Page 2 - xx10_BEGG_ALL_MASTER to Add to

PFC Begg Esq
Solicitor
9th Floor. Metro Building 1 Butterwick, Hammersmith
London W6 8DL
pBc PAUL N. BROWN-CONSTABLE
DESIGN & PROJECT CONSULTANT
7 MITRE HOUSE • 124 KINGS ROAD • CHELSEA • LONDON SW3 4TP TELEPHONE +44 (0)20 7589 2764 • MBL +44 (0)798 33 33 543 EMAIL: PAULBROWNCONSTABLE@ME.COM
composed 1 March 2019 with subsequent edits
Dear Mr. Begg,
With reference to your most recent communications please find attached my response which you’ll consider to “obfuscate” the truth but I consider it necessarily lengthy to prove the truth. Should come in handy when you bill Mrs Hillgarth?
As ever your resurgence after months is both predictable and unwelcome and in truth I’d rather do life at a decent facility than continue responding to your’s and your client’s pathetic vapid threats and in- nuendos.
Examples of which are indicated below as the prologue to this comprehensive tôme, including some of your client’s more imaginative statements such as “MHML never supplied any Quotes/Costings/Sur- veyor Specs in 2012 - oh yes we did as you’ll find out somewhere in this tôme”, “because you’d been caught out” (reference WORKING!), “you choose” (re DECOR VOTE then accusing of fiddling), “it was what you wanted to hear” (decor lighting and lift refurb preferences), “wandering around in my under- wear frightening her tenant”, “using the basement as an office”, “nobody wanted Mail Table, nor meter boxes nor signage”, “Mrs Hillgarth did not brief WADE for certain items she wanted”, “MHML/myself briefed WADE as we were in charge of the works process and not Mrs Hillgarth” and now your latest broadside, the thieving by me and my co-Director accomplices (& accountant) of £29,000 from lessees (despite having also been admonished for paying in £30,000 the year previously - or have I got it the wrong way around?
Whichever, it’s patent nonsense and ranks alongside all other observations/accusations/innuendos is- sued by you and your client or on behalf of your client since your 13pp diatribe letter of 23 March 2016. I should, but I won’t, apologise for the repetitiveness of much of this lengthy tôme but it’s a re- flection of your client’s own scattergun approach, followed closely by your’s, to observations/accusa- tions/innuendos and as such my responses simply reflect that exact same scattergun approach and I hope it annoys you as much as both she and you have annoyed me since 23 March 2016 - but in truth the responding to such rubbish is both mischievously enjoyable and very cathartic.
And I must be the only fraudster/thief who posts all the evidence to convict online since 2012 and ad- vises potential accusers to check that evidence at their convenience? I refer to all Year End Service Charge Accounts since 2012 to date including legacy 2005 - 2011 plus Budgets, Invoices (Major Works 2014 - meaning why the hell you even needed to ask for them in March 2016 when ALL was available since June 2015 beats me????).
Mais c’est la vie! And anyway this is more for my future use if I decide to sue you and your client for libel - still awaiting my lottery win?
Various attachments within this tôme totally refute your’s and your client’s ludicrous observations/ac- cusations/innuendos save for your more recent financial broadside, which is also addressed in much the same way as observations/accusations/innuendos to date since your thirteen pages of more rub- bish in your 23 March 2016 diatribe. It’s all yet again simply unimaginative nonsense.