47_PBC to Begg_30-6-16 (9pp)

MITRE HOUSE MANAGEMENT LIMITED
CORRESPONDENCE DELIVERIES & CONCIERGE ADDRESS
ON-SITE 24/7 BUREAU: SUITE 7 MITRE HOUSE • 124 KINGS ROAD • LONDON SW3 4TP EMERGENCY 24/7 TELEPHONE +44 20 7589 7502 • MBL: +44 (0)798 33 33 543
KNIGHTSBRIDGE BUREAU: 7 EGERTON GARDENS • LONDON SW3 2BP • MBL: +44 (0)798 33 33 543
COUNTRY BUREAU: BUCKLAND NEWTON PLACE • BUCKLAND NEWTON • DORSET DT2 7BX • MBL: +44 (0)798 33 33 543 OVERSEAS BUREAU: 290 HILL CREST GREEN 2 • BOWALAWATTA • KANDY • SRI LANKA • GPS: +94 (77) 9757355
EMAIL: MANAGEMENT@MITREHOUSE.COM • WWW.MITREHOUSE.COM:
P.F.C. Begg Esq.,
Solicitor,
9th Floor, Metro Building,
1 Butterwick, Hammersmith, London W6 8DL
30 June 2016
Ref: Mrs Michele Hillgarth & now Mitre House Management Limited & RBK&C & Freeholders
Thank you for the additional extension(s) and I attach your letter of 21 June 2016 with my comments as usual.
Please also find attached the requested Schedule of Works (Wade’s with costings) along with various other items I consider relevant to finally end this affair once and for all, a list of which is on page 2 overleaf.
I still consider your initial letter of 23 March 2016 to be a malicious ill-fated attempt to discredit myself, my co-directors and MHML, by a now totally discredited lessee purporting to represent a phoney plebiscite of a few allegedly like mind- ed, like thinking, fellow lessees who were without doubt ill-advised, ill-informed and totally misled, not once but twice, by this same lessee, as evidenced by her previous abortive and ill-prepared RTM application which was as disorganised, dishonest and disastrous as this present affair. I need hardly refer to her forgetting the 25% rule.
That lessee is your client, Mrs Hillgarth.
I suggest you review all our correspondence to date, most especially mine with more than adequate comprehensive supporting evidence to rebut all innuendos and accusations made in your initial 23 March letter and subsequent queries, as it would appear from my recent perusal of all our correspondence to date that you are still repeating requests which have previously been very comprehensively answered. The RTM, references to funding, lessee requests etc
I cannot and will not continue to advise you of references answered in previous correspondence to previous queries and accusations made, and unless we are subsequently legally obliged by you, RBK&C or indeed our Freeholders to consid- er your client’s tardy, out of time, 17 December 2015, request to view documents from our year ended 2014 Accounts dated 30 May 2015, as legally binding within the Landlord & Tenant Act 1987 s.22 to s24, I do not consider further correspondence to be useful.
It is totally discreditable to be arguing over the semantics of the 2014 works’ a year after they were finished (your client’s request for invoices on 17 December 2015). If these innuendos and accusations had any reason to be raised they should have been made within weeks of the finished works, or within days or weeks of the published year end accounts which all MHML’s replies to requests made as you infer, during the works, made abundantly clear would/could be answered once the accounts were published? Why wait six months and 17 days if so important, so disturbing, so very suspicious, so mistrusting of MHML and most notably, me?
MAINTAINING MITRE HOUSE
DIRECTORS • PAUL BROWN-CONSTABLE • SEGAR KARUPIAH • DIMA INTERNATIONAL LIMITED
REG. OFFICE • 9 ACTON HILL MEWS • UXBRIDGE ROAD • LONDON W3 9QN • REGISTERED NO. 7731341 • ENGLAND
a registered member of since 1 October 2014