D73/100FDD 2022
Surfin' Chicken — Litigation & Risk
Food & Beverage - Quick Service · 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
73 / 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
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
Texas
State whose law governs disputes — relevant if you're not based there
What drove the 73/100 rating
Risk Score Breakdown
- 01MEDOnly 5 units system-wide indicates extremely limited scale and unproven model replicability
- 02MEDNo average revenue or net income disclosure (missing Item 19) prevents ROI assessment and suggests weak performance data
- 03MINORZero territory protection creates direct competition risk from other franchisees and company-owned locations
- 04MINORWide investment range ($57.6K–$522.3K) suggests inconsistent unit economics or poorly defined requirements
- 05MED5–8% royalty range is high-end for QSR without disclosed profitability benchmarks to justify it
- 06MINORUnknown unit growth trajectory over franchise term raises sustainability questions for such a small 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.