B65/100FDD 2025
Egg Tuck — Litigation & Risk
Food & Beverage - Quick 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
65 / 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 65/100 rating
Risk Score Breakdown
- 01MINORNo financial performance disclosure (Item 19) — unable to validate investment ROI claims
- 02HIGHGoing Concern status is False — suggests potential financial instability or undisclosed restructuring
- 03MINOROnly 10 units system-wide — extremely small franchise network limits brand recognition and support infrastructure
- 04MINORNo protected territory — franchisees face direct competition from other franchisees in same markets
- 05MINOR150% YoY unit growth from tiny base (likely 4 units → 10 units) — growth trajectory unproven and potentially unsustainable
- 06MINORHigh investment-to-unit-count ratio — $285K-$444K entry for emerging brand with minimal operational track record
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.