Source: http://www.unhappyfranchisee.com/category/franchisor/jonathan-fortman-franchisor/
Timestamp: 2013-05-20 19:14:53
Document Index: 357743284

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 3', 'arts 1', 'art 3', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'art 2', 'art 2', 'art 2', 'art 2']

Jonathan Fortman Archives - Unhappy Franchisee : Unhappy Franchisee
JONATHAN FORTMAN: Corporate Bullying Part 3
Attorney Jonathan Fortman contributed this third part of a three-part series on the unsuccessful corporate bullying tactics of Beautiful Brands International (BBI) against UnhappyFranchisee.Com publisher Sean Kelly.
You can read the Parts 1 & 2 here:
BEAUTIFUL BRANDS: Standing Up to Corporate Bullies
By Jonathan Fortman April 28, 2013
Welcome to Part 3 of my blog series about corporate bullies.
I did not intend on making this into a series. Ongoing events in the underlying case have just naturally led me along the path. In this finale, I’ll talk about how the bully, after being challenged in the legal system, will then revert back to an adolescent playground bully thereby completing the circle.
I have three children. The youngest is my 10 year-old son. He thinks the old man can do no wrong. Everything I say is right and he looks up to me. It’s a very special time in the life of a parent.
My middle child is my 14 year-old daughter. She’s at that stage in life where she thinks she’s always right and her parents are dorks who don’t know anything. Don’t get me wrong, I think she’s a great kid. However, I think our Creator makes us all go through that stage so that we can undergo a few lessons in the school of hard knocks.
My third child is my stepson who will turn 21 in a few weeks. He has matured to the point where he has gone through a few of life’s lessons and is seeing that the old man knows what he’s talking about, at least some of the time. I must admit those moments are very gratifying. In the case I spoke about in Part 1 of this series, I made certain statements concerning the effect of standing up to a bully. As that case has unfolded, everything I said in Part 1 has proven to be true. The old man was right.
Consider yourselves all my children coming of age as I explain to you exactly why the old man was right.
In BEAUTIFUL BRANDS: Standing Up to Corporate Bullies, I talked about the case of Beautiful Brands International (“BBI”) v. John Doe. I told you that if you stand up to a bully, 99% of the time the bully will back down. In the BBI case, my client, Sean Kelly, stood up to that bully. At the time Part 1 was published, we had no idea if the bully would be among the 99% who back down or the 1% who keep coming because they’re too stupid to realize they’ve lost their power.
In JONATHAN FORTMAN: Corporate Bullying Part 2 of the series, I talked about the bully blinking first.
Basically, the bully responded by publicly crying about how it was so mistreated and stating that its victim was really the bully. When Part 2 was published, the case against John Doe was still pending. We disclosed Sean Kelly’s identity and basically dared the bully to replace Sean Kelly for “John Doe.” Since part 2 was published, the case against “John Doe” has been dismissed. There was no substitution of Sean Kelly for Mr. Doe. The bully has backed completely down.
In this finale of the series, I wanted to discuss the way in which these disputes can turn full circle from corporate bullying through perverted use of the courts to simple adolescent playground antics. BBI was founded by a man named David Rutkauskas. I don’t know Mr. Rutkauskas. However, reviewing his twitter account, blog, and the glowing PR materials his company throws out, I get the distinct impression that Mr. Rutkauskas thinks very highly of himself. After all, what kind of business executive sends out a tweet showing off his $100,000 Mercedes?
There’s nothing wrong with thinking highly of yourself or flaunting your material possessions if you are legitimate. The problem is that if your business is based solely on fluff and no real substance, it will eventually bring you down. You might as well put a big, huge red target on yourself.
I contrast Mr. Rutkauskas’ behavior with that of Warren Buffett and Sam Walton, two of the most successful people in history. By all accounts, both men came from humble beginnings, worked hard, and became giants in the business world. However, neither of them ever flaunted their wealth. They stayed true to their core values. Those successful in business can do that because they know that their success never depended on fluff. Rather, their success was directly tied to their work ethic. Their values drive them, not their material possessions or the need for self-promotion.
If there’s any doubt about the difference between Mr. Rutkauskas and the real business tycoons, one need only look at several tweets Mr. Rutkauskas sent after his business practices were questioned. After the case was filed against John Doe, Mr Rutkauskas made a series of tweets directed to Sean Kelly that were, to put it mildly, crude and offensive. This is a family-oriented blog so I won’t set out the contents of the tweets. Interestingly, the day after the tweets were made, Mr. Rutkauskas removed them from his twitter account. However, I had screen shots of the tweets and made sure to include those in my letter to the BBI attorney when I disclosed Sean Kelly’s identity.
(Here’s a side-lesson, my children, never tweet while under the influence of a mood-altering substance).
I thought that dismissal of the case against Mr. Doe would be the end of this saga.
Yesterday, Mr. Rutkauskas tweeted, and I quote: ”hey there Sean Kelly, why don’t u travel to Tulsa and say all this Bull S@*t to my face?”
The first thing I need to point out to Mr. Rutkauskas is that “bulls@*t” is a single word. If you’re going to act tough in a tweet, try to be grammatically correct. This tweet is comical. It shows that the old man was more right than he even knew.
The corporate bully has now reverted to middle school tactics of daring its victim to a fight on the playground.
We have come full circle to the days of our youth. Would Warren Buffett or Sam Walton had sent such a tweet had Twitter been around during their primes? Obviously not. In my opinion, Mr. Rutkauskas has now shown himself to be nothing more than an egotistical, self-absorbed peddler of fish oil.
As my daughter would say, he now has no relevance.
// ]]>TAGS: Jonathan Fortman, Attorney Jonathan Fortman, Jon Fortman, Sean Kelly, UnhappyFranchisee.Com, Beautiful Brands, BBI, David Rutkauskas, corporate bullying, bullying, franchise bullying
Written by ADMIN · Filed Under ALL POSTS, BEAUTIFUL BRANDS (BBI), FRANCHISE BULLYING, Jonathan Fortman JONATHAN FORTMAN: Corporate Bullying Part 2
Written by ADMIN · Filed Under ALL POSTS, BEAUTIFUL BRANDS (BBI), FRANCHISE BULLYING, Jonathan Fortman FRANCHISE DUE DILIGENCE is More Critical Than Ever (Attorney Jon Fortman)
Franchise due diligence, thorough franchise research and consultation with qualified professionals before buying a franchise is more critical than ever, according to attorney Jon Fortman.
Fortman, of St. Louis-based Fortman Law, is an attorney who represents franchisees who believe they’ve been defrauded or treated unfairly by franchisors.
While the legal agreements governing the franchise relationship have always been undisputedly one-sided in favor of the franchisor, Fortman reports that the playing field is less level than ever before… and getting worse.
In a recent blog post, Fortman writes:
“…franchisers are tightening the reins on the franchisees while making sure the franchise agreement is written in such a way that they really have no obligation beyond letting the franchisee use the marks and providing some minimal training.
“For instance, five years ago a franchise agreement may have said the franchisor SHALL provide training on a quarterly basis. Now, the same agreement will say that the franchisor MAY, in its absolute discretion, provide training on a quarterly basis.
I am amazed at the number of franchisees who signed their agreements and never saw an attorney… The contract may be a ten-year term. That’s a long time if you rush into something without proper investigation. – Attorney Jon Fortman
Writes Fortman: “There are more terminations and the ability of many franchisees to seek a remedy from the franchisor has been limited by arbitration provisions and the inability to pay for an attorney to fight the battle. I have only been doing these types of cases for about five years. I can see that during that time the relationship between franchisor and franchisee seems to be more strained and there is a lot of caution and suspicion when they interact. It has led to communication issues which is never good.
“Some [franchisors] blame the franchisees, and the attorneys representing them, because they believe franchisees don’t take responsibility for their success and are quick to blame the franchisor. There are some franchisees who do not get proper advice and do not fully understand the relationship between the parties.
“I am amazed at the number of franchisees who signed their agreements and never saw an attorney. They will pay significant amounts of money to buy a franchise that is based on a legal contract. The contract may be a ten-year term. That’s a long time if you rush into something without proper investigation.”
It is critical for prospective franchise owners to do their own thorough due diligence and research prior to committing to any franchise or business opportunity.
Just reading franchise publications supported by franchisor advertising or the franchisor’s list of testimonials and awards is not due diligence. Prospective franchisees must dig in with a skeptical and thorough approach in order to find out the truth about a given franchise opportunity or company. And they must spend a few bucks (that’s right, spend a few bucks) on getting advice from experienced franchise professionals paid to give honest, frank advice.
Writes Fortman:
“My advice to those of you considering the purchase of a franchise still remains the same. You must do your own investigation. It is even more important these days. Call every franchise owner listed in the disclosure document. That includes the open and closed locations.
The franchisor has a vested interest in seeing you buy into the system. Regardless of what the salesman says, their interest and your interest in the transaction are not the same. – Attorney Jon Fortman
“If it is a newer system, you must consider that there may not have been enough time for any flaws in the system to appear.
“The Internet has several sites that discuss franchising. I review the site www.unhappyfranchisee.com every day. That type of site lets you see what can happen if you don’t protect yourself. It also gives you examples of the types of things to look out for when making your decision.
“You also must speak to an accountant and an attorney, preferably ones who are familiar with franchising. They can spot areas of concern and get clarification for you from the franchisor….
“The franchisor has a vested interest in seeing you buy into the system. Regardless of what the salesman says, their interest and your interest in the transaction are not the same. A healthy dose of skepticism in any of these transactions can help you stay alert and spot problems before you sink your money into the franchise.”
Benjamin Franklin said “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.”
In franchising, a few thousand dollars and thorough due diligence can be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars and years of either prosperity – or misery.
The pages of UnhappyFranchisee.com are filled with the stories of those who wish they had done their homework more diligently before they took the leap.
Take our advice and investigate thoroughly before investing.
Written by ADMIN · Filed Under ALL POSTS, Buying a Franchise, Jonathan Fortman WELCOME TO UNHAPPYFRANCHISEE.COM
7-Eleven Franchise Complaints (40)
LIBERTY TAX SERVICE Franchise Complaints (2399)
NCHILLBILLY: @ txfunfoodz — take your claim to your...