Page 513 - FINAL MASTER 616pp 20-6-19

-29-
A SELECTION OF HILLGARTHISMS
So I do and accused of ‘Vote Rigging’?
@
“I INSIST ON HAVING A THIRD PARTY PRESENT”
So she turns up with a Policeman?
@
“SHE DENIES WRITING AN UNINTELLIGIBLE UNCASHABLE CHEQUE - OR RATHER WHEN & WHY, BUT.....”
“YOU CHOOSE”
And replies complaining of too short notice? It wasn’t.
@
“I DON’T RECOGNISE THE MAN’S VOICE ON THE AUDIO RECORDING” Happens to be her co-Director and neighbour for twenty years?
@
“SHE’S ADVISED I’M AWAY OVER A LONG WEEK-END”
And replies wanting to know who’s looking after Mitre House in my absence? @
“WE’RE ACCUSED OF RUNNING AN OFFICE IN THE BASEMENT”
And claims she has photos to prove it?
@
“I’M CAUGHT OUT DOING SOME WORKINGS”
Which is the only reason lessees were notified of savings?
@ “WEAREREQUIREDTOHAVEAFIREALARMSYSTEM(2012)”
We were not required to have one nor extinguishers, which we did have?
@
“THE LIFT CAGE SHOULD BE THE SAME BRONZE COLOUR AS YOU’VE DONE THE DOORS” Later she says she and a majority wanted a black lift...?
@
“I DID NOT AGREE TO MAKING SAVINGS”
So what did “well then everybody will be happy” mean?
@
“THERE’S NOBODY WORKING AT MITRE HOUSE”
Because they were all on the scaffolding doing the exterior...!
@
“THE SIGNAGE IS ALL CHEAP PLASTIC”
It happens to be all brass and perspex
@
“WORKINGS BY MHML COULD NOT HAVE COST MORE THAN £5000 AND NOT £31,756” The Lighting and electrics alone cost £12,500
“SHE’S ADVISED OF A BOARD MEETING”
Please refer to attached “ADDENDUM/FURTHER REFERENCES” in suPPort of argument
“that then was the distinctly unattractive state of the conversation when i called on mr Brown-constable the following dav, on 30 september 2014, accompanied by a police officer. the police officer witnessed his demand for "outstanding bills", but would not have understood precisely what was being referred to. i did hand over in the course of that conversation a cheque for £867.87, which was my share of the payment for the water tank. mr Brown-constable accepted that cheque at the time although he subsequently demanded that i should pay the money by bank transfer, because his bank
Para 61 - Mrs Hillgarth’s Witness Statement
allegedly ---i did not believe him - could not read my writing on the cheque. i have kept the cheque and one can see that the writing on it is no different from any other cheques i write.” Just how much can one rely on Mrs Hillagarth’s memory of events?