FDD Items 3 & 4 · 2025 filing

Green Home Solutions litigation history

What Green Home Solutions disclosed about lawsuits, arbitrations and bankruptcy in the 2025 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 (litigation) & 4 (bankruptcy) at a glance

What the filing discloses

Cases disclosed: 4; Item 3, as counted in the filing

Largest settlement, franchisor's own cases: $24K; As stated in Item 3

Bankruptcy (Item 4): None; Franchisor, parent, predecessor or officer

Filing year: 2025; Disclosures cover the prior ten years

Extracted from the 2025 Franchise Disclosure Document

Item 3: litigation

Two concluded predecessor cases (Belcher territory infringement settled $23,715; JC Franchising v Terrapin breach settled). Two concluded current cases involving Harod Ventures non-compete dispute (OnAxis received $150,000 settlement).

Item 3 (litigation) · 4 matters disclosed

Litigation cases

The franchisor and its predecessor

Concluded (4)

Harod Ventures, LLC et al v. OnAxis Franchising Group, LLC
dismissed
Brought by a franchisee · filed 2023-08-30 · U.S. District Court for the Central District of California · 2:23-cv-07196
“… Central District of California, Case No. 2:23-cv-07196 filed on August 30, 2023.”Page 13 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
OnAxis Franchising Group, LLC v. Harod Ventures, LLC (N.D. Ga.); Harod Ventures v. OnAxis Franchising Group, LLC (C.D. Cal. 2:23-cv-08878)
settled
Brought against a franchisee · filed 2023-10-21 · U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia; U.S. District Court for the Central District of California · 1:23-cv-04835; 2:23-cv-08878
“OnAxis Franchising Group, LLC v. Harod Ventures, LLC, United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Case No. 1:23-cv-04835 filed on October 21, 2023.”Page 13 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “On April 8, 2024, the parties entered into a settlement agreement wherein Harod agreed to pay to us a settlement amount of $150,000 and to cease operating the competing business for a period of two (2) years, and the parties further agreed to mutual general releases and that we would file a Joint Motion for Consent Final Judgment.” (page 14)
JC Franchising Group, LLC v. Terrapin Sales, LLC and Ronald C. Sager
settled
Brought against a franchisee · JC Franchising Group, LLC (our predecessor) · filed 2018-12-06 · Superior Court of Connecticut, Judicial District of Hartford · HHD-CV-19-6104324-S
“… State of Connecticut Superior Court, Judicial District of Hartford;”Page 13 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “Our predecessor settled the matter on March 12, 2019, and signed a Settlement Agreement with the Defendants whereby the Defendants agreed to pay all unpaid royalties, fees, and other amounts owed to us under the applicable Franchise Agreements, and our predecessor agreed to allow the Defendants to”
Christine Belcher; Ezekial Flores; Kenneth Richardson; Michelle Stephens v. JC Franchising Group, LLC dba Green Home Solutions; The Elite Group Commercial, Inc. and Chad Hett; and Does 1 through 50
settled
Brought by a franchisee · JC Franchising Group, LLC (our predecessor) · filed 2015-09-09 · Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles · BC594379
“Christine Belcher; Ezekial Flores; Kenneth Richardson; Michelle Stephens v. JC Franchising Group, LLC dba Green Home Solutions;”Page 13 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “our predecessor agreed to pay $23,715.00 and The Elite Group Commercial, Inc. and Chad Hett agreed to pay $42,926.26. A Settlement Agreement was signed in January 2016 and the case was dismissed on February 29, 2016.”

Item 3 lists the litigation the franchisor must disclose; a matter against a parent, an affiliate or a named officer is not a matter against the franchisor, and pending claims are allegations, not findings.

Disclosure signals that moved the score

How this shows up in the verdict

Predecessor company litigation (JC Franchising Group) suggests operational or compliance issues that may persist under current management

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?

Back to the Green Home Solutions verdict Risk analysis on the brand page Franchisee contacts for due-diligence calls