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
65 / 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
Yes
Franchisor can match any purchase offer when you try to sell
Governing law
Wyoming
State whose law governs disputes — relevant if you're not based there
What drove the 65/100 rating
Risk Score Breakdown
- 01MINOROnly 1 operating unit with unknown growth trajectory creates severe lack of proof of concept and scalability
- 02MEDNet income not disclosed despite $333k average revenue claim—unable to validate profitability or ROI
- 03MINORRoyalty structure heavily penalizes franchisees #4+ (7% vs 3.5%)—incentive misalignment and potential resentment
- 04MEDHigh investment range ($249.75k-$554k) with no disclosed net income creates unfavorable risk/reward ratio
- 05MINORNo Item 19 (Financial Performance Representations) provided—franchise may lack substantiated earnings claims
- 06MEDSingle unit system suggests either new brand, failed expansion, or undisclosed closures; unit growth unknown
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.