B60/100FDD 2024
All States M.E.D. — Litigation & Risk
Health & Wellness - Other · FDD Items 3, 4 & 5
Lower Risk
No litigation cases disclosed in FDD Items 3 and 4.
Source: FDD Items 3–5
FDD Items 3 & 4
Litigation Metrics
Cases disclosed
0
Total from FDD Items 3 and 4
Bankruptcy (Item 4)
—
Franchisor or officer bankruptcy
Overall risk score
60 / 100
FranchiseVerdict composite
Rating
MODERATE
STRONG / MODERATE / CAUTION / AVOID
FDD Items 5, 6 & 17 — what you give up
Contract Risk Indicators
Mandatory arbitration
Required
Disputes resolved outside court — limits your legal options
Jury trial waiver
Waived
You give up the right to a jury trial
Non-compete
2 yrs
Post-termination restriction on similar businesses
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
Florida
State whose law governs disputes — relevant if you're not based there
What drove the 60/100 rating
Risk Score Breakdown
- 01MEDOnly 2 operating units with unknown growth trajectory indicates extremely limited system scale and validation data
- 02MEDNo average net income disclosed despite $832,521 average revenue — suggests franchisees may not be achieving acceptable profitability after 8% royalties + operating costs
- 03HIGHGoing Concern status is False, raising questions about franchisor financial stability and long-term viability
- 04MINORHigh franchise fee ($100,000) relative to system size creates concentration risk with minimal franchisee network for support and learning
- 05MINORMaterial gap between investment range ($188,500-$255,500) and franchise fee ($100,000) lacks transparency on what comprises remaining $88,500-$155,500
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.