FranchiseVerdict
Meals of Hope logo
B65/100FDD 2025

Meals of Hope — Litigation & Risk

Business Services - Staffing · FDD Items 3, 4 & 5

Back to overview

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
Not required
You retain the right to sue in court
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
Florida
State whose law governs disputes — relevant if you're not based there

What drove the 65/100 rating

Risk Score Breakdown

  1. 01MEDUnit count declined 14.3% YoY (7 units) indicating system contraction and potential franchisee dissatisfaction
  2. 02MINORNo average revenue or net income disclosure (Item 19) prevents realistic ROI assessment on $61-72k investment
  3. 03MEDHighly unusual commission structure ($0.03-$0.09/meal) makes franchisee earnings dependent on franchisor's donation volume, creating misaligned incentives
  4. 04MINORHigh franchise fee ($40,000) relative to low initial investment range suggests front-loaded franchisor revenue extraction
  5. 05MEDVague territory protection and meal commission terms leave franchisee exposed to franchisor discretion on 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.