Page 5 - ref C_PBC to BEGG Prejudice PLUS

Ref (xi)_burning papers etc - I indeed do wish to clear my files of hundred if not thousands of emails all of which substantiate in detail your client’s dishonesty and most of which have been forwarded to you to little avail until the audio recording came to light which simply confirms everything you have been advised innumerable times.
Ref (xii)_references to others etc - the audio recording negates any accusation of conspiracy to defraud etc on the part of anybody, myself, MHML, its staff or its Accountants. It simply proves your client’s dishonesty.
Ref (xiii) - Mrs Hillgarth’s expenses - you state “ Mrs Hillgarth has devoted an immense amount of her time over the best part of three years to expose and put a stop to this corrupt activity etc...”
5
Ref (vi)_to this same lie can be added the accusations of Vote Rigging (you have been supplied on multiple occa- sions with Mr Karupiah’s letter to Samya Riad (Flat 4) dated 8 July 2012 which totally refutes this ridiculous accu- sation) and you have on file Mrs Hillgarth’s infamous “you choose” email dated 7 June 2012); use of Basement as an office (photos of which are still awaited despite multiple requests); misuse of lessees’ Window Repair monies; terrorising your client’s tenant by indecent exposure; unprofessional and incompetent workmanship by MHML (three years on and all looks in excellent condition as any independent Surveyor will attest to); not having suitable professional indemnity; no complaint’s procedure (despite being a member of one of the three UK Govt. statutes, PRS - Property Redress Scheme since October 2014 and well advertised on all our stationery and website, main- taining a website that was designed to confuse and did not post all and any relevant document regarding all aspects of Mitre House, Accounts, Analyses, Major Works’ programme information & documents; requiring your client to attend in the company of HM Constabulary to collect some keys; your client’s denial of writing illegible cheques; and most significantly your client’s denial of what was discussed and agreed on 23 May 2014 during a six hour 45 minute Board Meeting in the presence of Segar Karupiah and myself culminating in her exclaiming, “will be used for something else”, followed by “well then everybody will be happy?”
Ref (vii)_ your email of 13 June 2017 sates clearly [inter alia] “Mrs Hillgarth considers comments made “out of context” but had you listened to the lengthier portion as sent to you on 6th and 11th July 2017 [via we transfer and my explanation email] and Mrs Hillgarth on 18th July 2017 your “out of context” comment is also decimated. Regrettably yet again, both these transfers were ignored as neither you nor Mrs Hillgarth bothered to download and listen to the large audio file.....so best we let the court decide in or out of “context”.
Ref (viii)_ your client is quite welcome to audit any accounts she wishes to at her expense.
Ref (ix)_fraud, blackmail and attempting to pervert the course of justice (by fabrication of an audio clip) of which you have incontrovertible expert evidence, and is a very serious (imprisonable) offence.
Ref (x)_your client’s (witnessed) perjury by her denial on oath at the First Tier Tribunal on 26th June 2017 is also imprisonable. Her denial of what she exclaimed at our six hour 45 minute Board Meeting on 23 May 2014 flies in the face of common sense, made worse by the fact that Mr Karupiah also witnessed her comments in person and has confirmed that in writing and you neglect to mention that we have two expert witnesses confirming the audio’s authenticity, indeed its impossibility to “doctor” or “tamper with”. Had you or your client followed my advice (as sent to you on 6th and 11th July 2017 and your client on 18th July 2017- but both ignored) to download and listen to a lengthier portion some 30 minutes prior to the clip you were initially supplied, your comment regarding “out of con- text” is dismissed.
Seeing as neither myself nor MHML were ever advised of demands nor accusations prior to your letter of 23 March 2016 (and responded to by return with our agreement to comply in supplying documents requested) it seems obtuse to suggest Mrs Hillgarth to claim “three years”. It is already well established she lied when saying that she and other lessees had made requests for documents from our 2014 accounts which were ignored by MHML.
Mrs Hillgarth and all lessees were advised on multiple occasions (9 September 2014, 3rd January 2015 to name but two) to await publication of our 2014 accounts and to then request and peruse all and any documentation at their leisure. No request was forthcoming until the demands made in your letter of 23 March 2016 some nine months after the 2014 accounts were published - and we agreed to comply by return.
Had Mrs Hillgarth simply availed herself of our Property Redress Scheme (PRS) to further her complaint(s) against MHML, be that bad management, or access to documents, her costs would have been £90. It is hardly the fault of either myself, MHML or its members if Mrs Hillgarth has incurred considerable costs based on a pack of lies as is well evidenced firstly in her accusation of being denied access to documents and secondly her full knowl- edge and agreement as evidenced on the audio recording of the six hour 45 minute Board Meeting on 23 May 2017 with the immortal words “well then everybody will be happy”. They would be if she had told the truth.
Ref (xiv)_breach of s.20 - again, reference to the audio refutes any claim and to state that she is entitled to one ninth of the full £105,877 budget is simply “stupid”. Are you inferring that no works were done and that no s.20 Notices were legally issued? And most relevantly the emails sent to all lessees dated 11th and 13th September 2014 which the audio recording corroborates in minute and incontrovertible detail.