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
72 / 100
FranchiseVerdict composite
Rating
CAUTION
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
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 72/100 rating
Risk Score Breakdown
- 01MINOROnly 3 units in system with unknown/stagnant growth trajectory suggests minimal proof of concept and scalability
- 02HIGHGoing Concern status is FALSE — indicates parent company financial instability or operational uncertainty
- 03MEDNo Item 19 (Financial Performance Representations) disclosed — cannot independently verify claimed $708,876 avg revenue or $254,964 net income
- 04MINORHigh investment range ($424k-$1.2M) relative to only 3 units suggests unproven unit economics and excessive capital requirements
- 05MINOR7% royalty on gross sales (not net) combined with high initial investment creates cash flow pressure in early years
- 06MINORMicro-franchise system (3 units) presents extreme execution risk — one failed unit = 33% system failure rate
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.