all together for you into one convenient PDF file.

CLICK HERE TO OPEN THE 2016 BLENZ COFFEE LITIGATION LIST

As of December, 2016, just click this link for a complete download of all the lawsuits filed in BC related to BLENZ THE CANADIAN COFFEE COMPANY LTD, BLENZ COFFEE LTD, BLENZ COFFEE,

As of December, 2016, there are 49 lawsuits filed.

 

Franchisepro.ca picks up on Important Franchise Legislation article in Reputable Magazine

Franchisepro.ca picks up on Important Franchise Legislation article in Reputable Magazine

Wayne Taylor plaintiff in a lawsuit against Blenz Coffee in Vancouver, was interviewed in a reputable national magazine called Food Service and Hospitality.

Read about it here on Wayne’s Franchisepro.ca

food-service-cover

Read about it here

Blenz Coffee Franchise Poster Child Example of Need for BC Franchise Legislation

BIV_BLENZ

In this most recent Business in Vancouver article on the topic of the need for franchise legislation in BC, Wayne Taylor briefly describes his personal experience dealing with Blenz Coffee (Blenz the Canadian Coffee Company Ltd) and just some of the claims he and two other former Franchisees have against the Vancouver franchise and its directors Sarah Kate Moen, Geoffrey Hair and Brian Noble.

Blenz Coffee and many other local Franchisors have essentially been able to do whatever they like while they hide behind their weighty franchise agreements and the shield of their pricey lawyers.

Until now.

Franchisees around BC have had enough and have figured out that the scales have not only been unbalanced but completely lop-sided in their Franchisor’s favour.

Typically what will occur is the Franchisee will enter into a binding legal agreement with the Franchisor and by the time he or she figures out that their investment is built on sand (or worse) they have no money left to fight the imbalance in court because government has been conveniently avoiding getting involved.

The result? Ruined marriages, unnecessary bankruptcies, lost homes, and serious cases of depression around our beautiful cities.

For some Franchisees there may be time to recover their financial house before retirement but for many others the clock has run out by the time the battle begins.

The government of BC needs to at least make a way for the small guy to have a fighting chance against companies that display sociopath and bully-like, in the same way that they have in other provinces.

It’s time to level the playing field.

 

British Columbia Law Institute (BCLI) Releases Report on a Franchise Act in British Columbia

Members of the VCSFA had an opportunity to meet with Greg Blue of the British Columbia Law Institute (BCLI) approximately one year ago where we had the chance to hear more about the plans for a proposed Franchise Act for BC.  We created this post shortly after this meeting.

At this point, it was in the ‘consultation phase’ where feedback was being gathered by stakeholders in the franchise industry.  To read the original document, you can click this link and download it directly or go to the Franchise Act Project page at the BCLI.

We are pleased to announce that the conclusions from the consultation phase have now been compiled into this document: Report on a Franchise Act for British Columbia which can also be viewed/downloaded from the BCLI project page above.

In the near future, we will write a report with our feedback on the report.

The VCSFA would like to extend our most sincere thanks to Greg Blue and all the others who contributed to this worthwhile project as it has already contributed to the exposure of the oftentimes questionable nature of the Franchise-Franchisor relationship in general, but especially in BC, and will most certainly help any potential buyer (who does their due diligence) avoid some of the common pitfalls prevalent in the industry,

 

 

Why Quiznos is Going Bankrupt and What You Can Learn From It

Franchising is set on a pedestal in the minds of business minded people and customers alike as a dream model – a goal to reach as it were.  For some people, to franchise your business means you are validated by the business world.  To open hundreds of stores means you are awesome.  To open thousands?  Now you’re a rock star, baby.  But wait!  While your business groupies marvelled at your copying-and-pasting skills, your lovely, innocent, country bumpkin girlfriend who was always there for you got neglected on the way to your stardom.  That’s quite sad.

Some people believe that franchises are started by directors with abusive and even predatory business goals but most believe they start out innocently but are then corrupted by the sudden infusion of cash in their banks created by their army of burger flipping, latte steaming, foot-long wrapping worker bees.

You choose what you believe.

The Franchisees of Quiznos in the USA may now have to figure out how to walk on their own two feet while proceedings for the funeral of their corporate franchise mother ship get underway.  Will their Landlords extend expiring lease renewals now that their never-failing rent guarantor has failed?  Will the owners be able to sell their stores and recuperate the hundreds of thousands they spent to buy the business name and systems?  Will this bankruptcy ultimately mean the doom of Quiznos in Canada?  What buyer would purchase a franchise that may no longer be a franchise?  How much goodwill value is left in the brand?

This article in the Business in Vancouver publication summarizes the situation at Quiznos best as ‘…struggling with high debt, angry Franchisees, and increasing competition.”  Many of the angry Franchisees apparently sued the head office for failing to support them and for overcharging them for supplies.  Quiznos settled out of court for $95 million.  And just a few years later – good bye, sugar pie.

But it makes sense.  When a lawsuit is filed against a Franchisor, its roots didn’t magically grow like Jack’s beanstalk, especially if the lawsuit involves more than one Franchisee as it did in this case.  The Franchisees had to have been angry enough to fight against their own ‘fear of the Franchisor’ and start meeting privately to come up with a plan – a sort of revolution.  Money was taken from them unfairly so they went to get it back.  They paid for support that they didn’t get so they went for a court imposed refund – and they got it.  It would be interesting to ask the Franchisees who chose not to fight how they feel about their decision now.

One of the most interesting quotes from the BIV article on the topic is the following:

All except seven of its nearly 2,100 restaurants are independently owned and operated by franchisees and will not be affected by the bankruptcy, the company said in a statement.

How they will not be affected by the bankruptcy is nothing short of a very large mystery.  To remove a stigma of this size from a brand is a formidable task – regardless of where the bankruptcy is filed.  Think about Jack in the Box.  Stigmas are sticky.

So what can we learn from the woes that are sweeping over Quiznos?  Here are a few points to consider:

  • If Quiznos was focused on helping the Franchisees make money instead of finding ways to take it from them, none of this would have happened.  They would have had Ambassadors of the Brand instead of Assassins of the Brand.  Win + win = win  (Note: this formula still works in 2014)
  • If there are a bunch of Franchisees going after the Franchisor, you should probably be concerned.  Deeply concerned.
  •  ‘Too big to fall’ Franchises don’t exist (although McDonald’s might admittedly be trickier to topple).  The bigger they are the harder they fall – eventually.

Blenz Ranked as Lawsuit of the Week by Business in Vancouver (BIV)

Blenz Ranked as Lawsuit of the Week by Business in Vancouver (BIV)

Well respected and well read local business publication Business in Vancouver not only picked up on the court filing made by three former Blenz Franchisees against its former Franchisor, but ranked it as their ‘Lawsuit of the Week’ – and rightfully so.  Blenz has enjoyed for many years a natural windfall of sales produced by loyal customers who feel warm and fuzzy about the ‘local Canadian brand’. No doubt the very presence of this filing surprised the author.

Although the BIV article covers fairly well the claims of hindered store sales and lease renewal problems common to the three plaintiffs, a $6.00 download of the very large filing reveals that it didn’t even touch upon one of the most devastating claims against the Franchisor – Kormi’s doomed, mandatory, and very expensive renovation and surrounding events.  This part of the claim alone covers pages and pages and, if these claims are proven in a court of law and picked up by local media (ie. Steele on your Side), they will certainly have the potential to evaporate a good percentage of the ‘warm & fuzzy’ mentioned above.

767_seymour_from_front_left

It is also noteworthy that there was no mention of the first court filing of 2014 against Blenz by Elizabeth Jacobo.  Reports from those who have read this filing indicate that it is on par or even more potentially devastating to the Vancouver brand than the claims found within the Taylor, Sahdra, Kormi suit.

Read our March 14th report of the growing number of lawsuits Blenz is facing in 2014.

Check back regularly for updates on this and other similar stories.

 

 

Sue-Go Juice: Did Jugo Juice Juice their Franchisees?

It looks like Jugo Juice is becoming ‘sue-go juice‘.

I had been running my own coffee franchise for nearly two years when I took my first Canada Line trip.  The very first thing I noticed was what seemed like a Jugo Juice at almost every location.  The first thought that came to my mind was ‘Those rascals!’ (of course using much more colour terminology). My only surprise is that there are not more names on the plaintiff list.

As discussed in other VCSFA articles, the Franchisor is in a clear position of power and has the advantage of being the creator of some very hand-crafted – and arguably one-sided – legal documents, namely the lease, the sublease (if applicable) and the Franchise Agreement.  The profile of Franchisee that seems to be preferred by Franchisors is typically, from my experience,  someone not steeped in either franchising, or small business.  They are often accountants, teachers, retail managers, and such, but more commonly – again from my experience – immigrants who may not quite have the language skills to battle on their own should such a need arise.  The point here is that not one of Franchisees I have met over the last few years in the food and beverage business – especially in the Vancouver coffee business – came with the expertise required to make such a huge financial and time investment.  As a result, I have seen devastated marriages and families as the money is bled out of their lives.

The worst part is that British Columbia doesn’t have *any* franchise legislation to help abused Franchisees. In their often nearly bankrupt condition – the time when they most need a lawyer’s help – they are left to fend for themselves.  As in this Jugo Juice case, I’m sure that we will see that a mandatory disclosure document may have saved these Franchisees the need to file this lawsuit.

One will often come across quotes from experts in law and business saying things like, “It’s buyer beware” or, “One has to check the legal documents carefully”.  That’s very easy for someone to say who has no experience in business or business law.  To reiterate, most prospective Franchisees are not coming from a position of being savvy in business – and the Franchisors know that.

Every Franchisee I have spoken to has one thing in common – they trusted the name and the brand and their experience.  They trusted that the Franchisor would not knowingly put them (or allow them) into a bad deal.  The trust that potential buyers put in the brand is so strong that I have witnessed sound-minded, intelligent people sign documents that are so bad they would give you cramps.  I know one gentleman whose position is, “Well, they signed it.”  I disagree with this position.  If it were an independent cafe or restaurant and the people who created the documents were on the same playing field in experience, then I would steadfastly agree.  However, the very nature of a Franchise implies ‘trust’ and ‘success’ and they accomplish this image largely because of the sheer number of locations.  I will never forget a quote from my good friend.  He had just explained how he had received accounting and legal advice *not* to purchase his franchise coffee shop.  The outcome of his decision to purchase was the most devastating series of events I have ever witnessed.  After explaining his situation to someone the person asked ‘Well, why in the world did you purchase, then?”  His response?  I’ll never forget it.  It’s engraved in my mind forever:

I thought surely sixty locations couldn’t all be wrong.

They were wrong, though.  They all signed a similarly one-sided document and were reaping the reward of their folly.  Just like me.

Did Jugo Juice sincerely think – with all their experience in the retail beverage business – that these stores would succeed buried deep within the Canada Line?  Who has time, while rushing to a train, to have a nice, blended drink?  And, let’s just say you do have just enough time to grab a drink and get on the train, it says right here in the Translink Etiquette Guide (item #4) that you should ‘refrain from eating and drinking on the train’. So stopping to get one of these drinks will set you up to be a bad guy in the eyes of your co-commuters.  To me, this sounds like a business disaster waiting to happen. Just to make sure it wasn’t my personal experience and bias clouding my judgement, I started surveying my own customers to find out when was the last time they stopped and bought a nice drink at a transit station and if they would do so in the future.  The results of the mini survey were dismal: they all agreed that they would prefer to go a little further *above ground* and buy their speciality beverage.

Here’s what Jugo Juice gained out of the last few years since their 2010 Canada Line Expansion:

  • Incredible brand awareness: countless hundreds of thousands of people walked by (the key is *walked by*) those Jugo Juice logos
  • Increased probability of selling new stores: “Mr. Prospective Buyer, we are a big, well-known brand. You are buying into a big chain with a winning formula.  Look at the proof – we have stores in most Canada Line stations.”
  • Royalty payments: Did Jugo Juice offer ‘royalty relief’ during their time of suffering or was the full contractual amount continually (and probably automatically) taken from their bank accounts?  This will come to light, I’m sure.

What did the Franchisees – who likely invested all of their life-savings in these businesses – get out of the deal?  A court date?

It will be most interesting to follow this lawsuit and perhaps it will pave the way to better Franchisee-Franchisor relations in BC and ultimately the quick establishment of franchise legislation in our beautiful province.