FDD Items 3 & 4 · 2026 filing

Precision Door Service litigation history

What Precision Door Service disclosed about lawsuits, arbitrations and bankruptcy in the 2026 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: 3; Item 3, as counted in the filing

Largest settlement, franchisor's own cases: None stated

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

Filing year: 2026; Disclosures cover the prior ten years

Extracted from the 2026 Franchise Disclosure Document

Item 3: litigation

Two concluded arbitration/litigation matters between Predecessor (Precision Holdings of Brevard) and franchisees Charan Gohlwar/Tej Inc. over noncompetition and standards breaches, both settled confidentially; plus a 2017 California administrative Consent Order against affiliate FOR Franchising LLC (Window Genie predecessor) for failing to submit ads, $5,000 penalty, not involving the Franchisor.

Item 3 (litigation) · 3 matters disclosed

Litigation cases

The franchisor and its predecessor

Concluded (2)

Precision Holdings of Brevard, Inc. v. Charan Gohlwar and Tej, Inc. (2020)
settled
Brought against a franchisee · Precision Holdings of Brevard, Inc. (Predecessor) · filed 2020-01-17 · United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida; American Arbitration Association (01-20-0003-7127) · 6:20-cv-00095
“Precision Holdings of Brevard, Inc. v. Charan Gohlwar and Tej, Inc. (United State District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Case No. 6:20-cv-00095);”Page 22 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Precision Holdings of Brevard, Inc. v. Charan Gohlwar and Tej, Inc.; Charan Gohlwar v. Precision Holdings of Brevard, Inc.
settled
Brought against a franchisee · Precision Holdings of Brevard, Inc. (Predecessor) · filed 2019-01-09 · American Arbitration Association (01-19-0000-0863); United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida · 6:19-cv-00075-JA-GJK
“Concluded Matters Involving Predecessor: Precision Holdings of Brevard, Inc. v. Charan Gohlwar and Tej, Inc.(American Arbitration Association, Brevard County, Case No. 01-19-0000-0863);”Page 22 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

Parent, affiliates, master franchisor and subfranchisor

Concluded (1)

The Commissioner of Business Oversight of the State of California v. FOR Franchising LLC d/b/a Window Genie and Richard Nonelle
concluded
Government or regulatory action · For Franchising LLC (predecessor of our affiliate Window Genie) · filed 2017-11-14 · Commissioner of Business Oversight of the State of California
“The Commissioner of Business Oversight of the State of California v. FOR Franchising LLC d/b/a Window Genie and Richard Nonelle.”Page 23 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “... matter, that (a) FOR and Mr. Nonelle would desist and refrain from violations of section 31156 of the California Franchise Investment Law; (b) FOR would pay an administrative penalty in the total amount of $5,000 (which amount FOR paid) and (c) within 90 days of the date of the Consent Order, Mr. Nonelle and all persons employed by FOR who assist in preparing franchise registrations or who assist in franchise ...”

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.

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 Precision Door Service verdict Risk analysis on the brand page