Franchise owners across three states are taking legal action against mobile car care company Get Spiffy and its former CEO, alleging the company sold them a broken business model based on false promises.
Business owners in Maryland, South Carolina, and Nebraska are pushing forward with lawsuits and mediation demands. They accuse Get Spiffy Inc., Spiffy Franchising LLC, and founder Scot Wingo of fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and breaking franchise laws.
Wingo was the public face of Spiffy, pitching it as a high-growth tech startup that could handle mobile oil changes, detailing, and fleet maintenance. According to the claims, Wingo and his team used misleading representations about national accounts, scalability, and corporate support to persuade people to buy into the franchise.
But once the new owners paid their fees and bought the necessary infrastructure to handle the promised customer demand, they say they ran into a totally different reality. Franchisees allege they were hit with massive unexpected costs, broken equipment, unpaid invoices, and almost no real operational support from headquarters.
“These matters are not isolated disputes,” said Jeffrey C. Mayes, lead counsel at the law firm Druven, which is representing the franchisees. “Our clients allege Spiffy made material representations about its franchise model, national accounts and operational support that did not match what franchisees experienced after they invested.”
The Maryland case details the specific financial toll on the individual owners. Ross Markajani and his company filed a lawsuit that includes civil RICO claims against Spiffy, Wingo, and executives Karl Murphy and Connor Finnegan. An experienced delivery contractor and father of two, Markajani says Spiffy showed him a business model projecting nearly $480,000 in first-year sales. He later discovered the company’s official Franchise Disclosure Document actually listed average first-year sales at $139,790. After signing his agreement, Markajani says he faced launch delays, broken equipment, and a lack of guidance that left him buried in debt and facing potential bankruptcy.
“I thought I was building a future for my family,” Markajani said. “Instead, Spiffy left us drowning in debt and stripped us of our peace of mind.”
Similar scenarios are playing out in other states. In Nebraska, Kevin Ziebell’s DZDI Enterprises LLC demanded mediation over their franchise agreement disputes. Down in South Carolina, a group called PSD Ventures LLC—run by Paul Clark, Steve Lanzl, and Dan Haight—did the same. The South Carolina dispute adds another layer of complexity to the situation, as those owners were tied to Get Spiffy not just as franchisees, but also as shareholders.
While these disputes pile up, Get Spiffy has been going through major corporate changes. In August 2024, Wingo stepped down as CEO. Co-founder Karl Murphy took over the top job, though Wingo kept his seat on the company’s board. Since then, Spiffy has started pivoting away from its consumer franchise model and toward software and fleet-focused services.
That shift in business strategy has not slowed down the legal challenges.
“Spiffy’s pivot only sharpens the question at the center of these cases,” Mayes said. “Our clients allege the model failed to deliver as promised, and they are pursuing accountability for the devastating financial consequences that followed.”
Druven currently represents a total of five former Spiffy franchisees. While one of those matters recently ended in a confidential settlement, the remaining cases are still making their way through mediation, arbitration, and federal court proceedings.
READ: Alabama Woman Sentenced To Over A Decade Behind Bars For Teen Sex Trafficking Scheme
Please make a small donation to the Tampa Free Press to help sustain independent journalism. Your contribution enables us to continue delivering high-quality, local, and national news coverage.
Sign up: Subscribe to our free newsletter for a curated selection of top stories delivered straight to your inbox
