Page 15 - 67_PBC to Begg Addendum_31-10-16 (24pp)

15
“great Michele, wise choice re tenants set up as all we’ll do is attach hers to the new setup with tidy cabling etc.” At 12:56, I responded:
“as I said, I will be paying my share for the communal aerial and satellite”.
Subsequent e-mails from you that day brought up other issues and expenses, hence why I did not on that very day of 29th September give you a cheque for the TV aerial. But I have always said I would pay my share, the thing here is not to mix issues.
I also handed you a cheque when I came over on 30th September for £867.87 to cover my share of the cost of the water tank replacement.
There was, as we all stated previously, no need for a Section 20 letter. If instead of confusing and mixing issues you took what was in front of you this would all be sorted and the requisite funds would be in your hands.
And she continues in her email, again 6 October 2014 (a continuation of the “flurry” of emails...)
Paul,
We are short £6,757.90 in order to meet the refurbishment costs of £105,019.00 If we divide this shortfall, it would cost each of the 9 flats £755.77
We agreed a nominal sum of £2,000 so that would cover the shortfall, and also the cost of the replacing the water tank and changing the TV aerial. All the flats agreed to this.
You are now blackmailing us, bullying us, insulting us and confusing us as usual.
We have all agreed that Section 20 was not necessary for the change of the water tank, and you will be fully responsible with your 2 other directors if any illness arises from contamination because you have ignored our agreement as the majority to change the tank and the cost would be met within the £2,000 given by each flat.
Michele
And she continues in her email, again 6 October 2014 (a continuation of the “flurry” of emails...) In brief Paul,
1) Tank money has been paid in front of the police officers by myself by cheque, but you have yet to reply regarding as to why on a Friday night the issue with the water tank was suddenly discovered. We still await an explanation for why this was missed in the surveyor’s report.
I sent you an e-mail on 29th September at 15:30, and in your response to my question of what the surveyor was directed to do, you stated that:
“The water tank, the lift, the electrics, the idiots that own flats here, their miserable front door etc are not of his con- cern”.
How on earth are the water tank and the lifts not of his concern??
2) TV aerial costs have been agreed to be paid – cheque will be in the post in accordance with your e-mail of 29th September 2014 at 11:51 where you state that no extra charges are required.
3) Nobody refused to pay the initial £2,000 as have been continuously reiterated. But you spend your life contra- dicting yourself. See Diego’s comment in his e-mail today, regarding point 7 in your e-mail of 1st October at 20:02.
4) The installation of the Sky dish by my tenant has been covered at length in previous e-mails, and responsibili- ty taken.
5) As you can see in Diego’s e-mail to you today at 10:28, work has been carried out on at least two occasions on the weekend and out of hours. Perhaps when you preach about adhering to the rules, then management should be setting an example. As managing agent, on top of living in the building, you should be ensuring that this does not happen. But as I have had witnessed when I came last Tuesday you are clearly distracted because it was YOUR FLAT that was full of workmen and not the communal areas...
We still have no real idea of what is included in the £105,000. Purely because on your website you state that the internal works will cost £25,00 but won’t include all of the specifications you then list below. And that the external works will be costing £75,000. There is no specifications for that on the website, and whilst I’m not naïve enough to leave out VAT it is hard to understand what we are paying for within the £105,000 and this is what EVERYONE WANTS TO KNOW AND WHAT WE KEEP ON AND ON AND ON ASKING FOR, AND HAVE DONE FOR MONTHS ON END.