B61/100FDD 2025
Rehabneeds — Litigation & Risk
Health & Wellness - Other · 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
61 / 100
FranchiseVerdict composite
Rating
MODERATE
STRONG / MODERATE / CAUTION / AVOID
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
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
No
Franchisor can match any purchase offer when you try to sell
Governing law
Maryland
State whose law governs disputes — relevant if you're not based there
What drove the 61/100 rating
Risk Score Breakdown
- 01MEDOnly 4 units system-wide indicates extremely limited track record and minimal franchisor operational infrastructure
- 02HIGHNo Item 19 financial performance representation (Going Concern = False) means franchisor won't substantiate the $461K avg revenue claim
- 03MINOREscalating minimum royalties ($1K→$2K→$3K) combined with 6% revenue share creates dual burden that could exceed 8%+ of gross revenue by Year 3
- 04MINORMassive investment range spread ($94.6K–$285.3K) suggests either highly variable startup costs or lack of standardized operations
- 05MINORMicro-franchise system (4 units) with unknown growth trajectory raises sustainability and franchisor viability concerns
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.