FranchiseVerdict
Cha Redefine logo
B61/100FDD 2026

Cha Redefine — Litigation & Risk

Food & Beverage - Full Service · FDD Items 3, 4 & 5

Back to overview

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
61 / 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
California
State whose law governs disputes — relevant if you're not based there

What drove the 61/100 rating

Risk Score Breakdown

  1. 01HIGHGoing Concern status is False — indicates potential financial instability or undisclosed restructuring at franchisor level
  2. 02MEDNet Income not disclosed in Item 19 — impossible to validate actual profitability; average revenue of $1.37M means little without expense clarity
  3. 03MINOROnly 5 units system-wide — extremely small franchise network with unknown growth trajectory; minimal scale and brand recognition
  4. 04MEDHigh investment range ($315K-$714K) paired with undisclosed net income creates unquantifiable ROI risk
  5. 05HIGHNo litigation disclosed but going concern status suggests financial strain that may precede legal issues

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.