Page 104 - (C) Good Ref_1

From: Subject: Date: To: Cc:
Maria Leoni-Sceti mleonisceti@gmail.com
Re: Mitre House Section 20 Decision
20 June 2014 18:49
Fortunati, Diego - GCIB LDN diego.fortunati@baml.com
Paul Brown-Constable studio@graffiti.biz, ivan@osullivanproperty.co.uk, Karupiah Segar segar_9@hotmail.com, Riad Samya riadsf@gmail.com, Michele Hillgarth mhillgarth@gmail.com, Jamil Raja J.Raja@jraja.co.uk, Leigh-Pemberton Christopher clp@sw12group.com
Dear Paul and other lessees of Mitre House,
Having read Flat 9's response to the e-mail below, Flat 3 agrees wholeheartedly with all the points raised and once again applaud Diego for his keen business sense and ability to sift through the utter nonsense we have been receiving left right and centre.
KInd regards,
Maria Leoni-Sceti
Flat 3
On 20 Jun 2014, at 02:00, Fortunati, Diego - GCIB LDN <diego.fortunati@baml.com> wrote:
Please find attached and below my response to your latest communication re internal and external refurbishment. The original has been posted to Paul.
If any other Lessee agrees with my views, feel free to just respond to this e-mail by saying I agree with Flat 9.
***
London, 20 June 2014
Private
Dear Paul,
Re: Mitre House Section 20_2 Notice – Response from Flat 9
Reference is made to your letter dated 15 June 2014 and cover e-mail dated 16 June 2014 where there is a request of additional comments on Management proposed internal and external redecoration.
Below are my comments ahead of your very tight deadline of 7 days from 15 June 2014.
Needless to say how surprised and disappointed I am. After more than 2 years of discussions and constant rejection of the wishes of the majority of Lessees by Management, when the process finally appeared to be following more standard procedures (tender and section 20 notices), you came up with the usual random “rabbit out of the hat”. It is not acceptable that after a 5 months process of notices the conclusion is that you now propose to appoint a contractor never mentioned before and not included in the tender process or surveyor report already paid by all Lessees.
This continued exchange of e-mails, incorrect notices, wrong assessments, mathematical errors (cfr. your e-mail dated 16 May 2014) is exactly why we have requested, several times, Mitre House being managed and refurbishment works being carried out by professionals with the relevant qualifications and set-up to do so.
I do not consent to your proposal to appoint Benitor Ltd for the proposed works of internal and external redecoration for the following reasons:
1. In your Section 20_2 notice dated 25 March 2014 you had listed 7 contractors with associated quotes. Benitor Ltd was not on the list, nor was their quote submitted prior to the consultation period deadline of 30 April 2014. Thereforethey are not a
valid selection