Score: 1/100

Subject: Request for Investigation into RobotLAB, Inc. Franchise Practices To Whom It May Concern, I am submitting this complaint anonymously out of concern for potential retaliation against current and former franchisees. I respectfully request that the appropriate authorities investigate the franchise sales and business practices of RobotLAB, Inc., headquartered in Southlake, Texas, to determine whether prospective franchisees have been provided accurate and complete information during the franchise sales process and whether contractual obligations have been honored. The concerns outlined below are based on firsthand experience operating a RobotLAB franchise and are presented for investigation. 1. Exclusive Territory Concerns One of the primary selling points of the franchise was the promise of an exclusive territory. However, after purchasing the franchise, corporate allegedly conducted business directly with customers located inside franchise territories without involving the franchise owner. In addition, service contracts associated with robots operating inside franchise territories reportedly remained under corporate control rather than being assigned to the franchisee. If accurate, these practices may substantially reduce the value of the exclusive territory that franchisees believed they were purchasing. 2. Marketing and Lead Generation During the franchise sales process, prospective franchisees were told that RobotLAB would actively market their territories and provide qualified sales leads. In practice, little or no meaningful lead generation or local marketing support was provided despite ongoing franchise fees. Prospective buyers should understand what level of marketing support is actually delivered versus what may be represented during franchise sales presentations. 3. Training and Operational Support The franchise was promoted as a turnkey business supported by extensive training, experienced technical personnel, and an established operating system. The actual support received reportedly consisted primarily of online training videos with limited practical guidance. Technical assistance was often difficult to obtain and response times could extend several days while customers were waiting for service. An investigation may determine whether the operational support provided matches representations made during franchise sales. 4. Service Contract Revenue Monthly recurring service revenue appeared to be presented as a significant component of the franchise business model. After robots were deployed, corporate reportedly retained many of those recurring service agreements rather than allowing franchisees to manage and benefit from customers within their own territories. If this practice is widespread, it could materially alter the financial model that prospective franchisees relied upon when purchasing the business. 5. Financial Projections Used During Franchise Sales Financial projection spreadsheets were reportedly provided to assist prospective franchisees in evaluating the opportunity and, in some cases, obtaining SBA-backed financing. There are concerns that these projections may not have been based on verified historical franchise performance and may instead have reflected assumptions that were not adequately disclosed. This issue may warrant review to determine whether prospective franchisees received sufficient information to evaluate expected financial performance. 6. Franchise Terminations There are reports that franchisees who questioned corporate practices or raised concerns regarding territory rights, service revenue, or contractual obligations later received notices of default or termination. An investigation may determine whether these actions were appropriate under the franchise agreements or whether they could discourage franchisees from asserting contractual rights. Requested Investigation The reporting party respectfully requests that regulators review: Whether franchise sales representations accurately reflected the business opportunity. Whether exclusive territory provisions have been honored. Whether recurring service revenue has been handled consistent with franchise agreements. Whether promised marketing, training, and operational support have been provided. Whether financial projections used during franchise sales complied with applicable franchise and consumer protection laws. Whether any franchisees have experienced retaliation after raising legitimate contractual concerns. The purpose of this complaint is not to determine liability but to encourage an impartial investigation into practices that may affect both current franchisees and future purchasers. Protecting prospective small business owners from potentially misleading franchise practices is an important public interest. Thank you for your consideration.

By: Verified Franchisee

Score: 11/100

Significant concerns about this Franchisor — misrepresentation, insufficient support for franchisees, and market opportunity is oversold. Many franchisees have cut ties after big financial losses. This franchisor doesn’t have good relationships with franchisees, manufacturers or the average client. Word for the wise — don’t believe everything the Franchisor says. Look elsewhere to invest your capital. As predatory as it gets.

By: Verified Franchisee

Score: 2/100

Former franchisee here. In my experience, the RobotLAB franchise was not financially viable for me, and I never saw a consistently proven, profitable model at the unit level. RobotLAB even tried operating a company‑owned location and later sold it to a franchisee, which did not give me confidence that the model was truly working. Day‑to‑day support felt limited and reactive rather than strategic, and the marketing provided was very thin and not developed for the size of the required investment. What were described as “leads” were often just names of businesses pulled from lists, not warm or qualified opportunities, so a lot of the real prospecting work still fell entirely on me with little or no support from corp. Among the franchisees I got to know, most have exited or are trying to exit, and more than a few feel like the real business model is selling robots and equipment to franchisees rather than building sustainable territories. That is my personal perspective based on what I’ve seen and lived. There are also multiple court cases involving RobotLAB that prospective franchisees may want to review for themselves. These are public records on Trellis (this link searches RobotLAB cases across many states): https://trellis.law/cases/robotlab?state=ak&state=az&state=ar&state=ca&state=co&state=ct&state=de&state=dc&state=fl&state=ga&state=hi&state=id&state=il&state=in&state=ia&state=ks&state=la&state=me&state=md&state=ma&state=mi&state=mn&state=mo&state=mt&state=nv&state=nh&state=nj&state=nm&state=ny&state=nc&state=nd&state=oh&state=ok&state=or&state=pa&state=ri&state=sc&state=sd&state=tn&state=tx&state=vt&state=va&state=wa&state=wv&state=wi&county=&matter_type= They did have some people in support at corp on the tech side that were helpful. Also, trying to learn every robot and be good at selling across diverse set of industries was very difficult. This is just my honest experience and opinion as someone who invested, operated, and ultimately exited.

By: Verified Franchisee

Score: 10/100

Long story short, this is a model that does not work for any franchisee. Almost 40 people have tried and have failed.. only the corporate is making money and they’re able to get new Franchise because prospects are excited about Robotics and AI.

By: Anonymous Franchisee

Score: 7/100

The CEO's only focus is getting media and tv interviews, and selling new franchise locations. Marketing support is non-existent. Barely any leads come from corporate. All claims made during the discovery process are pretty much false. The other folks in leadership actively cause more problems instead of solving them. The technical support team is actually good. This company franchised too early without proving that the model works. Most locations are struggling and many are leaving.

By: Anonymous Franchisee