Page 385 - OK THE REAL DEAL BEG 616pp NO SOUND

MHML £15,572 invoice.
It’s still a thoroughly impertinent question but as indicated on multiple occasions in correspondence with Mr Begg, on receipt of confirmation that every other slur and accusation, including acknowledgement of stated final reserves of £16,201, is withdrawn and agreed as untrue, we will oblige her.
And do not forget that all lessees were advised on multiple occasions (in our bundles) to await the year ended 2014 Accounts when all documentation was available for inspection. Not one lessee requested until Mrs Hillgarth a year after the works were completed and over 6 months since the accounts were published. But in truth with £16,201 in Reserves as opposed to only the predicted £11,243 one might presume that any sensible lessee would consider not only the finances in good shape but more importantly the whole interior finished to a degree that they had been advised initially to be unaffordable cosmetic luxuries. Mrs Hillgarth’s opinion of it being cheap and vulgar and more preferable in white, taupe and black, we will take soundings from the Tribunal’s visit. Mrs Hillgarth is on record (in the bundles) of not wanting white or black and indeed being joyfully pleased with the bronze lift.
Hopefully the Tribunal will agree that if these accusations have indeed been previously answered or explained with supporting hard copy evidence to disprove, then that same evidence needs to be in somebody’s bundle and it patently is not in the applicant’s.
And before Mr Begg accuses me yet again of attempting to obfuscate the situation I suggest he considers how he’d react to accusations of wandering around the Metro Building in his underwear and leaving notes for the cleaner to keep schtum, or purloining the staff’s Christmas Raffle money despite it being donated with cheques written out to the Staff Father Christmas Party Account, let alone saying ”you choose” and then being accused of Vote Rigging - and I’ll forget for the moment admitting in your own Witness Statement you’re a liar or spending 15 months and a court case to realise there’s 50% more in the bank than you’d been struggling with computing despite accounts to hand and notified on 8th June 2015 of £16,201 in Reserves carried forward to 2015 -
As I said in one previous letter - your client doesn't need a lawyer, she needs a psychiatrist? And Mitre House does not need a Manager whom most of us couldn’t afford anyway, save for those like Mrs Hillgarth who sub-let (and the Manager’s first job would be to insist she complies with her lease covenants which will set her off against him in 5 minutes) Hope that’s not considered “chaff”, or obfuscation - it’s the blunt truth and why we do need 13 Folders of past and previous relevant hard copy evidence in support of our case as it’s obvious nobody’s taken any notice of it to date or it was considered insufficient?
Yours apologetically,
Paul Brown-Constable cc Ms J. Burrow
!"#$%&'()*%& +,!-./'/&0123
On 19 May 2017, at 17:23, Bruce R. Maunder Taylor <brmt@maundertaylor.co.uk> wrote: Dear Mr. Brown-Constable,
I acknowledge receipt of your bundles which, at first glance, run into over 1000 pages.
Your letter says that you have copied to Ms. J. Burrow at the Tribunal. Is that just the letter or the whole bundle?
You no doubt understand that the Applicant has to make up the trial bundles and the cost of paginating and copying yours will be substantial. The Tribunal only wish to be provided with those documents which you will want to draw to their attention at the hearing in order to make out your case. I put it to you that your statement of case is unreasonable, and will result in grossly unnecessary cost, if not reduced to only