Gas station buyer alleges fraudulent misrepresentation by former owner in contract dispute

A recent decision from the Superior Court of New Jersey Appellate Division has affirmed a jury verdict finding that a gas station buyer was misled by the seller through fraudulent misrepresentation and breach of contract during the sale of a business. The case centers on allegations that false documents were used to induce the purchase, resulting in significant financial loss for the buyer.

The complaint was filed by Aponte Service Station, LLC, naming Scander, LLC and Bassem Scander as third-party defendants. The case was heard in Bergen County under Docket No. L-7638-20, with oral arguments presented on December 16, 2025, and a decision issued on March 3, 2026.

According to court documents, Scander purchased and operated a gas station at 90 Hackensack Avenue before deciding to sell it in September 2017. In preparation for the sale, Scander provided prospective buyers with financial information generated from both the station’s Ruby Point of Sale System and his own software application. The latter summarized sales data but was later revealed to be unreliable.

Aponte expressed interest in purchasing the gas station in May 2017 and conducted due diligence over several months. During this period, Aponte requested authentic fuel supplier invoices to verify sales figures. Instead, he received computer-generated spreadsheets summarizing fuel sales and purported invoices from P&J Fuel supplier for May and June 2017. At trial, Jasbir S. Chandi of P&J testified that these invoices were not genuine P&J documents. After this testimony, Scander admitted that he had created these invoices using his software application.

Aponte testified that these documents influenced his decision to buy the business because they suggested strong diesel sales at the station. He stated that no warnings about unreliability were given verbally or in writing regarding these documents—a claim supported by broker Brian Elkin’s testimony.

Negotiations continued after Aponte visited the gas station for three nights to observe operations firsthand. Following his site visit and review of current sales receipts, Aponte reduced his offer but ultimately agreed to purchase the business for $225,000 on September 15, 2017. However, after taking ownership, Aponte found that actual sales did not match those represented in the documents provided by Scander.

In April 2021, Aponte filed suit against Scander LLC and Bassem Scander individually for breach of contract, breach of implied covenants of good faith and fair dealing, and fraudulent inducement related to the sale transaction.

A jury trial began on August 5, 2024. On August 7, 2024, jurors awarded $225,000 in compensatory damages—the full purchase price—to Aponte Service Station LLC. The following day brought an additional $75,000 award in punitive damages against Scander LLC and Bassem Scander individually. Prejudgment interest brought total damages to $332,400.86 as reflected in a final judgment order entered September 11, 2024.

Scander appealed both liability findings and damage awards arguing there was insufficient evidence showing Aponte reasonably relied on allegedly fraudulent computer-generated invoices or suffered quantifiable loss as required under New Jersey law.

The appellate panel rejected these arguments citing substantial credible evidence supporting jury findings: “The jury is the preeminent factfinder in our system of justice…” The opinion notes testimony from both parties as well as corroborating witnesses indicating Aponte relied upon documentation supplied by Scander when making his purchase decision.

On damages claims raised by defendants—including lack of expert testimony or supporting bank records—the court ruled such evidence was unnecessary since Aponte sought reimbursement equal to his out-of-pocket loss: “no expert is required ‘when a plaintiff seeks to be made whole.'” The jury determined compensatory damages based on what Aponte paid for what turned out to be a failing business due to inaccurate representations about its performance.

All remaining arguments advanced by defendants were deemed without merit sufficient for further discussion by written opinion.

Attorneys involved included William M. Goldberg representing appellants (Scander LLC and Bassem Scander) and Alan I. Kraminsky (with Justyna Eisenbardt) representing respondent (Aponte Service Station LLC). The case identification is Docket No. L-7638-20.