Page 294 - xx10_BEGG_ALL_MASTER to Add to

-57-
“HOW DID YOU THINK MHML WERE FUNDING THE NEW LIGHTING?”
and proved not once but twice to refuse payment of previous debts due. She still came out of MHML with more money than it had cost her and had she had the common decency, professionalism and intelligence expected of her, none of these queries, accusations, demands etc etc would ever have occurred, let alone £30k odd in costs, unless it was actually the Caribbean Dawn and Waiting Room Green that finally sent her over the edge or as she so succinctly put it, cheap, vulgar and inappropri- ate. I would proffer that her behaviour as a Director was cheap, vulgar and inappropriate based on all the details listed in this tome (apologies but I did warn you). And yes, she was required to resign and I can’t see what possible reason either you or she have to say it was not done legally nor hu- manely?
She was usually the last to pay her Quarterly Demands, was incapable of doing so electronically in- sisting on stapling a cheque [on occasion totally illegible which you were supplied with despite her predictable denial], and on record as refusing to pay agreed contributions and canvassing other lessees to do same, ad nauseam!
As I said in my reply to your 23 March 2016 diatribe (approaching anniversary) if she had acted in this despicable manner during the war, she’d have been shot as a traitor. Yes I know, more obfus- cation and chaff - but true obfuscation and chaff like “Nuts”.
The exact same accusations as are being replied to in this letter have been made in numerous correspondence with the exact same identical denials made with the exact same identical full sup- porting evidence, to thoroughly dispute all and any accusation and innuendos made since and in- cluding Mrs Hillgarth’s Solicitor’s initial letter received, dated 23 March 2016.
It does not make sense to NOT agree to making sensible savings from items you do not need to spend on items you do need? Unless you’re Mrs Hillgarth.
Had your client not caused the mayhem and sheer stupidities over affordable budgets in 2012 (our first year in charge), there would have been NO management charges whatsoever for any year, as initially all four Directors including your client agreed to attempting. And no fees were charged for first 11 months but due to Mrs Hillgarth’s intransigence it was decided to charge as my workload was almost as much as yours appears to be representing Mrs Hillgarth.
Due entirely and only to Mrs Hillgarth’s disloyalty and deviousness Management charges of £4320 were retrospectively charged for 2012, held at £4320 for 2013 and 2014, raised to £4850 in 2015 and to £4995 in 2016/2017 [and all well below independent professional agent’s fees] and most pertinently in 2017, all lessees, including MHML’s now two Directors, and Mrs Hillgarth, were only paying £83 MORE per annum than they were paying our previous Agents, KFH, in 2011 - that’s a rise in annual outgoings of £83 per lessee per annum after SIX YEARS and having done a £105,000 major works programme leaving £16,201 in Reserves.
In year ending 2012 there was a surplus back to lessees of £1758, in 2013 there was a surplus back to lessees of £1188, in 2015 there was a surplus back to lessees of £770 and in 2016 there was a surplus back to lessees of £510 - admittedly in 2014 there was a deficit of £1753 which I’m still ashamed of!
Hardly poor management, nor indicative of monies going missing?
It’s nothing short of a miracle I’m not accused of taking bribes and backhanders, sexual harass- ment, assassinating Kennedy and responsible for the Brexit fiasco....yes I admit, obfuscation & chaff but you deserve it causing me time and effort in pointing out ad nauseam the same re- sponses to your incessant innuendos & accusations. Now adding 2015 and 2016 Account queries which I did warn you that the answers would add yet further proof of your client’s mis- chief [my flat refurb].
Believe it or not, but due to your duplicity by copying in Mr Raja & Mr Karupiah (but I note never your client indicating you are either hiding from her your errors [or hers] or more likely sim- ply ambulance chasing your unpaid fees) I was put on my honour to ignore your correspondence which was a great shame as I much enjoyed responding to your ignorant queries. Your clumsy attempt at putting my fellow conspirators against me with your scurrilous innuendos has failed mis- erably and only added to your frustration in representing your client’s mischiefs to little effect. As I
PLEaSE rEFEr to variouS attaCHED “PDF/FuRtheR ReFeRenCes” in SuPPort oF arguMEnt