ComForCare Home Care litigation history

The franchisor

Pending (1)

• Deborah Podolak v. ComForCare Health Care Holdings, Inc, et. al.

  pending

  In the Court of Common Pleas, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania Civil Division · GD-19-2022

  “Case No. GD-19-2022; In the Court of Common Pleas, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania Civil Division The plaintiff alleges a violation of Pennsylvania Wage Payment as well as the Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act in a class action against one of ComForCare’s independently owned and operated franchisees and included ComForCare (the Franchisor) as a defendant under a vicarious liability theory.”Page 17 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3

Concluded (1)

• Administrative Proceeding before the Securities Commissioner of Maryland: Case No. 2010-0082

  concluded

  Government or regulatory action · Securities Commissioner of Maryland · 2010-0082

  “… In 2007, ComForCare filed a franchise renewal application in Maryland that was effectuated December 10, 2007, and subsequently, in 2008, filed an amendment application that was effectuated October 7, 2008.”Page 17 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3

  Outcome: “On April 15, 2010, ComForCare and the Maryland Securities Commissioner, reached an agreement to enter a Consent Order pursuant to which ComForCare agreed to cease and desist from offering or selling franchises in violation of Maryland Franchise Law and agreed to offer rescission to the three Maryland franchises. One franchisee elected to rescind.”

Status not stated in the filing (2)

• ComForCare Franchise Systems, LLC v. Dahlia Home Care, Inc., et. al.

  Brought against a franchisee · filed 2024 · Superior Court of the State of California, County of Fresno · 24CECG00550

  “Case No. 24CECG00550; Superior Court of the State of California, County of Fresno On or about February 7, 2024, ComForCare filed suit against Defendant for failing to timely pay fees owed under its Franchise Agreement, failing to provide access to its books and records, and breaching the confidentiality terms of the Franchise Agreement as well as the Confidentiality Agreement.”Page 17 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3

• ComForCare Franchise Systems, LLC v. Platinum Care, Inc. d/b/a ComForCare Home Care - Chester South, et. al.

  Brought against a franchisee · filed 2023 · State of Michigan Circuit Court for the County of Oakland · 2023-203856

  “Case No. 2023-203856; State of Michigan Circuit Court for the County of Oakland On or about November 15, 2023, ComForCare filed suit against Defendant for failing to timely pay fees owed under its Franchise Agreement. On or about March 14, 2024, Defendant filed a counterclaim claiming that ComForCare was in breach of contract and is seeking damages in excess of $75,000.”Page 17 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3

Parent, affiliates, master franchisor and subfranchisor

Concluded (3)

• Vezeto Enterprises, Inc., et. al., v. Blue Moon Franchise Systems, LLC

  settled

  Brought by a franchisee · Blue Moon Franchise Systems, LLC (a Common Controlled Affiliate) · filed 2023 · In the Court of Common Pleas, Franklin County, Ohio · 23CV-008200

  “… Case No. 23CV-008200; In the Court of Common Pleas, Franklin County, Ohio On or about November 20, 2023. Blue Moon noticed Plaintiff that it was in material default of its Franchise Agreement because it had failed to make timely royalty payments and had apparently ceased operations without notice.”Page 17 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3

  Outcome: “about January 16, 2024 the parties agreed to settle the matter and release Plaintiff from the Franchise Agreement in exchange for Plaintiff paying its past due balances of $2,500.” (page 18)

• Administrative Proceeding before the State of Minnesota Department of Commerce: 70650-BD

  concluded

  Government or regulatory action · the predecessor franchisor to the Common Controlled Affiliate Next Day Access, LLC · filed 2022 · State of Minnesota Department of Commerce · 70650-BD

  “… On February 11, 2022, the predecessor franchisor to our Common Controlled Affiliate, Next Day Access, LLC, consented to the entry of a Consent Order by the State of Minnesota Department of Commerce based upon the allegation that it sold two unregistered franchises in violation of Minn.”Page 18 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3

  Outcome: “In that Consent Order, Next Day agreed to pay a civil penalty of $1,000 to the State of Minnesota and $180 in investigative cost”

• Federal Trade Commission Docket No C-4379

  concluded

  Government or regulatory action · CAREPATROL, Inc., the predecessor franchisor to the Common Controlled Affiliate CarePatrol Franchise Systems, LLC · filed 2012-12-03 · Federal Trade Commission (administrative) · C-4379

  “… On December 3, 2012, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) issued an administrative complaint against CAREPATROL, Inc. (which is not an existing entity but was incorrectly named), the predecessor franchisor to our Common Controlled Affiliate, CarePatrol Franchise Systems, LLC, alleging issues with certain wording on CarePatrol”Page 18 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3

  Outcome: “The FTC sought to have CarePatrol change the website. In compliance, CarePatrol modified the wording on its website pursuant to FTC instructions. No consumer was involved nor made any complaint. There was no fine or penalty imposed.”

Status not stated in the filing (1)

• Blue Moon Franchise Systems, LLC v. Dawn and Mark Martin

  Brought against a franchisee · Blue Moon Franchise Systems, LLC (a Common Controlled Affiliate) · filed 2024 · State of Michigan; Circuit Court for The County of Oakland · 2024-205720-CB

  “… Case No. 2024-205720-CB; State of Michigan; Circuit Court for The County of Oakland On or about February 16, 2024, Blue Moon filed suit against Defendant for failing to pay its initial franchise fee and abandoning the business in breach of the Franchise Agreement.”Page 18 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3