Page 8 - 2-6-17 Disclosure & Reply 3-6-17

-3-
Accusations included blackmail; misappropriating Lessees’ window repair monies despite “MH” and all other Lessees requested to write cheques directly to our contractor which they all did, including “MH”; non payment to suppliers despite bank statement evidence to the contrary; frightening “MH’s” sub-let tenant by wandering around in (“PBC”) underwear (it was a white boiler suit whilst painting & decorating); fraud because MHML had not identified Surveyor’s Fees separately from Contractor fees nor indeed identified individual contractors including “MHML”on our annual accounts summary under “Reserves Utilised”; but most seriously that of theft and misappropriation of Lessees’ contributions of £2000 to fund the “works” programme for £105,019 due to only having £98,262 in Reserves and if the voluntary contributions per lessee for a new Water Tank and com- munal TV/Sky installations had even been spent?
In a letter dated 14 June 2016 (item 6c): in reply to “MH’s” Solicitor letter of 14 June 2016, “MHML” “PBC” con- firms for the umpteenth time that due to only having £98,262 in Reserves to fund a £105,019 works programme, we were short by £6756 and consequently it was necessary to call upon all nine lessees, including “PBC” and the other (then) three directors (which included “MH”) for a £2000 contribution each, so leaving, if lucky, £11,243 in Reserves at the end of the “works” programme. All as stated on the final s20 Notice dated 22 June 2014 (items 19 & 20): indicating all contractor costings included vat and fees and only £98,262 in Reserves. This was all previously agreed with “MH” at a board meeting on 23 May 2014.
8_ Reference to Lessees of this £11,243 reserve was made on multiple occasions prior to commencement of the works and during, (items 7, 8a, 9): and remains at the very heart of this application as indeed £11,243 was not the final end year/end works total in Reserves but £16,201, as our year ended 2014 Accounts amply evidences (item 16): as indeed does our letter to all Lessees dated 8th June 2015 which accompanied the year ended 2014 Accounts and Quarterly Demands to all lessees. (item 12):
9_ Despite the Accounts’ confirmation as to funds in correct place (Reserves), and despite our notification to all Lessees, again on multiple occasions during the works, of their right to request and review documents etc of the 2014 Accounts once published, (items 10, 11,18): no requests were received from any Lessee within the six month period allowed, as is well evidenced by “MH’s” voluntary admittance in her Witness Statement dated 10 August 2016 (item 4): until “MH’s” Solicitor’s letter of 23 March 2016. Due to his and “MH’s” repeated insis- tence that requests had been made by various lessees as well as “MH” in all subsequent correspondence to the 23 March 2016 letter and indeed repeated again in the Section 22 Notice as presented to the Tribunal for the Application to Appoint a Manager.
10_ Most recently, and well prior to “MH’s” 7 April 2017 Application to Appoint a Manager, “MH” forwarded a letter dated 7 November 2016 from her Solicitor to all Lessees which yet again contained the identical same accusations of “where are the Lessees’ funds?” (item 13):
11_ As an example, this 7 November 2016 letter stated:
In your letter to me [“MH’s” Solicitor] of 29 September 2016, responding to mine of 23 September, you [“PBC”] said: "£25,121.54 is the cost & installation of the communal TV/Sky and Water Tank with the balance remaining in Reserves [which in a previous letter he [“MH’s” Solicitor] estimated as £11,974.54] (item 13b):
(“PBC” comment/reply in reply on 7 November 2016): True - what exactly is erroneous in that statement - any- thing not spent on the Water Tank and TV/Sky installation, along with anything else not spent anywhere else remained in Reserves.... where else would it remain?
[“MH’s” Solicitor] That response leaves unclear how much was actually spent on the communal TV/Sky and Water Tank. It also fails to answer my question (posed on the assumption that something close to the budgeted figure of £13,147 was properly spent on the communal TV/Sky and Water Tank), as to what had happened to all the rest of the money which, according to the service charge accounts, had apparently been spent.
12_ In “PBC’s” letter to “MH’s” Solicitor dated 10 June 2016, some five months previously to 7 November 2016, he stated:
With scaffolding in place, MHML renegotiated and saved £2125.83 off the quoted costs of both installs, which was justification enough for doing as MHML had advised whilst scaffolding was in place to facilitate the two installs.