FDD Items 3 & 4 · 2026 filing
ECHO Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham litigation history
What ECHO Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham disclosed about lawsuits, arbitrations and bankruptcy in the 2026 Franchise Disclosure Document. Item 3 lists the material legal actions a franchisor must report; Item 4 covers bankruptcy. This is the franchisor's own disclosure, not a court record, and not legal advice.
Items 3 & 4 at a glance
What the filing discloses
- Cases disclosed
- 9
- Item 3, as counted in the filing
- Largest disclosed settlement
- None stated
- Bankruptcy (Item 4)
- None
- Franchisor, parent, predecessor or officer
- Filing year
- 2026
- Disclosures cover the prior ten years
Extracted from the 2026 Franchise Disclosure Document
Item 3: litigation
No pending or resolved litigation against the franchisor itself. Multiple pending class actions against parent WHR and affiliates involving hotel price-fixing allegations (IDeaS revenue management software), misleading fee allegations in Canada, and other matters. Several resolved cases settled or dismissed.
Disclosure signals that moved the score
How this shows up in the verdict
- Going Concern status is FALSE — franchisor may lack financial stability to support franchisees
- Multiple active class action litigations (price-fixing, misleading fees, privacy violations, antitrust) expose franchisees to brand reputation and potential liability
- High capital requirement ($11.6M–$17.4M) paired with undisclosed profitability and going concern risk creates severe financial exposure
- Litigation where franchisor is plaintiff (LuxUrban breach of contract) suggests franchisor-franchisee relationship tension
The verdict grade is FranchiseVerdict's editorial assessment across SBA loan performance, unit growth, revenue and disclosure signals. It is not investment advice.
Before you weigh a lawsuit
How to read Item 3
A franchisor must disclose pending actions and any material civil action involving the franchise relationship, plus convictions or civil judgments for fraud, unfair or deceptive practices, or franchise-law violations, going back ten years. A case the franchisor brought against a franchisee counts too. Item 3 does not include every dispute: settled claims below the materiality line and matters resolved in private arbitration can be absent.
Questions worth asking current and former franchisees, using the contact list in Item 20:
- Were you, or anyone you know in the system, party to a dispute with the franchisor?
- Was it resolved by settlement, arbitration or a court, and on what terms?
- Has the number of disputes gone up or down since you signed?