Cachengo Lawsuit Alleges Interference, Theft, and New Company by Former CEO – Part 4

Cachengo, Incorporated is suing its former CEO, Ash Young and members of his family for allegedly siphoning millions of dollars from the company.

This is Part Four of a multi-part series examining the lawsuit, the parties involved, and the allegations at its center.

While Part Three focused on alleged personal spending during periods of missed payroll, this installment examines the events leading up to the Young family’s removal from leadership, what Cachengo alleges occurred in the days that followed, and early signs that the defendants are starting a new company called ‘Qavats‘.

“Hostile Takeover”

Monday morning, November 10, 2025, multiple Carroll County Deputy units filled the driveway of former Cachengo CEO Ash Young’s residence.

According to scanner traffic at the time, Young contacted dispatch claiming that a group of armed individuals had surrounded his home. He told dispatchers that the individuals disabled his home’s alarm panel and changed access codes.

“Caller states that it is the company out of California trying to take ownership of all of his vehicles, his possessions, his company, etc.,” dispatch advised responding deputies.

The items in question, according to the complaint filed in federal court, were unlawfully titled in Young’s name and are alleged by Cachengo to be company-owned assets.

The incident itself is referenced in the lawsuit, as well, and represents just one of several allegations involving Young and members of his family that Cachengo says occurred in the days following their removal from leadership.

How did it get to this point?

Prior to the Youngs’ Removal

According to the lawsuit, concerns about the Young family’s spending came to a head in the weeks leading up to their removal, after Cachengo’s chief financial officer raised repeated alarms internally.

“After taking his position in early 2024, Greg Brooks, the Chief Financial Officer of Cachengo, tried to raise issues he discovered related to the Young Family’s spending,” the complaint states.

Those efforts, Cachengo alleges, were met with resistance.

“When he did so, Mr. Young threatened to fire him (Brooks) for ‘insubordination,’” the lawsuit says.

Despite that warning, the complaint alleges Brooks continued to document what he viewed as improper transactions.

In October 2025, he compiled a list of expenses attributed to the Young family and presented it to Cachengo’s independent board of directors.

According to the lawsuit, Brooks raised the issue again after the company was unable to meet basic financial obligations, including payroll, and it cost him.

“Mr. Brooks was terminated the following Tuesday,” the complaint reads.

The termination did not end the matter. Instead, Cachengo alleges it accelerated an internal reckoning.

As part of the response, Cachengo updated its accounts payable policy so that all payment approvals required sign-off from board member Jeff Sindelar.

“Only two transactions received this approval,” the complaint states: Brooks’ final paycheck and a scheduled insurance payment.

“Mr. Young ignored this new policy… and continued to spend money from Cachengo’s Bank of America account without the Board’s knowledge or approval,” the complaint alleges.

In the final weeks before his removal, Cachengo claims Young charged more than $60,000 to company credit cards, including an Orlando trip for extended family, “extravagant dinners,” an $8,000 purchase at a Nashville boot store, and $12,000 spent at a horse farm in Kentucky. (These purchases and more are detailed in part 3)

The lawsuit further alleges that prior to their removal, Young caused Cachengo to pay himself and family members “grossly disproportionate salaries.”

This allegation mirrors findings in an internal investigation previously obtained by the Carroll County Observer, which alleges, “Beyond the $1.3M in salaries paid to Ash Young and family members who appeared to be directly tied to the core business, two other family members were paid $100,000 and $50,000 in salaries for unclear contributions. In particular a son-in-law was paid $100,000 and the for-profit gym he operates had rent…paid directly by Cachengo.”

Sources close to the Young family told the Observer that the gym referenced in the investigation was also the location of several pieces of exercise equipment named in the federal lawsuit. That detail, however, is not alleged in either the lawsuit or the internal investigation.

After the Removal: Theft

According to the complaint, Cachengo’s concerns did not end with the removal of Young and his family from leadership. Instead, the company alleges that they interfered with company operations in the days following.

According to the lawsuit, Cachengo’s employee handbook states, “All company property must be returned immediately upon request or upon termination of employment.”

“Mr. Young did not return any of his company property, including but not limited to real estate, vehicles, and company documents,” the lawsuit goes on to say.

Among that company property, Cachengo alleges Young took a prototype product known internally as ‘Deep Dish.’

According to the complaint, Cachengo spent more than $150,000 developing the prototype.

“Shortly after his termination, Mr. Young convinced Cachengo’s head of security to let him into the company’s manufacturing building during nonwork hours,” the lawsuit alleges. “Mr. Young then took, without authorization or consent, the only prototype of the company’s next generation product….”

Cachengo alleges that Young also removed a laptop connected to the prototype. While that laptop was later returned, the complaint says Young has admitted he still possesses the Deep Dish prototype and has refused to return it.

“Despite repeated requests,” the lawsuit says, “neither Mr. Young nor any of the Young family members that were terminated on November 7, 2025 have returned Cachengo property in their possession.”

After the Removal: Interference

The lawsuit further alleges that Young retained personal control over key company systems, even after his termination, and used that control to interfere with operations.

“After his termination, Mr. Young also tampered with or removed employee access to multiple systems,” the complaint states.

Young had set himself up as the administrator or license holder on several essential platforms.

“For example, Cachengo could not access QuickBooks, Cachengo’s financial online recordkeeping system for all accounting, for several months following Mr. Young’s termination,” the lawsuit alleges.

The complaint also states that Cachengo still does not have access to its Slack internal communications channel.

Additionally, the lawsuit alleges that Young personally owned Cachengo’s website domain and shut down both the website and company email system following his termination. Access was later restored, however.

Young Allegedly Starts a New Business: Qavats

After his termination, Young allegedly contacted Cachengo’s customers and vendors in an effort to divert business.

“Mr. Young has also been contacting customers and vendors to try to get them to do business with him instead of Cachengo,” the complaint states.

The lawsuit names Trendmakers, Asus, and SuperMicro among the companies Young allegedly contacted.

In one email to an Asus executive included as an exhibit, Young wrote that Cachengo had experienced a “power grab” and claimed the company was “dead,” while asking to discuss working together at a new venture.

The email signature block, according to the lawsuit, identified Young as “Chief Evangelist” of a company called “Qavats.”

‘Qavats’ appears to be derived from a Hebrew verb meaning ‘to gather’ or ‘to assemble.’

The website for Qavats appears to use branding elements visually similar to Cachengo’s, including comparable logo styling and typeface.

The website also appears to be under development.

It currently consists of a holding page stating “Our Wheels Are Spinning” and offers a newsletter signup, but does not yet describe any products, services, or business operations.

Allegations outside the lawsuit have also surfaced regarding the apparent new venture. Sources close to the Young family told the Carroll County Observer that several former Cachengo employees continue to work directly for the Youngs in various capacities, including their farm and equine aspirations.

Police Calls and Property Disputes

The complaint also references two law enforcement incidents following Young’s termination.

On November 10, 2025, as detailed above, Young contacted police claiming that more than a dozen armed individuals had surrounded his home, disabled his alarm system, and prevented him from leaving.

According to the complaint, Young told officers that he personally owned the property, not Cachengo.

Two days later, police were again called to one of Cachengo’s properties, this time over a claim that the company had stolen equipment from Young’s property.

“The property had not been stolen,” the lawsuit says, adding that no auction or sale of the equipment had been planned.

What’s Next?

In its complaint, Cachengo asks the court to order the return of company property it says remains in the possession of Ash Young and members of his family. The company is also seeking injunctive relief to prevent further interference with its operations, along with damages related to the alleged misuse of company funds and assets.

The allegations detailed in the complaint have not been proven in court. The defendants are presumed innocent, and no responses had been filed at the time of publication.

Part Five will examine Cachengo’s federal racketeering claims, including how the company alleges a pattern of conduct supports its RICO allegations, and what the lawsuit claims investors were told as the company continued to raise capital that the Youngs’ allegedly later stole.