Page 13 - APPENDIX_00_PREFIX 1-17

(l) in reply to “mH’s” Solicitor from “PBC” on 30 June 2016 by return he states:
-13-
(k) in a letter from “mH’s” Solicitor to “PBC” on 21 June 2016 he states [correctly re: funds]:
Having collected in the supplement of £2,000 per flat you had total reserves available to you of £116,262.75 (£98,262.75 plus £18,000). This was more than enough to complete the budgeted works, including a reasonable 10% contingency reserve. However you pleaded lack of money to Mr White to justify a reduction in his specification. After making "savings" against the original budget totalling £32,496, achieved primarily by reducing this agreed specification, (a 'Saving of £3,185 against the anticipated surveyor's bill, plus a saving of £29,311 against the anticipated AR Lawrence bill) your actual expenditure on items within the reduced Schedule of Works totalled only £72,523 (comprising £62,010 paid to AR Lawrence and £10,513 paid to the surveyor).
(Folder_00 Item_50)
You will note from the content of email correspondence between lessees and MHML in
September 2014, to which you repeatedly refer, a serious lack of funding because of Mrs Hillgarth’s canvassing of other lessees to refuse to oblige/pay the previously agreed £2000, and the voluntary agreed contributions for the Water Tank and SkyTV installs. As such, MHML made clear that due to a lack of funding as agreed by lessees [and Mrs Hillgarth as evidenced in the 23 May 2014 minutes of the meeting she attended with her fellow directors] would result in a reduction of works to be accomplished - all as stated in 48pt large typography on our website [and still in evidence] as well as made abundantly clear in replies and requests to lessees well into mid Octo- ber 2014. Works were progressing but underfunded!
Because those lessees who did not pay, in fact refused to pay in some cases, their agreed £2000 contributions when requested to, on schedule, MHML did not have adequate Reserves for emer- gencies, contingencies etc. This non payment was also the reason the TVSky install was required to be paid by voluntary contributions as opposed to possibly coming from Reserves as previously indicated as a good possibility/probability.
Collateral damage again caused by Mrs Hillgarth’s intransigence, misinformation etc. (Folder_00 Item_51)
(m) in a letter from “mH’s” Solicitor to “PBC” dated 23 September 2016 he requests:
To summarise the financial position as the leaseholders currently understand it, MHML appears to have paid itself, without informing the leaseholders or obtaining their consent, (at least) £31,765.21 out of monies which the leaseholders had intended and made available to pay AR Lawrence. Fur- thermore MHML has still failed to account for a further £25,121.54 which (according to the Service Charge accounts) has been paid away, but the leaseholders still do not know to whom. This is set out in tabular form below:
money appropriated and/or collected by mHml
£
98,262.75 18,000
13,147.00 129,409.75
Available reserves (per PB-C) Additional contributions collected Additional “voluntary" contributions paid
Water Tank Communal TV
Total monies collected by MHML: Less:
money accounted for by mHml Actually paid to AR Lawrence
7,810 5,337
62,010.00