FranchiseVerdict
Placement Helpers logo
D75/100FDD 2025

Placement Helpers — Litigation & Risk

Health & Wellness - Senior Care · 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
75 / 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
Non-compete
2 yrs
Post-termination restriction on similar businesses
Franchisor can compete
No
Right of first refusal
Yes
Franchisor can match any purchase offer when you try to sell
Governing law
California
State whose law governs disputes — relevant if you're not based there

What drove the 75/100 rating

Risk Score Breakdown

  1. 01MINOROnly 2 units in system with unknown growth trajectory—suggests minimal market validation or severe underperformance
  2. 02MINORNo Item 19 (Average Revenue/Net Income) disclosure—impossible to assess ROI or validate $54k-$79k investment thesis
  3. 03HIGHGoing Concern = False—indicates franchisor financial instability or operational distress
  4. 04MINORHigh franchise fee ($45,000) relative to total investment (~83% of low-end cost) limits working capital for new franchisees
  5. 05MED8% royalty on undisclosed revenue creates ongoing cash drain with no performance visibility
  6. 06MINORExtremely thin franchisor infrastructure likely with only 2 franchised units supporting system

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.