Skip to main content
FranchiseVerdict
Motel 6 logo
AStrongest tier85/100FDD 2026

Motel 6: Litigation & Risk

Lodging · FDD Items 3, 4 & 5

Back to overview

Moderate: Review

5 cases disclosed in FDD Items 3 and 4.

Source: FDD Items 3–5

FDD Items 3 & 4

Litigation Metrics

Cases disclosed
5
Total from FDD Items 3 and 4
Bankruptcy (Item 4)
None
Franchisor or officer bankruptcy
Verdict score
85 / 100
FranchiseVerdict composite · higher is better
Rating
A
A / B / C / D / F verdict grade

7(a) FOIA data · FY2020–present

SBA Loan Performance

Aggregated from public SBA 7(a) loan disclosures. Charge-off rate is the share of loans that were charged off or settled for less than the full balance.

Total 7(a) loans
615
Government-backed loans issued
Charge-off rate
4.6%
vs 16% franchise average
5-yr charge-off rate
0.0%
Defaults
14 loans
Loans charged off or defaulted
Total loan volume
$1.3B
Avg loan size
$2.1M
Participating lenders
136

FDD Items 5, 6 & 17: What You Give Up

Contract Risk Indicators

Mandatory arbitration
Not required
You retain the right to sue in court
Jury trial waiver
Waived
You give up the right to a jury trial
Franchisor can compete
Yes
Franchisor can open competing locations in or near your territory
Right of first refusal
Yes
Franchisor can match any purchase offer when you try to sell
Governing law
TX
State whose law governs disputes. Relevant if you're not based there

Extracted from FDD Item 3

Litigation Detail

1 pending franchisee suit (MS & Sons, CA federal court); 1 prior franchisee suit settled (Park Property Management, UT); 1 prior class action (MALDEF/Arizona ICE guest data, $10M settlement); 1 government action (Washington State ICE guest data, $12M settlement); 1 collection action against former franchisee (Aesha LLC, TX 2024)

What drove the 85/100 verdict

Risk Score Breakdown

  1. 01MINORDeclining unit count (-0.9% YoY) signals shrinking franchise system despite 1,195 locations
  2. 02MEDNo disclosed average revenue or net income (Item 19) prevents financial performance validation and suggests weak or inconsistent unit economics
  3. 03HIGHMultiple active litigation cases including franchise termination disputes, data privacy class actions, and franchisor collection actions indicate systemic operational and legal friction
  4. 04HIGHData privacy litigation (Jane V. class action, Washington State action) over guest information disclosure to immigration authorities creates reputational and operational liability risk
  5. 05MINORFranchisor initiating collection actions against franchisees (G6 Hospitality vs. Aesha LLC) suggests cash flow stress among operators
  6. 06MED20-year term length is lengthy for a declining brand with limited financial transparency
  7. 07MEDHigh investment ceiling ($8.2M) with 5% royalty on undisclosed revenues creates uncertainty on ROI calculations

Severity inferred from FDD text. Not a regulatory or legal classification

Litigation data from FDD Items 3, 4, and 5. SBA data from public 7(a) FOIA records (FY2020–present). Not legal advice. Consult a franchise attorney before signing any franchise agreement.