Page 4 - AUDIO DOCS WWW

and in bold print to emphasise his point:
Thus the posiNon of the non-MHML leaseholders was abundantly clear. And the implicaNon of what you are claiming in this audio clip is that Mrs Hillgarth was engaged in a conspiracy (ha ha ha she AGREED) with the directors of MHML to defraud the non-MHML leaseholders, who plainly did not want you to do any of the work yourself. However if Mrs Hillgarth had been aware of and connived in what you planned, it seems extraordinary that on 11 September 2014 (having discovered that you were doing some of the work yourself - (BECAUSE SHE WAS THEN ON HER VENDETTA) she should have wriZen to you to enquire what was going on and to request a breakdown of the costs of the internal work.
In your response of the same date you stated that you were not doing the works yourself; “They are being done by your preferred contractor A&R Lawrence for the agreed budget of £115,019.” (ALREADY WELL EXPLAINED AND ANSWERED IN THE 13 JUNE CORRESPONDENCE - FOR GOD’S SAKE READ WHAT YOU’RE SENT TO READ) Actually, as you must have known, that was not the truth. Indeed we have a copy of a leZer from Evens Boyce to AR Lawrence dated 14 July 2014 from which it is clear that when you wrote that leZer of 11 September you had already reduced the contract sum for AR Lawrence to £63,828 plus VAT. (You were subsequently to reduce it again to £53,000 plus VAT). (ALREADY WELL EXPLAINED AND ANSWERED IN THE 13 JUNE CORRESPONDENCE - FOR GOD’S SAKE READ WHAT YOU’RE SENT TO READ)
In your response to Mrs Hillgarth of 11 September 2014 you conNnued: “I have, though, done the li1, which is NOT included in the Surveyor's Specifica>ons, as advised to you in a previous email a1er your visit (I aAach the quote (£11,602 incl. vat) to do what I have succeeded in doing for under £200 of spray paint. In fact I've actually done more than their quote specified, considerably more!).
You conNnued: “Since the scaffolding commenced installa>on on Sunday 31st August, exactly two weeks ago, Management have already saved Lessees exactly £1177.56 OFF the budgeted £105,019. This has been accomplished by Management stepping in and doing various workings which we knew could be done at a more economical cost (in brief, shop signage (COSTED BY A.R. LAWRENCE FOR £800 plus vat which Management have produced for £125.......and >dying up visible wiring and making Meter Cupboards which A.R.Lawrence costed at £922 plus Vat for 3 meter cupboards and Management have produced same for £648 TO ALSO INCLUDE BOXING IN THE LOOSE WIRING).This ini>al saving of £1177.56 will not however be reimbursed to lessees at the end of the works, as Management will u>lise this first of many savings, to progress works on the interior NOT included in the Surveyor's Specifica>ons (such as the li1 workings).”
Why did you need to explain all this on 11 September 2014 if you had already made clear at the 23 May 2014 meeNng that you were going to take these steps and Mrs Hillgarth had agreed to it? Why didn’t you just say: “Michele, don’t you remember our meeNng of 23 May when you agreed to all this?” YES TOO TRUE AND I KNOW WHAT THE REPLY WOULD HAVE BEEN ....... I NEVER SAID THAT etc - all PREDICTABLE & ON THE AUDIO AS PREDICTED - WANNA HAVE IT?
The truth is that Mrs HIllgarth never requested or authorised MHML or yourself to do any work in relaNon to the refurbishment. She believed (and once the SecNon 20 noNce had
“I do not consent to the works proposed by you (PROPOSED BY, NOT DONE BY) under the Management Proposal or to your proposal to start minor workings during the summer. Should you proceed with your proposed refurbishment (THE PROPOSED REFURB NOT THE WORKS), you are at risk of being held personally liable for any money spent”.
been agreed on 22 June 2014 was enNtled to believe) that all the work was going to be done