Page 485 - NEW FINAL 616 BIG BAD BEGG

£98,364 (approx) in the bank (yes indeed £102 out on my guesstimate on s.20) Plus £18000 (£2000 x 9)
Plus £12858 (Tank & TV)
Making funds available of £129,222 approx
Less AR Lawrence Total £63,600
Less Surveyors Total £10,513
Less Tank & TV Total £11,256
Less Savings Costs Spent & MHML Works Total £31,756 Grand Costs Total £117,125
Due ag sations notably tinued terly De reflect a counta under “ indicate the oth £12,85
Less funds available of £129,222 approx Result: £12,097
Plus not paid Creditor AR Lawrence (a) £7418 Plus not paid Creditor AR Lawrence (b) £1590 Plus Debtors £4563
Less Creditors £9467
Result (Reserves carried forward) £16,201
Details of the Mitre House Management Limited Banking Transactions 2014-2016
23. mhml appears to have the following bank accounts, all with lloyds Bank limited, chelsea Branch (sort code: 30:64:72):
As I ex 2005 h ing was everyo gramm whom t amount remain ally list
-13-
SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT TO CITY OF LONDON POLICE
and to THE INSOLVENCY SERVICE
mitre house management limited (“mhml”) – company no: 07731341
mitre house, 124 King’s road, london sW3 4tP (“mitre house” or “the Property”) directors of mhml: Paul Brown-constable, dima international limited (Jamil raja) and segar Karupiah (resigned 29 september 2016) (together “the directors”).
AS UTILISED/SPENT. THE SAME INDEED COULD BE LEVELLED AT THE TWO OTHER ITEMISED "RESERVES UTILISED” OF £18,000 AND £12,858, NEITHER OF WHICH WERE ALL SPENT, BUT WERE RECEIVED. AND ALL EXPLAINED IN THE ACCOUNTS’ ACCOMPANYING NOTES.
OUR PREVIOUS AGENTS SUBSEQUENT TO MAJOR WORKS IN 2005 HAD ADOPTED THE VERY SAME PROCESS. THEY DID NOT DIFFERENTIATE OR INDIVIDUALLY LIST SURVEYOR FEESNORTHEIRAGENTS’FEESETC,PREFERINGASWEPREFERREDONEAMOUNTRE- FLECTING THE BUDGET APPROPRIATED PLUS ANY OVERSPEND (£858). AS INDEED DO KNIGHT FRANK & WELCOME TRUST ON THEIR SUMMARIES, ALL OF WHICH YOU HAVE PREVIOUSLY BEEN SUPPLIED COPIES OF. ONE FIGURE ONLY UNDER RESERVES UTILISED.
YOUR ACCUSATION THAT THIS WAS PROGRESSED TO MISLEAD AND MISAPPROPRIATE LEASEHOLDER’S MONIES AS WE HAD NOT MENTIONED ALL RECIPIENTS INDIVIDUALLY, AR LAWRENCE, SURVEYOR, AERIALTEC, HOUSEMAN, MHML ETC IS DENIED AS PETTY SUP- POSITION, AS INDEED ANY REQUEST TO INSPECT THE VARIOUS ACCOUNTS’ DOCUMENTA- TION BY ANY LESSEE/LEASEHOLDER, TO WHICH THEY HAD ALL BEEN ADVISED TO DO ON PUBLICATION OF THE YE2014 ACCOUNTS, WOULD HAVE BEEN WELL IN EVIDENCE IF IN- DEEDANYQUERYHADBEENRAISED.ANYOUTSTANDINGAMOUNTSWERELISTEDAND PROPERLY ACCOUNTED FOR IN CREDITORS IN THE CORRECT MANNER.
TO SAVE A FIFTEENTH COMPUTATION GUESSTIMATE FROM YOU OR MRS HILLGARTH:
As rega Utilised Service you acc propria spent f Reserv be leve £18,00 were re nying N
o mhml’s clients call account no: 24411268 (the “leaseholders’ reserve account”). this account is effectively a client account holding the leaseholders’ money collected in ad-
Please refer to attached “ADDENDUM/FURTHER REFERENCES” in suPPort of argument