Page 164 - OK THE REAL DEAL BEG 616pp NO SOUND

-2-
“HOW DID YOU THINK MHML WERE FUNDING THE NEW LIGHTING?”
b) You have.....evidence to show that MHML have abrogated the basement as an office? bb) Despite at least a dozen requests for this evidence none has ever been forthcoming.
c) Qualifications etc....MHML asserted in an email that a “monkey” can be an agent.
cc) Your client initially referred to exactly the same and we were paraphrasing her comment. d) MHML were not permitted to charge fees for services rendered?
dd) A particularly pathetic observation seeing as MHML reduced lessees’ annual outgoings year in year out for five years and expected to do so at no charge and fees charged were substantially LESS than market rates, despite accusations to the contrary.
e) Stating misleadingly on MHML’s www experience of capabilities & qualifications.
ee) MHML had Director’s Indemnity Insurance and was a member of Property Redress Scheme and had first hand experience of dealing with RTM applications (quite obviously more so than your client’s Solicitors who failed to advise her (or prompt her memory as she was fully aware) of the 25% footprint ruling when she attempted an RTM in 2013 and MHML also had first hand knowledge of lease extensions (five in total) including all four of MHML’s Directors.
f) MHML plagiarised the T&Cs of another company.
ff) Indeed we did as indeed was proved endemic when Seaborne Freight were caught doing same. Apologies were made to Canonbury with nothing more than a phone call from them requesting we remove the offending T&Cs as opposed to your client’s insistence that Solicitors were involved - none were and Canonbury gentlemanly accepted our apology.
g) Vote Rigging etc
gg) Another pathetic accusation which despite 100% proof (see letter attached) that no vote rigging took place whatsoever this accusation has been repeated ad nauseam despite the attached letter making abundantly clear the situation was the making of your client’s mischief.
hh) Another pathetic accusation and a perfect example of your client’s mischief making - proof of the nonsense has been answered in your more recent queries as regards payments to certain par- ties and payments into bank accounts - quite simply an example of your client’s attempt at discredit- ing both MHML and myself with lies told to various lessees - one of many lies - see answers to your various financial queries further in this t me all of which disprove your ridiculous accusations that £29,000 was stolen from lessees.
ii) Apparently your client considers works executed by MHML to have been incompetent and could not have cost the amounts claimed as spent from the savings made. Were this true, any competent appraiser, builder, surveyor or average independent person could have reviewed the various work- ings and made a report to that effect. None was forthcoming save for the ignorant and spiteful com- ment from your client proving yet again her malicious malevolence towards MHML and her fellow Directors.
jj) See (c) above as example of your client’s language and MHML’s multiple incessant constant re- sponses to the rubbish, innuendoes, accusations and observations made by and copied to other lessees resulted in the only language she understood - and yes some were rude as were her’s on innumerable occasions examples of which can be supplied, if not already supplied.
h) Your own flat
i) Issue of competence
j) Rudeness
PLEaSE rEFEr to variouS attaCHED “PDF/FuRtheR ReFeRenCes” in SuPPort oF arguMEnt