FranchiseVerdict
Circle K logo
A40/100FDD 2024

Circle K — Litigation & Risk

Retail · FDD Items 3, 4 & 5

Back to overview

Moderate — Review

3 cases disclosed in FDD Items 3 and 4.

Source: FDD Items 3–5

FDD Items 3 & 4

Litigation Metrics

Cases disclosed
3
Total from FDD Items 3 and 4
Bankruptcy (Item 4)
—
Franchisor or officer bankruptcy
Overall risk score
40 / 100
FranchiseVerdict composite
Rating
STRONG
STRONG / MODERATE / CAUTION / AVOID

7(a) FOIA data · FY2020–present

SBA Loan Performance

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

Total 7(a) loans
45
Government-backed loans issued
Default rate
8.3%
vs <3% typical · system-wide
5-yr default rate
—
Defaults
3 loans
Loans charged off or defaulted
Total loan volume
$55.6M
Avg loan size
$1.2M
Participating lenders
27

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
10 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
Arizona
State whose law governs disputes — relevant if you're not based there

What drove the 40/100 rating

Risk Score Breakdown

  1. 01MINORSystem declining 8.3% YoY with 6,063 units down from ~6,615 last year, indicating contraction and potential market saturation or franchisee dissatisfaction
  2. 02MEDNo average net income disclosed in Item 19 prevents assessment of actual profitability; disclosed $1.39M revenue doesn't guarantee positive returns after $25K-$55K annual royalties plus operating costs
  3. 03MINORUnprotected territory creates direct cannibalization risk; franchisees compete with corporate-owned and other franchised Circle K locations in same market
  4. 04HIGHMultiple active litigation cases (TMC v. Broadway, Universal Property Services v. Lehigh Gas, TMC v. Golen) suggest operational disputes and potential franchisor relationship issues
  5. 05MINORHigh upfront investment ($1.46M–$2.74M) combined with 10-year commitment and declining unit count increases difficulty recovering capital
  6. 06HIGHGoing Concern status is FALSE, but system decline warrants clarification on franchisor financial stability and long-term viability

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.