Page 349 - OK THE REAL DEAL BEG 616pp NO SOUND

subsequent refusal to pay the same dividend to her as you thought fit to pay to yourself and your fellow directors.
Should you fail to provide the information required relating to the refurbishment expenditure, or to make the repayments properly due to my client, I intend to file a formal report with the Serious Fraud Office. I should also repeat that this letter, as well as your response (or your neglect or failure to respond, should that prove to be the case) will – if necessary - be filed as evidence in support of our application to the First Tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) under Sections 22-24 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987.
I think our various replies to your various queries have complied.
Your Co-Directors and Dima International Limited
I would be grateful if you would ensure that any response to this letter on the part of MHML is authorised and approved by your co-directors. It is all very well for Mr Raja to say to Mrs Hillgarth (as he does in an e-mail dated 1 May 2014) “Please note I don’t want to receive any correspondence from you or anybody else regarding this matter. If you have a complaint about management of mitre house [sic], then write to them. I don’t have the time to read these e-mails from you or anybody else.” That is an extraordinary statement from a person who (through Dima International Limited, of which he is the sole director) has set himself up, with yourself and Segar Karupiah, as having responsibility for the management of Mitre House and who has demanded and received substantial management charges for the running of the building.
Dima International Limited has statutory duties as a director of MHML which Mr Raja cannot simply slough off. He must accept joint and several responsibility, with yourself and Mr Karupiah, for the acts and omissions of MHML since he took office in 2011. If he does not wish to accept these ongoing responsibilities in the future he must arrange for Dima International Limited to resign immediately as a director of MHML.
Should you be willing to attend a meeting with myself and Mrs Hillgarth in order to explore whether these matters could be resolved by negotiation, without recourse to the law, no doubt you will let me know. In any event please respond to this letter by no later than close of business on Thursday 31 March 2016. Should you fail to do so the consequences referred to above will ensue.
An agreement to meet was made in my letter in reply to yours of 23 March 2016 but as made clear in my attached letter dated 7 April 2016, it will not be at Mitre House and will not include Mrs Hillgarth, relying on you as her [now fourth] legal representative acting on her behalf and to supply the copies we will supply as directed, all on the understanding that we receive the various confirmations, apologies and firm commitment from Mrs Hillgarth to fully comply with her lease obligations. Copy attachment to my letter is from Dorrington dated 27 November 2006 and you are holding the one from KFH dated 29 April 2009, which does somewhat evidence Mrs Hillgarth’s total disregard for agents and authority, and most certainly MHML and without doubt my goodself. As well advised in my attached letter that is somewhat ironic that if your application for an order under Section 22-24 of the Landlord & Tenant Act 1987 were successful [although one feels that could have been attempted by