Page 5 - 1_Letter from Begg 23-3-16 (13pp)

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.”
You continued: “I have, though, done the lift, which is NOT included in the Surveyor's Specifications, as advised to you in a previous email after your visit (I attach 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!)
Since the scaffolding commenced installation 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 tidying 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 initial saving of £1177.56 will not however be reimbursed to lessees at the end of the works, as Management will utilise this first of many savings, to progress works on the interior NOT included in the Surveyor's Specifications (such as the lift workings).”
I need hardly point out that once your leaseholders have been informed that contractors have been appointed to do a fixed job at a fixed cost, it is potentially fraudulent (at least without informing them) to mislead your leaseholders by doing the work yourself, or through others, and then to keep the money which was paid by the leaseholders to get the work done. And this remains the case even if the aggregate cost to the leaseholders is the same as, or less than, they would have paid to the agreed contractor. I would like to have your comment on this please.
Your own Flat
In the course of the works it became clear that you were having your own flat decorated at the same time. In view of the existing uncertainties about what AR Lawrence were doing (or not doing) the suspicion arose that your own flat was perhaps being decorated at the expense of the other tenants at Mitre House. Thus on 13 August 2014 Christopher Leigh-Pemberton wrote to ask for your confirmation that there was no element of personal benefit arising from the use of AR Lawrence as the contractors for the overall Mitre House project.
In your response of the same date, timed at 10.35, you wrote: “even if I was using A&R Lawrence (which I am not) its none of anybody’s business save mine”. This was consistent with an e-mail timed at 7.45 on the same date to Diego Fortunati , when you wrote: “I am doing the works in the flat myself”. However both of these e-mails appeared directly to contradict your earlier e-mail to Mrs Hillgarth on 12 August 2014, timed at 5.54 pm, in which you had written: “My flat is being done by Benitor and AR Lawrence after hours and weekends” (this notwithstanding that work is not allowed after 6pm).