Skip to main content
FranchiseVerdict

FDD Items 3 & 4 · 2026 filing

Epcon Communities litigation history

What Epcon Communities disclosed about lawsuits, arbitrations and bankruptcy in the 2026 Franchise Disclosure Document. Item 3 lists the material legal actions a franchisor must report; Item 4 covers bankruptcy. This is the franchisor's own disclosure, not a court record, and not legal advice.

Items 3 & 4 at a glance

What the filing discloses

Cases disclosed
5
Item 3, as counted in the filing
Largest disclosed settlement
$2.2M
As stated in Item 3
Bankruptcy (Item 4)
None
Franchisor, parent, predecessor or officer
Filing year
2026
Disclosures cover the prior ten years

Extracted from the 2026 Franchise Disclosure Document

Item 3: litigation

Five concluded cases: (1) Price v. Epcon Communities et al. - plumbing defect claims, settled $95,000 ($35,000 paid by Epcon entities); (2) Marrington Villas at Cobblestone Association v. Epcon - construction defect/fraud claims, settled $1,000,000; (3) Lipari v. Epcon Nantz Road - fraud/misrepresentation re: drainage and lake access, settled $52,500 plus drain installation; (4) M.E. Stores Property v. Epcon Nantz Road - dust/nuisance property damage claim, settled $25,000 total ($22,000 paid by Epcon); (5) Fair Housing Advocates Association/HUD/DOJ v. Epcon Communities re: ADA/Fair Housing accessibility violations at multiple Ohio projects, resolved via Consent Decree with $2,200,000 retrofit fund, $51,303 civil penalty, $40,000 settlement to FHAA, and $300,000 fund for aggrieved persons.

Disclosure signals that moved the score

How this shows up in the verdict

  • Going Concern status is FALSE — indicates potential financial instability or solvency concerns at corporate level
  • Multiple active litigation cases including Fair Housing Act violation with Consent Decree — regulatory compliance risk and reputational damage
  • Construction defect litigation across multiple projects (Price, Marrington Villas, Lipari) indicates systemic quality/delivery issues

The verdict grade is FranchiseVerdict's editorial assessment across SBA loan performance, unit growth, revenue and disclosure signals. It is not investment advice.

Before you weigh a lawsuit

How to read Item 3

A franchisor must disclose pending actions and any material civil action involving the franchise relationship, plus convictions or civil judgments for fraud, unfair or deceptive practices, or franchise-law violations, going back ten years. A case the franchisor brought against a franchisee counts too. Item 3 does not include every dispute: settled claims below the materiality line and matters resolved in private arbitration can be absent.

Questions worth asking current and former franchisees, using the contact list in Item 20:

  • Were you, or anyone you know in the system, party to a dispute with the franchisor?
  • Was it resolved by settlement, arbitration or a court, and on what terms?
  • Has the number of disputes gone up or down since you signed?