Trust. Build. Betray. The Alleged Con Job of Andrea D’Alessio and Inspirata Management
How a Self-Promoting “Luxury Construction Visionary” Became the Focus of Allegations Involving Investor Losses, Project Disruptions, and Misused Design IP
A lawsuit filed in Miami-Dade County by DLC Capital Management outlines a series of allegations against Inspirata Management Company, Scalaa LP, Andrea D’Alessio, Anthony Iannuzzi, Erik Peterson, and affiliated entities. The filings depict a breakdown between long-term business partners and raise questions about financial oversight, project management, and the protection of proprietary architectural work.
A lawsuit filed in Miami-Dade County by DLC Capital Management outlines a series of allegations against Inspirata Management Company, Scalaa LP, Andrea D’Alessio, Anthony Iannuzzi, Erik Peterson, and affiliated entities. The filings depict a breakdown between long-term business partners and raise questions about financial oversight, project management, and the protection of proprietary architectural work.
Background: A Long-Term Business Relationship Deteriorates
According to the complaint, DLC Capital spent nearly a decade supporting the professional growth of Andrea D’Alessio, providing funding for business operations, office infrastructure, staffing, and project support. Over that period, D’Alessio established Inspirata and Scalaa as full-service luxury design and construction-related firms.
The lawsuit alleges that, despite outward appearances, significant financial and operational irregularities occurred behind the scenes.
Alleged Financial Misconduct
The complaint asserts that D’Alessio had broad access to DLC’s financial resources, and that this access was allegedly used to charge DLC for unauthorized expenses. The suit lists several categories of financial activity it characterizes as improper:
Unapproved Charges
- Hundreds of thousands of dollars allegedly billed to DLC credit cards for work unrelated to DLC projects.
Vendor Payments and Invoice Discrepancies
- Payments to outside vendors that the complaint states were duplicated without authorization.
- One example cited in the lawsuit involves Southeast Marine Construction, which allegedly received a second $50,000 payment. Plaintiffs assert that a false invoice was later created to justify the additional charge.
Statements Under Oath
- The complaint alleges that D’Alessio submitted a sworn declaration claiming all files and materials had been returned, while major folders and project documents were allegedly missing, mislabeled, or withheld.
Project Interference and Operational Disputes
Following DLC’s efforts to end the business relationship, the suit alleges a series of actions that disrupted ongoing projects:
- Contractors were reportedly instructed to stop working with DLC.
- Third-party engineers were allegedly threatened with legal action if they continued providing services to DLC.
- Access to design files, blueprints, and development documents—funded by DLC—was allegedly restricted.
The complaint contends that these actions resulted in stalled or delayed construction activity across multiple sites.
Alleged Reuse of Proprietary Design Materials
The lawsuit also focuses on the handling of architectural concepts and designs produced during the parties’ collaboration. According to the filings:
- DLC-funded designs were allegedly displayed on Scalaa’s and Inspirata’s websites after the business separation.
- Several DLC projects appeared with new titles, including:
- The Palm Project → “The Modern Oasis”
- The Glass House and The Hidden Gem → shown on Scalaa’s website
- The New York Residence → also featured online, though plaintiffs assert Scalaa did not exist when that project was designed
DLC claims this constitutes unauthorized use of intellectual property for commercial promotion.
Permit and Code Issues at the Teacher Housing Project
At DLC’s 177 NW 35th Street development—a five-story teacher housing project—the suit alleges a series of unpermitted and noncompliant actions:
- Removal of trees without permits, resulting in $77,000 in mitigation payments and $8,000 in fines
- Foundation work begun without an approved city permit
- Misrepresentations allegedly made to City staff regarding project status
- Instructions to workers to continue construction despite stop-work orders
- A site-wide shutdown causing damage to installed rebar and halting progress
Filings state that DLC was not informed of these issues until after the partnership dissolved, and that resulting delays and penalties exceeded $1.7 million.
The Wooden Statue Installation Dispute
Another incident described in the lawsuit involves a $720,000 wooden statue installation. Plaintiffs allege:
- Use of a diesel generator that did not comply with county codes
- Absence of structural engineering
- Lack of required permits
- Significant budget overruns
According to the lawsuit, the final projected cost reached $1.35 to $1.4 million, nearly double the original estimate, and the structure may require reconstruction.
Context and Broader Significance
The filings characterize the issues as part of a larger operational pattern and allege that the conduct described was deliberate rather than incidental. Inspirata, Scalaa, and the named individuals have become involved in multiple litigation matters across South Florida, including disputes over costs, project management, and ownership of design materials.
The allegations in the DLC case describe practices that plaintiffs view as violating professional norms and investor trust. The lawsuit emphasizes concerns about transparency, intellectual property protection, and compliance with permitting and regulatory requirements.
A Cautionary Note
All defendants deny wrongdoing, and the case remains active. No court has yet ruled on the merits of the allegations.
However, the filing has drawn attention due to the volume and specificity of the claims, as well as the extensive documentation cited by the plaintiffs.