Skip to main content
FranchiseVerdict
OFFICE PRIDE logo
AStrongest tier71/100FDD 2026

Office Pride: Litigation & Risk

Cleaning & Maintenance · FDD Items 3, 4 & 5

Back to overview

Moderate: Review

1 case disclosed in FDD Items 3 and 4.

Source: FDD Items 3–5

FDD Items 3 & 4

Litigation Metrics

Cases disclosed
1
Total from FDD Items 3 and 4
Bankruptcy (Item 4)
None
Franchisor or officer bankruptcy
Verdict score
71 / 100
FranchiseVerdict composite · higher is better
Rating
A
A / B / C / D / F verdict grade

7(a) FOIA data · FY2020–present

SBA Loan Performance

Aggregated from public SBA 7(a) loan disclosures. Charge-off rate is the share of loans that were charged off or settled for less than the full balance.

Total 7(a) loans
4
Government-backed loans issued
Charge-off rate
N/A
vs 16% franchise average
5-yr charge-off rate
N/A
Defaults
N/A
Loans charged off or defaulted
Total loan volume
$1.2M
Avg loan size
$307K
Participating lenders
3

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
Not waived
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
FL
State whose law governs disputes. Relevant if you're not based there

Extracted from FDD Item 3

Litigation Detail

Faith Franchising Company, LLC v. Titsworth Enterprises, Inc. and Adrian Titsworth (M.D. Fla., filed Feb 4, 2025) - franchisor sued franchisee for violating in-term and post-termination restrictive covenants by working with a competitor; court entered preliminary injunction; case stayed pending franchisee principal's bankruptcy.

What drove the 71/100 verdict

Risk Score Breakdown

  1. 01MINORDeclining unit count (-2.0% YoY) suggests system contraction and potential franchisee dissatisfaction
  2. 02HIGHActive litigation involving non-compete violations indicates franchisor enforcement challenges and potential franchisee conflicts
  3. 03MINORNo average net income disclosure (Item 19) prevents ROI validation despite $70-133k investment and 9% royalty burden
  4. 04MINORUnprotected territory creates direct competition risk between franchisees in same market
  5. 05MEDHigh royalty rate (9%) on modest average revenue ($713k) leaves limited margin for profitability verification
  6. 06MED10-year term lock-in with declining unit momentum suggests limited secondary market for resale

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.