Page 319 - xxxxxx9_BEGG_ALL_MASTER to Add to

Schedule of Works but they were not, and had she properly perused them and advised other lessees who also should have perused them we would not be having this correspondence].
And don’t forget Mrs Hillgarth advised me in an email, “you choose”. We did.
Vote Rigging
As you know the refurbishment work which ultimately started in September 2014 was preceded by some two years of detailed, intensive and frequently acrimonious correspondence. There was a wide divergence of opinion within the block about the appropriate extent, cost, style and timing of the work to be done. However it was clear that 6 out of 9 leaseholders (ie all except the three MHML directors) had a broadly similar view about the appropriate décor.
On 7 June 2012 you wrote in an e-mail to Susanna [Gnecco]: “If I’ve said it once, I’ve said it a dozen times. It doesn’t matter what you or I want – its what the majority want”. However it seems you were unwilling, in practice, to respect the wishes of the majority. When alternative scenarios were put to them, 6 out of 9 flats voted for a “classic” look (as opposed to the “Belle Epoque” look favoured by yourself). However you engineered the vote by claiming that Samya Riad had voted for “Belle Epoque” (she hadn’t) and by consulting Christopher Leigh-Pemberton’s tenant rather than Mr Leigh-Pemberton himself.
You actually admitted this in writing on 11 June 2012 when you wrote to Susanna [Gnecco] and other tenants: “I admit to everything, including unsuccessfully trying to fiddle the vote.........Guilty as charged.” And then you simply proceeded to ride roughshod over the wishes of the majority by arranging for the premises to be decorated in the style and colour scheme which you had favoured from the outset.
There never was a vote to rig [hence my response to such an outrageously infantile suggestion].
And I can prove that.
Secondly there never was a majority on anything at any time. It’s a fantasy, an illusion perpetrated by Mrs Hillgarth in her pursuit of getting her own way which entailed a £219,000 budget (Wade tender for exact same works as tendered by all other tender contractors] with only £98,262.75 in Reserves on 15 October 2014
Management attempted every trick in the book to appease Mrs Hillgarth and her small coterie.
Firstly we suggested that those that can afford such a budget simply supplement those that can’t, which included me and by all accounts quite a few others. That suggestion was very quickly refused.
Management then mooted the required one off payments required from each of 9 lessees to fund a budget (admittedly for both Internals & Externals) of £219,000 with only £98,262.75 in the bank. We proposed, I recall but can confirm if needed, approx. £12,000