Page 278 - OK THE REAL DEAL BEG 616pp NO SOUND

“HOW DID YOU THINK MHML WERE FUNDING THE NEW LIGHTING?” larger agreed contractual works for the building as a whole.”
-41-
If ever proof were needed of your client’s irresponsible and despicable misinformation to other lessees this is a perfect example. Her initial email to me on 12 August 2014 requesting: “can you please tell us (NOTE “us” not me?) who will be doing the refurbishment of your flat?” was copied in to ALL lessees, hence the various comments back.
Mr Karupiah replied to her impertinent request saying: “as a Director of MHML she was entitled to request of me as a fellow Director but not to copy to all lessees unless attempting as she was to cause alarm, and my reply to Mrs Hillgarth’s email stating quite understandably sarcastically, that both Benitor & AR Lawrence were employed after hours and at week-ends was no more or no less as ridiculous a response as to her ridiculous innuendo, having no basis of truth - but still communi- cated back to all lessees by Mrs Hillgarth, so the damage she intended on doing was achieved stir- ring up other lessees quite understandably had the situation been as Mrs Hillgarth still believed and hoped it was.
I mention this episode as just one example of many that Mrs Hillgarth communicated to other lessees to cause the same type of mischief, use of basement as office, vote rigging etc, that we (MHML) had to endure whilst she remained a Director of MHML, in breach of her lease covenants and demanding both a budget that was totally unaffordable from existing Reserves without a sub- stantial (£7500 - £12,500) call on lessees to adequately fund (Interior & Exterior) utilising her pre- ferred contractor, Wade (a call which not one lessee including Mrs Hillgarth agreed to contribute and insisting the internals & externals to not run concurrently as no savings could be made by doing so and the works (internal/external) required differing skillsets, and secondly MHML should be replaced by an external “professional” agent - and she maintained that there was a majority of lessees that agreed with her which was totally untrue or unproved despite MHML constantly asking her to pro- vide written evidence from each lessee as indeed was possible as she organised the “non” to using Benitor as previously described.
Mrs Hillgarth’s virtual majority consisted of herself, and Flats 3 and 9 joined somewhat bizarrely by Flat 8 in the final stages of 2014. That left a silent majority of five lessees v her four?
This was again evidenced in a recent vote taken by our present Agents, Maunder Taylor, who re- quested of all 9 leaseholders whether they preferred a concurrent workings for the upcoming 2020 Interior/Exterior and again a majority voted for concurrent, with almost the same minority of Mrs Hill- garth and her minority allies voting against?
Maunder Taylor also insisted on advising lessees of works’ costs/budgets to include vat & fees in exactly the same way that MHML did on all s.20 notices which Mrs Hillgarth considered unprofessional and misleading and advised all other lessees of her gripes? We rest our case.
As for allegedly not responding to query emails or requests from Mrs Hillgarth or lessees (as wit- nessed by Mrs Hillgarth’s own Witness Statement @ para 73 where she admits neither she nor any other lessee requested nor were denied access to our YE2014 accounts documentation), or indeed sending innumerable conflicting or confusing emails to her and other lessees might I remind her that I only ever replied/responded/answered received emails and rarely if ever, save for the letter that al- ways accompanied the Quarterly Demands with an update on current news at Mitre House, did I in- stigate email correspondence.
No matter what Mrs Hillgarth was advised it was almost immediately rebutted, be that a denial of re- ceipt of documents sent, an accusation of mismanagement, a complaint requiring immediate, if not before attention etc as the examples below well evidence.
Unless I had solid irrefutable proof of above Hillgarthisms she would deny them, and she is on record of denying almost everything including receipt of ***bank statements, Surveyor’s Schedule of Works, seeking two initial Wade quotes & one from Hemi (Tribunal/26 June 2017 on oath), as in- deed she did regarding the 23 May 2014 Board Meeting discussions and agreements as well evi- denced by her accusation that she never said “will be used for something else”, nor “well then everybody will be happy” (which isn’t exactly what your email to me on 20 June 2017 stated: “If you listen carefully there is some music at the very beginning of your recording . Mrs Hillgarth does not recall any music in your flat; this was after all a board meeting . You were doing all the talking –
PLEaSE rEFEr to variouS attaCHED “PDF/FuRtheR ReFeRenCes” in SuPPort oF arguMEnt