D72/100FDD 2025
LivAway Suites — Litigation & Risk
Lodging - Hotels & Motels · 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
72 / 100
FranchiseVerdict composite
Rating
CAUTION
STRONG / MODERATE / CAUTION / AVOID
FDD Items 5, 6 & 17 — what you give up
Contract Risk Indicators
Mandatory arbitration
Not required
You retain the right to sue in court
Jury trial waiver
Waived
You give up the right to a jury trial
Franchisor can compete
Yes
Franchisor can open competing locations in or near your territory
Right of first refusal
No
Franchisor can match any purchase offer when you try to sell
Governing law
Utah
State whose law governs disputes — relevant if you're not based there
What drove the 72/100 rating
Risk Score Breakdown
- 01MEDOnly 4 units in system indicates extremely limited scale, network effects, and sustainability — micro-franchise with minimal operational data
- 02MEDNo average revenue or net income disclosed — impossible to validate ROI on $11.2M-$13.7M investment; Item 19 absence is critical red flag
- 03HIGHGoing Concern = False suggests parent company financial distress or structural instability, raising questions about franchisor support and survival
- 04MEDMassive capital requirement ($11.2M-$13.7M) for hotel/lodging with zero disclosed performance benchmarks creates extreme financial risk
- 05MED5% royalty on undisclosed revenue stream means franchisees cannot model cash flow or break-even scenarios
- 06MINOR20-year term locks capital into unproven concept with only 4 reference units and no track record of unit profitability
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.