.

,

DOCKET NO.

SUPERlOR COURT .

IGNA nus KOrvrNINAKAS and CHRlSTINA A. KOMNINAKAS

J.D. OF FAIRFIELD

v.

AT BRIDGEPORT

APEIRON CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC; GREGORY PETER LOLES;

KALLIOPI LOLES; FARNBACHERLOLESSTREET PERFORMANCE, LLC; F ARNBACHER LOLES AUTO PARTS, LLC; FARNBACHER LOLES MOTORSPORTS, LLC; FARNBACHERLOLES RACING,LLC

DECEMBER jQ_, 2009

COMPLAINT

RECITALS

1. At all times herein, IGNA nus KOMNINAKAS and CHRISTINA A.

KONfNTNAKAS (Hereinafter "Plaintiffs"}; are individuals residing at 19 Hubbell Lane, Shelton,

Connecticut.

2. At all times herein, the Defendant, APEIRON CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC.,

(Hereinafter "Defendant Corporation") is engaged in the business of Investment Advisements

having a principle place of business at 925 Grassy Hill Road, Orange, Connecticut.

3. At all times herein, the Defendant, GREGORY PETER LOLES (Hereinafter

"GREGORY LOLES") is an individual residing at 451 Judd Road, Easton, Connecticut.

4. At all times herein, the Defendant, GREGORY LOLES, is the President of the

Defendant Corporation.

1

5. At all times herein, the Defendant, KALLIOPI LOLES, is an individualresiding at

451 Judd Road, Easton, Connecticut.

6. At all times herein, KALLIOPI LOLES IS the Secretary of the Defendant

Corporation.

7. On or about January, 2005, GREG9RY LOLES, contacted the Plaintiffs via

telephone in an attempt to persuade the Plaintiff s to allow him to act as their Investment Manager and/or Securities Broker.

8. On or about January, 2005, GREGORY LOLES invited Plaintiff's to their home in

Easton, Connecticut to continue to persuade Plaintiffs to allow the Defendant Corporation to invest their funds, both GREGORY LOLES and KALLIOPI LOLES were present in the home at the time of the meeting.

9. On or about December, 2004, at the aforementioned home meeting, GREGORY

LOLES, represented to the following to the Plaintiffs

a. That their funds would be invested in a fund known as the Knightsbridge Fund.

b. That said Knightsbridge Fund was managed by two (2) colleagues in New York, New York.

c. That Aperion would pool the Plaintiffs funds together with the funds of other individual investors and invest in the Knightsbridge Fund as a bulk investment.

2

d. That the Plaintiffs principal investment would be fully protected.

e. That the Knightsbridge Fund receives an eleven percent (11 %) return on investment and in turn, the Plaintiffs would receive a Seven and Three Quarters Percent (7.75%) return on their individual investment.

f. That the Knightsbridge Fund receives a high return on investment while fully protecting the initial principal because the Fund only invests in stable, high power companies with the highest bond status.

That the worst thing that could happen is that the Plaintiff's would be forced

g.

to accept a return of their principal investment if in fact the Knightsbridge . Money Managers could .no longer afford to pay the stated dividend.

h. That if the Knightsbridge Money Managers would be returning the principal payment the Plaintiffs would be given three (3) months notice.

1. That the Plaintiffs should avoid investing in the stock market but rather investment in the Knightsbridge Fund as it would guarantee a steady dividend payment while simultaneously protecting their initial investment.

J. That at any time, the Plaintiffs could demand the return oftheir principle and if so demanded, the principal would be returned by GREGORY LOLES within five (5) days.

10. At the commencement ofthe home meeting, on or about December 30, 2004, the Plaintiffs

gave a check made payable to Defendant Corporation in the amount of Seventy Five Thousand

3

($75,000.00) DOLLARS.

11. On or about February 1,2005, the Plaintiff's received an Account Statement from the

Defendant Corporation confirming the principal investment of Seventy Five Thousand ($75,000.00) DOLLARS and the Portfolio Holdings of375 shares of the Knightsbridge Fund, indicating a Seven and Three Quarters Percent (7.75%) return and 375 shares of the Travelers Fund which indicated a 6.15% percent return.

12. From February 4,2005 to August, 2007, the Plaintiff's received a monthly dividend

payment in the amount of Four Hundred Thirty Four 38/100 ($434.38) DOLLARS.

13. On or about July, 2007 the Plaintiff's gave an additional check to the Defendant

Corporation in the amount of Seventy Five Thousand ($100,000.00) DOLLARS to double the initial investment.

14. From September, 2007 to October, 2009 the Plaintiff's received a monthly dividend

payment in the amount of One Thousand Thirteen 54/100 ($1,013.54) DOLLARS.

15. On or about February, 2009, June 2009 and again in August, 2009 the Plaintiff's demanded

the return of their total principal investment from GREGORY LOLES and on each occasion Mr. Loles agreed to return the funds.

16. On or about October, 2009 the Plaintiff's again demanded the return of their initial

principal investment at which time GREGORY LOLES informed the Plaintiff's that he would return the principal by the middle of November.

17. The defendant GREGORY LOLES and Defendant Corporation have refused to return the

4

total principal investment in the amount of One Hundred and Seventy Five ($175,000.00)

DOLLARS to the Plaintiff.

COUNT ONE - FRAUD AND INTENTIONAL MISREPRESENTATION (As to Gregory Peter Loles and Apeiron Capital Management, Inc.)

1-17. Paragraphs 1 through 17 of the recitals are hereby incorporated in this Count One.

18. The Defendant Corporation and GREGORY LOLES committed fraudulent and

intentional misrepresentations to the Plaintiff through one or more of the following statements to

the Plaintiff:

t

I

I

I

i

. ;

a.

That their funds would be invested in a fund known as the Knightsbridge

Fund.

b.

That said Knightsbridge Fund was managed by two (2) colleagues in New

York, New York .

c. That Defendant Corporation would pool the Plaintiff s funds together with

the funds of other individual investors and invest in the Knightsbridge Fund

as a bulk investment.

d. That the Plaintiffs principal investment would be fully protected.

e. That the Knightsbridge Fund receives an eleven percent (11 %) return on

investment and in tum, the Plaintiffs would receive a Seven and Three

Quarters Percent (7.75%) return on their individual investment.

5

f. That the Knightsbridge Fund receives a high return on investment while fully protecting the initial principal because the Fund only invests in stable, high power companies with the highest bond status.

That the worst thing that could happen is that the Plaintiffs would be forced

g.

to accept a return of their principal investment if in fact the Knightsbridge Money Managers could no longer afford to pay the stated dividend.

h. That if the Knightsbridge Money Managers would be returning the principal payment the Plaintiffs would be given three (3) months notice.

1. That the Plaintiff's should avoid investing in the stock market but rather investment in the Knightsbridge Fund as it would guarantee a steady dividend payment while simultaneously protecting their initial investment.

J. That at any time, the Plaintiff s could demand the return of their principle and if so demanded, the principal would be returned by GREGORY LOLES within five (5) days.

19. The abovementioned statements made by the Defendant Corporation and

GREGORY LOLES were untrue and were known to be untrue and/or made said statements with reckless disregard for the truth of the matter.

20. the Defendant Corporation and GREGORY LOLES made said false

representations as statements of fact.

21. The Defendant Corporation and GREGORY LOLES made said false

6

representations to induce the Plaintiffs to pay over funds to the Defendant Corporation and

GREGORY LOLES.

22. The Plaintiffs relied upon and acted upon on said fraudulent misrepresentations of

the Defendant Corporation and GREGORY LOLES to their detriment.

23. As a result, the Plaintiffs have suffered damages.

COUNT TWO- VIOLATION OF THE CONNECTICUT UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES ACT (As to Apeiron Capital Management, Inc., Gregory Loles and Kalliopi Loles)

1-17. Paragraphs 1 through 17 of the recitals are hereby incorporated in this Count One.

18. At 'all times herein, the Defendants, Apeiron Capital Management, Inc., Gregory

Loles and Kalliopi Loles are engaged in the business of Investment Advisement.

19. Apeiron Capital Management, Inc., Gregory Loles and Kalliopi Loles are

"persons" who are engaged in "trade" or "commerce" as defined in Connecticut General Stautues

§42-110a.

20. At no time did Apeiron Capital Management, Inc., and/or Gregory Loles and/or

Kalliopi Loles invest any portion of the Plaintiff s funds with the Knightsbridge Fund, Travelers

Fund and or any other investment product but rather retained the Plaintiff s funds for their own

personal use and/or enjoyment.

21. At all times herein Kalliopi Loles participated in, knew or should have known of

the improper retention of the Plaintiff s funds.

7

22. At no time did Kalliopi Loles make reasonable inquiry into the investment

practices, procedure and/or rate of return on investments andior distributions of funds invested by

Gregory Loles and or the Defendant Corporation.

23. The Defendant, Kalliopi Loles sat idle with reckless disregard for the investment

practices, procedureandior rate of return on investments andior distributions of funds to investors

without making reasonable inquiry into Gregory Loles' andlor the Defendant Corporations said

investment practices which enabled her to generate personal financial gains which caused great

financial loss to the Plaintiffs.

24. The conduct of Apeiron Capital Management, Inc., Gregory Lo1cs and Kalliopi

Loles offends common concepts of fairness.

I

~ ;~

I

I

I

1

I

I

25. It is unethical and unscrupulous for Apeiron Capital Management, Inc., andlor

Gregory Loles and/or Kalliopi Loles to directly or indirectly misrepresent the investment strategy

of the Plaintiffs funds and convert said funds for their own person use and enjoyment.

26. It is unethical and unscrupulous for Apeiron Capital Management, Inc., and/or

Gregory Loles andlor Kalliopi Loles to intentionally make known false statements to the

Plaintiff's with regards to investment strategy of the Plaintiff s funds.

27. It is unethical and unscrupulous for Gregory Loles andlor Kalliopi Loles to act with

reckless disregard and not to have made reasonable inquiry into the investment acts of the fellow

officers of the Defendant Corporation.

28. It is unethical and unscrupulous for Apeiron Capital Management, Inc., andlor

8

Gregory Loles and/or Kalliopi Loles to refuse to return the Plaintiff's principal investment.

29. The act of making the abovementioned known false representation to the Plaintiffs

with regards to the investment strategies and procedure in an effort to obtain the Plaintiffs funds

and then convert said funds for the personal use of Apeiron Capital Management, Inc., andlor

Gregory Loles and/or Kalliopi Loles are unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of

trade or business, in violation of the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act, Conn. Gen. Stat. Sec:

42-11 Oa et. seq. ("CUTP A").

30. The Plaintiffs have suffered, and continues to suffer an ascertainable loss as a result

of Apeiron Capital Management, Inc., and/or Gregory Loles and/or Kalliopi Loles'violations of

CUTPA.

31. A copy of this Complaint is being mailed to the Attorney General of the State of

Connecticut and the Connecticut Commissioner of Consumer Protection in accordance with Conn.

Gen. Stat. §42-110g(c).

COUNT THREE - CONVERSION (As to Apeiron Capital Management, Inc., Gregory Loles and Kalliopi Loles')

1-17. Paragraphs 1 through 17 of the Recitals are hereby incorporated in this Count

Three.

18. The Defendant Corporation, Gregory Loles and Kalliopi Loles refuse to return the

initial principal investment to the Plaintiff

9

19. The initial principal investment in the amount of One Hundred and Seventy Five

($175,000.00) belonged to the Plaintiffs.

20. The Defendant Corporation, Gregory Loles and Kalliopi Loles took possession of

and exercised control over the Plaintiffs property which deprived the plaintiff of the property

either permanently or for an indefinite period oftime.

21. Defendant Corporation, Gregory Loles and Kalliopi Loles refusal to remit payment

is unauthorized, wrongful, without the Plaintiffs permission, and without any other lawful

authority.

22. Defendant Corporation, Gregory Loles and Kalliopi Loles conduct caused harm to

the plaintiff.

. COUNT FOUR - UNJUST ENRICHMENT (As to Apeiron Capital Management, Inc., Gregory Loles and Kalliopi Lolesl

1-17. Paragraphs 1 through 17 of the Recitals are hereby incorporated in this Count Four.

18. The Defendants Apeiron Capital Management, Inc., Gregory Loles and Kalliopi

Loles were unjustly enriched, including but not limited to, one or more ofthe following ways:

a. At no time did the Defendant Corporation, Gregory Loles and Kalliopi Loles invest in Knightsbridge Fund and/or the Travelers Fund;

b. Defendant Corporation, Gregory Loles and Kalliopi Loles received the benefit of receiving funds in the amount of$175,000.00 for an investment that was never made;

c. The Defendant Corporation Gregory Loles and Kalliopi Loles unjustly retained commissions for investments that were never made;

10

d. The Defendant Corporation Gregory Loles and Kalliopi Loles retention of funds and commissions hurt the plaintiffs.

19. It would be contrary to equity and good conscious for the Defendant Corporation

Gregory Loles and Kalliopi Loles to retain a benefit that has come to them at the expense of the

Plaintiffs.

20. As a result of said Unjust Enrichment the Plaintiffs have suffered Damages.

21. The Defendant Corporation Gregory Loles and Kalliopi Loles have been unjustly

enriched in the sum of S 175,000.00 plus commissions exclusive of interest and costs of collection.

COUNT FIVE- STATUTORY THEFT, VIOLATION OF C.G.S. 52-564 (As to Apeiron Capital Management, Inc., Gregory Lolesand Kalliopi Loles).

1-17. Paragraphs 1 through 17 of the Recitals are hereby incorporated in this Count Five.

18. The Defendant Corporation stole the assets and knowingly received and/or

concealed $175,000.00 of the Plaintiffs funds.

19. Gregory Loles stole the assets and knowingly received and/or concealed

$175,000.00 of the Plaintiffs funds.

20. Kalliopi Loles stole the assets and knowingly received and/or concealed

$175,000.00 of the Plaintiffs funds.

21. Pursuant to C.G.S. 52-564 the Plaintiffs are entitled to treble damages.

COUNT SIX- NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION (As to Gregory Loles, Individually 11

and Apeiron Capital Management, LLC)

1-17. Paragraphs 1 through 17 of the Recitals are hereby incorporated in this Count Six.

18. GREGORY LOLES made negligent misrepresentations in one or more of the

following ways:

a. he supplied false information by informing Plaintiffs that their funds would

be invested in a fund known as the Knightsbridge Fund; that their funds

i I

I

! 1

I

i

I

I

!

would be invested as a bulk investment; that the Plaintiffs principal would

be fully protected; their investment would be paid over to the Knightsbridge

Fund which only invests in stable, high power companies with the highest

bond status; that the worst thing that could happen is that the Plaintiffs

would be forced to accept the return of their principal if Knightsbridge

could no longer support the stated dividend; that Plaintiffs could demand

the return of their principal and of so, would be returned by GREGORY

LOLES within (5) days.

b. Gregory LOLES failed to exercise reasonable care in communicating the

information as LOLES knew or should have known that the communications were false and he

could not honor the investment strategy as communicated to the Plaintiffs

c. GREGORY LOLES supplied the information to the Plaintiffs to induce the

Plaintiffs to act upon the information and supply him with fund to invest.

d. The Plaintiffs justifiably relied upon the information and paid over funds to

12

, ~~q------.- -.- --.---.---.--.-~ .. ~~~ .. ~

-~~~c ... ~~._._._ ••••• "'

GREGORY LOLES and/or the Defendant Corporation to their injury.

19. At all times herein Gregory Loles was an agent of Aperion Capital Management.

20. As a result of the carelessness and negligence of the Defendant, Gregory Loles and

Apeiron Capital Management the Plaintiffs has suffered damages.

COUNT SEVEN - BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY (As to Gregory Loles)

1-17. Paragraphs 1 through 17 of the Recitals are hereby incorporated in this Count

Seven.

i ~

I i I

.1

! i ~

18. GREGORY LOLES owed a fiduciary duty to the Plaintiffs in that he took

possession of the Plaintiffs funds to invest in agreed upon investment products.

19. GREGORY LOLES breached said fiduciary duty in one or more of the following

ways:

a. he supplied false information by informing Plaintiffs that their funds would

be invested in a fund known as the Knightsbridge Fund; that their funds

would be invested as a bulk investment; that the Plaintiffs principal would

be fully protected; their investment would be paid over to the Knightsbridge

Fund which only invests in stable, high power companies with the highest

bond status; that the worst thing that could happen is that the Plaintiffs

would be forced to accept the return of their principal if Knightsbridge

could no longer support the stated dividend; that Plaintiffs could demand

the return of their principal and of so, would be returned by GREGORY

13

LOLES within (5) days.

b. he failed to return the principal investment of the Plaintiffs notwithstanding their

repeated demands.

c. he improperly monitored and/or-managed the funds of the Plaintiff and/or

d. he never invested the Plaintiffs funds in the stated financial products but rather

absconded with said funds for his personal use.

COUNT EIGHT - VIOLATION OF CONNECTICUT SECURITIES AND BUSINESS OPPORTUNITY INVESTMENT ACT (As to Gregory Loles, Kalliopi Loles and Apeiron Capital Management, LLC

1-17. Paragraphs 1 through 17 of the Recitals are hereby incorporated in this Count

Eight.

18. Gregory Loles, Kalliopi Loles and/or Apeiron Capital Management, LLC are

persons as defined by C.G.S. §36b-3(15).

19. Gregory Loles, Kalliopi Loles and/or Apeiron Capital Management, LLC directly

and/or indirectly conducted prohibited activities pursuant to C.G.S. 36b-4 in one or more of the

following ways:

a. At no time did Apeiron Capital Management, Inc., and/or Gregory Loles

and/or Kalliopi Loles invest any portion of the Plaintiffs funds with the Knightsbridge Fund,

Travelers Fund and or any other investment product but rather retained the Plaintiff s funds for

their own personal use and/or enjoyment.

14

b. At all times herein Kalliopi Loles participated in, knew or should have

known of the improper retention of the Plaintiffs funds.

c. At no time did Kalliopi Loles make reasonable inquiry into the investment

practices, procedure and/or rate of return on investments and/or distributions of funds invested by

Gregory Loles and or the Defendant Corporation.

d. The Defendant, Kalliopi Loles sat idle with reckless disregard for the

I

!

!

I I I

I

!

j

investment practices, procedure and/or rate of return on investments and/or distributions of funds

to investors without making reasonable inquiry into Gregory Loles' and/or the Defendant

Corporations said investment practices which enabled her to generate personal financial gains

which caused great financial loss to the Plaintiffs.

e. The Defendants Apeiron Capital Management, Inc., and/or Gregory Loles

and/or Kalliopi Loles directly or indirectly misrepresented the investment strategy of the

Plaintiff's funds and conveedrt said funds for their own person use and enjoyment.

f. The Defendants Apeiron Capital Management, Inc., and/or Gregory Loles

and/or Kalliopi Loles intentionally made known false statements to the Plaintiffs with regards

to investment strategy of the Plaintiff's funds.

g. The Defendants Apeiron Capital Management, Inc., Gregory Loles and/or

Kalliopi Loles acted with reckless disregard and did not make reasonable inquiry into the

investment acts of the fellow officers of the Defendant Corporation.

h. The Defendants, Apeiron Capital Management, Inc., andlor Gregory Loles

15

and/or Kalliopi Loles to refuse to return the Plaintiffs principal investment.

20. As a result ofthe Defendants conduct the Plaintiffs have suffered damages.

COUNT NINE - VIOLATION OF UNIFORM FRAUDULENT TRANSFER ACT(As to Farnbacher Lolas Motorsports, LLC, Farnbacher Lolas Auto Parts, LLC, Farnbacher Loles Street Performance, LLC, Farnbacherloles Racing, LLC)

1-17. Paragraphs 1 through 17 of the Recitals are hereby incorporated in this Count

Eight.

! I

I

i

I ! !

j

18. At all times herein the Defendant, Gregory Lolas was the sole member of The

Defendant Farnbacher Lolas Motorsports, LLC (Hereinafter "Motorsports, LLC") a Limited

Liability Company with a principal place of business located at 45A Miry Brook Road, Danbury,

Connecticut.

19. At all times herein the Defendant, Gregory Lolas was the sole member of The

Defendant Farnbacher Lolas Auto Parts, LLC (Hereinafter "Auto Parts, LLC").

20. At all times herein the Defendant, Gregory Lolas was the sole member of The

Defendant Fambacher Lolas Street Performance, LLC (Hereinafter "Street Performance, LLC").

21. At all times herein the Defendant, Gregory Lolas was the sole member of The

Defendant Fambacherlolas Racing, LLC (Hereinafter "Racing, LLC").

22. At all times herein the Defendant Kalliopi Lolas was the wife of the Defendant

16

..

Gregory Loles.

23. At all times herein the Plaintiff's are "Creditors" pursuant to C.G.s. 52~552b(4).

24. At all times herein Gregory Lolas was a "Debtor" pursuant to C.G.S. 52-552b(6).

25. At all times herein Motorsports, LLC, Auto Parts, LLC, Street Performance, LLC

and Racing, LLC were "Insiders" pursuant to C.G.S. 52-552b(7).

26. Upon information and belief Gregory Lolas has organized, planned and

implemented a scheme to defraud individuals and organizations of their funds, one of such

individuals being the Plaintiffs.

27. Upon information and belief, Gregory Lolas has transferred the funds of the

individuals, organizations, including the funds of the Plaintiffs to Motorsports, LLC, Auto Parts,

LLC, Street Performance, LLC, Racing, LLC and Kalliopi Loles with the intent to hinder, delay

and/or defraud creditors which includes the Plaintiffs.

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff seeks:

1. Money damages;

2. Restitution;

3. Interest Pursuant to C.G.S. §37-3

4. Costs pursuant to C.G.S. §42-10Ig(d);

5. Attorneys' fees pursuant to C.G.S §42-10Ig(d).

6. Double Treble Damages;

17

7. Injunctive Releif j

8.

Such other and further relief as the Court deems just and fair.

THE PLAINTIFF,

By: __ ------------------------------

Dennis J. Kokenos Owens, Schine, & Nicola, P.C. #44796

799 Silver Lane

P.O. Box 753

Trumbull, CT 06611

Phone: (203) 375-0600

Fax: (203) 375-5003

18