On a Tuesday last December, five companies filed a lawsuit in New York state court alleging Bert I. Dweck stole $2.8 million tied to three real estate deals: 1526 Grand Concourse in the Bronx, and 4188 and 4910 Broadway in Manhattan. The pattern, per the complaint, was consistent: Dweck approached investors with an opportunity to acquire a property, the investors wired funds, and Dweck allegedly disappeared with the money. The investors claim Dweck provided phony documents as part of the deal.
Dweck, the Brooklyn-based dealmaker behind Dweck Group, is now facing seven lawsuits in New York state court. Investors and lenders are seeking at least $14.4 million in total. The cases paint a picture of a broker whose alleged cash crunch spiraled across multiple real estate deals and personal lending relationships.
Several lawsuits accuse Dweck of failing to return money that was supposed to remain in escrow accounts. Others allege he solicited funds for deals that either stalled, collapsed, or never materialized. The legal drama is reverberating through Brooklyn's tight-knit Syrian Jewish community, of which Dweck and his family are a part.
Two weeks after the Patriarch lawsuit was filed, Bronx supermarket owners Luis Manuel Diaz and Senelda Diaz sued Dweck and alleged associate Mark Benun for fraud. The Diazes, who own a C-town supermarket in Parkchester, alleged Dweck and Benun claimed they represented the owner of a neighboring building they wished to purchase. The Diazes sent over $1.44 million to Dweck and Benun. But when the closing occurred in May 2023, Dweck and Benun allegedly never showed up.
The actual property owner had no records of payments from the Diazes, according to the lawsuit. The Diazes allege Dweck and Benun concocted a similar scheme on another property. Dweck and Benun convinced the Diazes to enter into a partnership and created an LLC to buy a former Apple Bank at 74 Hugh J. Grant Circle in the Bronx. The Diazes sent over $1.37 million in payments. The LLC never bought the bank and was dissolved in October 2023.
The lawsuit alleges Dweck and Benun have not returned the money. Dweck denied the allegations in a legal filing. A spokesperson for Benun said: "Mark Benun was not served in this complaint. If and when he is served, he will defend any and all claims relative to the Diaz Group other than selling them a net lease which converted to a sale." The spokesperson added that upon learning of Dweck's criminal activity, Benun immediately hired counsel.
The investors in the Patriarch case allege Dweck's lawyer, Jacques Erdos, assisted in the alleged fraud by releasing escrow funds directly to Dweck. In a statement, Erdos's lawyer said Erdos disputes the allegations and believes the claims lack merit. Dweck's attorney declined to comment.
The lawsuits began piling up in December, but the alleged misconduct spans years. The Diazes' claims date to 2023. The Patriarch lawsuit involves deals that were supposed to close earlier. The pattern suggests a sustained cash flow problem, not a one-off lapse.
For the broader market, the Dweck case is a reminder that escrow accounts are only as reliable as the parties controlling them. In a rising rate environment, where deal velocity slows and capital becomes more expensive, the temptation to misuse escrow funds can increase. Operators facing liquidity crunches may view client funds as a bridge loan to themselves.
Lenders and investors should scrutinize escrow arrangements more closely. Require independent escrow agents. Demand regular account statements. Verify that funds are held in segregated accounts. The Dweck case shows what happens when trust replaces verification.
The $14.4 million in claims is small relative to the broader CRE market, but the reputational damage is outsized. Dweck's family has been named in some lawsuits. The Syrian Jewish community in Brooklyn is close-knit; a breach of trust there can have long-lasting consequences.
What happens next? The courts will decide. But the pattern is clear: when deals fail and money goes missing, the legal system becomes the collection agent. For investors, the lesson is to treat every escrow arrangement as if it will be litigated. Because increasingly, it will be.