COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF AND DEMAND FOR ...

NAPAA’s agent members in Florida, the agents’ chances of success for both existing andproposed franchises all in violation of the Act.129. Additionally, the heightened standards have shrunk the pool of potentialpurchasers, thereby impeding agents’ ability to sell their franchises for fair value, if at all,all in violation of the Act.130. The heightened requirements have also deprived a number of Allstateagents the opportunity to acquire additional books of business to expand their franchisesall in violation of the Act.131. Additionally, the reduced pool of potential purchasers exposes agents tothe risk that Allstate will unilaterally terminate an agent’s Agreement, leaving the agentwithout any viable opportunity to sell his or her interest in the book of business all inviolation of the Act.132. Allstate’s representations within its Exclusive Agency ResultsMeasurement and its intention to terminate agents who do not meet the “expected results”in any of three specified areas, and the resulting termination of agents for failure to meetthe “expected results” in some regions of the country, represent violations of the Act.133. The portions of the Agreement that force the agents to be responsible forthe payment of expenses incurred by the agent in performing under the Agreement, andthe new “agency remittance process,” which forces agents to assume a portion ofAllstate’s banking expenses, represent a failure on the part of Allstate to disclose theknown required total franchise investment all in violation of the Act.