Page 3 - 15_PBC to Begg_10-5-16 (11pp)

waste looking at it.”
-3-
The attached bundle of correspondence with Mrs Hillgarth and Flat 9 well illustrates the frustrations being experienced, namely chasing up agreed contributions, the £2000, the SkyTV, the Water Tank etc but due to Mrs Hillgarth’s gerrymandering and misinformation everything previously agreed and understood as being a requirement was again being queried, despite all executed with 100% agree- ment of all lessees including Mrs Hillgarth and Flat 9 and as such legally circumventing the usually required s.20 Notices (or a dispensation) by asking, requesting voluntary contributions, and receiving 100% agreement from all 9 lessees (and making clear that failing 100% agreement we could not pro- ceed as planned (and by proceeding we were all saving a great deal of money whilst £20,000 of scaffolding was in place etc). (ref: refer to listings A-ZZZ & XX)
Statements made in your letter of 23 March are perfect examples of Mrs Hillgarth’s ignorance of facts stated, documents supplied and emails sent ad nauseum to further explain. Namely, the £2000 contribution was for no other reason than to finance the works and leave a few thousand in Reserves.
As stated, the £2000 contributions had nothing whatsoever to do with the subsequently mooted SkyTV install nor the emergency of the Water Tank - my reference to such as the Water Tank in emails men- tioned by you was obtuse - such as in English means a good example of what might be an unexpect- ed expense, not a reference to using the £2000 contributions to be used for either the SkyTV or Water Tank, both of which required voluntary contributions, a 100% agreement to do (most especially the SkyTV install) and had we simply used up the emergency funds held over in Reserves for these two items, further funding of Reserves would have been required, promptly, or the Reserves would again be underfunded. Yet another ignorant misinterpretation to cause yet more grief (ref: WW and others))
Hence queries and concerns and yet more accusations came our way having made very clear the situation to Mrs Hillgarth and Flat 9 and indeed all other lessees multiple times previously. And all with in a few days after works had commenced and we not having sufficient funds in the bank to pay for them? I think you, too, Mr Begg might have succumbed to some less than British vernacular.
You will also note the usual references to we not having supplied documentation with our usual resp- onse that we had, and when we’d sent it and if not, look on the website. (ref: refer to listings A-ZZZ)
You will note an email from Mrs Hillgarth, dated 23 September 2014 stating: (ref: M)
“Your web has been designed for your own entertainment and nobody in their right mind has time to
I think we can deduce from that comment that Mrs Hillgarth was, 3 weeks into the works’ schedule on 23 September 2014, still totally oblivious to any posted document on our website (but to be fair, had been sent copies of all documents lodged there at some stage well prior to 23 September 2014, multiple times). Two years earlier she had emailed saying the website was a great idea!
I think we can also deduce from that comment that Mrs Hillgarth’s ignorance was also in evidence by Flat 9 and possibly other lessees, as one would have hoped that one or two of them might have contradicted her? Regrettably Mrs Hillgarths misinformation won the day obviously.
If proof perfect is still required as to MHML’s transparency of information, refer to email to all lessees dated 13 September 2014 (13 days into works’ schedule) with an update - (ref: UU)
You will note (in case of misunderstanding as Flat 9 refers to nobody wanting SkyTv nor Tank), that in an email to me dated 17 September 2014, Mrs Hillgarth states unequivocally, “Yes, I agree with the installation”. (ref: U) also well understood from our meeting on 28 April at Mitre House (Ref: VV)
No doubt you will no doubt now appreciate that if there ever was a majority or consensus it was a pretty disparate disorganised and disorientated one which MHML did not recognise for reasons stated comprehensively earlier. (ref: refer to listings A-ZZZ)
And in case it was not mentioned by Mrs Hillgarth, we did issue an s.20 for the Water Tank in prepara- tion that if we could not get 100% agreement from all 9 lessees to fund individually, voluntarily and so save money, it would have been referred to LVT for dispensation due to the urgency of the situation
in the absence of the 100% agreement we did thankfully receive. (ref J)