Page 6 - 67_PBC to Begg Addendum_31-10-16 (24pp)

Mr Karupiah sent an email to Dr Riad on July 29th stating:
6
If proof were needed of no consensus on decor, or indeed Mrs Hillgarth’s trustworthiness or lack of, this email of 14 October 2014 more than likely well evidences both. And was a perfect example of why I was insisting on having a third party present to ascertain the actual state of play as opposed to any imagined or misinformed interpretation.
I repeat yet again, the only reason for ever purchasing the Head Lease, as well indicated in correspondence at the time, was to maximise economies and minimise expenditure in the running of Mitre House. No other reason whatsoever and had Mrs “Property Developer” Hillgarth actually pulled her weight, been a team player, been co-oper- ative as opposed to obstructive and realised the other benefits of economies, it was quite true, we could have enter- tained (note entertained) expanding our talents even to her other property empire!
(para 19)_Vote Rigging - this has been answered so many times it’s pathetic and I attach yet again Mr Karupiah’s email to Dr Riad in Flat 4 (of which you have already been twice supplied a copy) which explains how this ridiculous situation arose - and it’s true, if you ask a silly question, you get a silly answer!
So there can be no misunderstanding whatsoever, I asked Paul to let me have copies of the various emails he received from you, Michele and Leigh Pemberton to substantiate the fairness or not, of the Vote. These are attached in one large pdf containing 6 pages which are self-explanatory.
In my opinion, a perusal of these emails fully substantiates the validity of the vote as presented by Paul. But does raise serious doubts as to why both Mr Leigh Pemberton did not admit to changing his vote, or indeed you, Samya, for not explaining yourself at the meeting. By doing so, Paul would have been fully exonerated and apologised to by his accusers.
As I think you are well aware, Paul is still being accused of manipulating the vote, which patently he did not, but he refuses to give credence to such silly accusations by answering them, preferring to ignore it and make light of it. He is as you are well aware, very British. In that respect, I fully agree with his insightfulness, as indeed does Flat 6 (Jamil Raja).
So I hope that finally brings to rest the ludicrous accusation of Vote Rigging! If anybody did, Mrs Hillgarth did.
(paras 25-27)_ reference to my email of 11 September simply confirms what Mrs Hillgarth is denying - namely, quite obviously works outside of the Schedule of Works were being progressed and being funded from sav- ings made from the £105,019 budget -
Dear Michele -
Somewhat amused to now have to field yet more comments from Flat 3, following Flat 9 and your own ignorant com- ments. Why do you persist in causing bad feelings, misleading lessees like you did with the RTM affair and stirring up yet more disputes. Who's next to get in touch, Flats 1 and 8 one supposes as no doubt you've also attempted to poi- son their tranquility.
Our Surveyor hopefully made clear exactly what I advised him to explain if contacted by you, and exactly as I had explained to you (to little avail), namely that certain works are NOT and never were included the works specifications, such as lighting/electrics but are within the overall budget of £105,019. How many times do you have to told?
Having spent half an hour with me on Tuesday complaining of wiring in places and advised by me yet again that the specs included removing redundant wiring where found, you still berated our surveyor on the same observations for the very same information. Are you deaf or just contrary? You also agreed to the installation of a communal TV Aerial which would also clean up all redundant tv & satellite on roof (your first visit in 40 years....) including your three cables which had absolutely nothing attached - just redundant cables and something you had no idea of.
Bizarrely, he also advised that you requested yet another copy of the works specifications - what are you doing with the four or five you've already received? Selling them?
I have now instructed our surveyor and A.R. Lawrence personnel to refer any contact from you direct to me and to not discuss any matter or supply any information nor documentation to which you have no right until such time as the works are completed.
You are quite the most duplicitous, scheming and ill-informed co-director I have ever encountered and look forward to seeing you at our registered office on 18th September where matters will be finally resolved. Might I suggest you bring along your cheque book to pay the very outstanding £2582.74 RTM invoice owed to Management.
Paul
PS Signage UP - Savings UP - or would you prefer contractor's signs for six times the money .....?