D75/100FDD 2026
Bobaebanjum — Litigation & Risk
Food & Beverage - Full Service · 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
75 / 100
FranchiseVerdict composite
Rating
CAUTION
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
California
State whose law governs disputes — relevant if you're not based there
What drove the 75/100 rating
Risk Score Breakdown
- 01HIGHGoing Concern issue — franchisor may face financial viability problems
- 02MINOROnly 1 unit in system — no demonstrated scalability or multi-unit validation
- 03MINORNo average revenue or net income disclosure — impossible to assess ROI on $337k-$604.5k investment
- 04MINORHigh initial investment ($337k-$604.5k) with unproven unit economics and no Item 19 financial data
- 05MINORSingle unit suggests franchise is pre-revenue or post-failure recovery — extreme business model risk
- 06MINOR5-year term is relatively short for recouping investment in food/beverage sector
- 07MEDNo disclosed unit growth trajectory — suggests stagnation or recent launches
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.