Page 8 - 67_PBC to Begg Addendum_31-10-16 (24pp)

8
Wrong, it was not only stripped down, but steam cleaned and very well prepared (as can be confirmed by some lessees who witnessed the steam cleaning). What a pathetic spiteful ignorant comment to make just for the sake of being contrary - a perusal of Mrs Hillgarth’s Flat 5 front door gives credence to what she knows of good workman- ship.
Mrs Hillgarth also leaves out “Don’t you ever give up, Michele - firstly I’m accused of getting my flat done cheaply by AR Lawrence and now that I’m doing all the works. You must think me very stupid!”
Just two more of her ridiculous accusations, since denied with supporting documents, but communicated to all other lessees in her pursuit of discrediting me.
And did we not make clear in this email that In, “Management are attempting, and will succeed, in presenting the inte- rior decor of Mitre House to a standard not even envisaged by most lessees, at no additional cost to lessees over and above the agreed £105,019 budget. This will be achieved by making small savings where possible, common sense, hard work and a great deal of thought.
The only proviso to that statement is so long as no EXTERIOR WORKINGS (over which Management has little or no control) require additional contingency monies which is, of course, why all lessees received the September Quarterly Demands with the additional non-voluntary contribution of £2000 each, so enabling reserves to amply fund any addi- tional expenditures.”
Surely that evidences she was aware of savings being made for (WHAT) additional works? I don’t recall any reply from Mrs Hillgarth stating NO ADDITIONAL WORKS WANTED.
(para 28)_a proof perfect example of somebody lying - covered comprehensively elsewhere in this letter.
“By way of explanation to the leaseholders Mr Brown-Constable has asserted in correspondence that the lease-
holders, and in particular Mrs Hillgarth, were insisting that certain items within the Schedule of Works should be excluded in order that other improvements outside of the Schedule of Works could be included.” - is true or not?
(para 30)_if ever final proof were needed as to the reason, the situation, the consequences of Mrs Hillgarth’s actions, this oft quoted “flurry of emails” fully, 100% supports the reasons (by now 2 days into the works schedule) for the ridiculous alleged intimidation, blackmailing, inappropriate language due to extreme extenuating circumstances!
Mrs Hillgarth references a 2 September 2014 email:
“Please find attached a quote (the cheapest of three to date) for a COMMUNAL DIGITAL TV AERIAL (not Satellite/Cable/SKY) - to replace the few ailing arials and chaotic cabling on the roof at present.
The cost will be met from future reserves during 2015 at a rate per flat over 4 quarters of £96 each lessee meaning no one has to pay any additional sums whatsoever. If you don't use it, it's there as a facility for future users/owners/sub-tenants etc.
What she fails to point out (despite it being obvious in the first sentence ““Please find attached a quote (the cheapest of three to date) for a COMMUNAL DIGITAL TV AERIAL (not Satellite/Cable/SKY)
Consequently, as this was a far cheaper option (TV only, but no Sky/TV), it could most probably have been able to be funded from future Quarterly Demands, so long as all Lessees pay their agreed £2000 contributions.
As she well knows, the quoted cost for the combo Sky/TV was £5,337 - and again, this most likely had a chance of not having to be individually pre-paid had all lessees paid their £2000 contributions on time - but as email correspon- dence evidences, due to Mrs Hillgarth’s obstructiveness, she and some others had still not paid by mid October 2014
Mrs Hillgarth’s reference to the 13 Sept 2014 email is basically “game set and match” as both you and she cannot possibly be making the various accusations you have been making to date: (attached ref game, set & match)
One third down the email is 3_Notes on the WORKS to date:
“Since the scaffolding commenced installation on Sunday 31st August, exactly two weeks ago, dead on schedule,
Management have already saved Lessees £1177.56 OFF the agreed and budgeted £105, 019.
This has been accomplished by Management doing various workings which could be done at a more economical cost (in brief, shop signage (COSTED (Contingency) BY A.R. LAWRENCE FOR £800 plus vat which Management have produced for £125.......and tidying up visible wiring and making Meter Cupboards which A.R.Lawrence costed at £922 plus Vat for 3 meter cupboards and Management have produced same for £648 incl vat but TO ALSO INCLUDE BOXING IN THE (some) LOOSE INTERNAL WIRING on all three floors).
This initial saving of £1177.56 will not however be reimbursed to lessees at the end of the works, as Management will utilise this first of many savings, to progress works on the interior NOT included in the Surveyor's Specifications (such as the lift workings).