Condo buyers at 1010 Brickell sue for deposits on three units

There’s some buyer’s remorse swirling around 1010 Brickell.

A man and a woman who put down 50 percent deposits totaling more than $650,000 on three condo units in the 50-floor luxury tower are trying to get out of their deals, according to three recent lawsuits filed in Miami-Dade Circuit Court.

Maiko 2308 LLC, Maryol 2208 LLC and Nishiki 3907 LLC accuse the developers of making material changes to the building’s design and failing to provide condo documents pertaining to the condo association bylaws and maintenance, according to the suits. The three limited liability companies claim 1010 Brickell Holdings violated Florida’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act and the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act, and also violated state law requiring developers to provide prospective buyers with condo documents.

As a result, Maiko, Maryol and Nishiki have the right to cancel the purchase agreements and are entitled to deposit refunds, the lawsuit states. The three companies are owned by Victor Mijares and Caterina Angilello, according to state corporate records. A partnership between Key International and 13th Floor Investments is developing the 387-unit 1010 Brickell, which is scheduled for completion later this year.

Kenneth Damas, attorney for Mijares and Angilello, did not return an email request for comment. Attorney Barry Rothberg, a Greenberg Traurig shareholder representing the developers, said 1010 Brickell Holdings is confident it will prevail in court.

“The allegations set forth in the complaints are without any factual basis,” Rothberg said. “The buyers in all three suits acknowledged receipt of all required documents, including the condominium documents, the amendments to condominium documents, and the property reports.”

According to the lawsuits, Mijares and Angilello signed purchase agreements for three units on the 22nd, 23rd and 39th floors of 1010 Brickell on April 2, 2014. The combined value of the transactions is $1.28 million. They put down 50 percent deposits of $185,000, $215,000 and $249,500 on the condos.

However, Mijares and Angilello allege 1010 Brickell Holdings has never provided them with copies of their condo documents as required by state law. In addition, the developers made “material alterations” to the building design after they signed their contracts but never provided them with copies of the amendments to the plans, which is also required by state law.

The buyers specifically cited an increase of the ground floor commercial space by approximately 3,200 square feet and a new wall dividing the balconies of their units, the lawsuit states.

In motions to dismiss the lawsuits, 1010 Brickell Holdings accuses Mijares and Angilello of engaging in “an effort to escape [their] obligations under a pre-construction contract.” Furthermore, their claims of not receiving the condo documents are false, the motion states. The purchase contracts Mijares and Angilello signed contained a provision in which they acknowledged receiving the documents. They also signed a receipt confirming they received the condo papers as well as having gotten transmittal letters delivered by UPS detailing the changes to the building design, the motion states.