Page 488 - xx10_BEGG_ALL_MASTER to Add to

-17-
SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT TO CITY OF LONDON POLICE
and to THE INSOLVENCY SERVICE
mitre house management limited (“mhml”) – company no: 07731341
mitre house, 124 King’s road, london sW3 4tP (“mitre house” or “the Property”) directors of mhml: Paul Brown-constable, dima international limited (Jamil raja) and segar Karupiah (resigned 29 september 2016) (together “the directors”).
surveyor) but £7,418 of the total money due to ar lawrence was not actually paid until 28 Jan- uary 2015. therefore only £65,105 of “legitimate” payments that we know about were made by mhml in 2014. this means that of the £96,647 paid to mhml’s Priceplan Xs account in 2014, £31,542 presently remains unaccounted for and “invisible”.
A CONSIDERED RESPONSE: £31,756.21 WAS ALSO PAID OUT OF “THE ACCOUNTS’ AS A RESULT OF SAVINGS MADE FROM THE £105,019 BUDGET (ALL AS DISCUSSED AND AGREED AT THE 23 MAY 2014 BOARD MEETING) TOTALLING £31,756.21 AND WHICH WAS SPENT/USED TO FUND ITEMS INITIALLY CONSIDERED UNAFFORDABLE AND CONSE- QUENTLY WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE SCHEDULE OF WORKS FROM WHICH ALL TENDERS WERE QUOTED. I’M NOT SURE WHETHER YOU’RE TOTALLY AU FAIT WITH THIS AFFAIR?
33. under detailed “cross-examination” in correspondence Paul Brown-constable eventu- ally admitted in writing that the sum of £31,765.21 had been charged to the leaseholders by mhml in respect of the project. a “justification” for these charges totalling £31,756.21 (oddly not totalling £31,765.21, which was the figure previously notified to us) subsequently appeared in an invoice /00014_0007 dated 31 december 2014 addressed by mhml to the service charge account. this sum was classified in the heading to the invoice as “the £31,756.21 savings made from the 22 June 2014 s 20 approved budget of £105,019”.
A CONSIDERED RESPONSE: I THINK THIS NEEDS HITTING INTO THE LONG GRASS FOR GOOD AS IT’S BORINGLY REPETITIVE & UNTRUE - FIRSTLY: IT’S PROBABLY A TYPO NOT A HANGING OFFENCE - DO YOU WANT A LIST OF YOUR STUPIDITIES - MISQUOTES, WRONG DATES ON EMAIL REFERENCES & LETTERS, ASKING THE SAME QUESTION A DOZEN TIMES DESPITE HAVING THE ANSWER - CREDITS ON SURVEYOR/WATER TANK/TV INSTALL TO NAME BUT A SOUPÇON?
MHML INVOICED THE SERVICE CHARGE ACCOUNT FOR £15,572.85 FOR WORKS AND FEES. £16,183.36 WAS THE AGGREGATE COST OF ALL OTHER COSTS AND SUPPLIES AND FITMENTS PAID DIRECTLY FROM MHML’S ACCOUNT NO: 23433668 (THE “PRICEPLAN XS ACCOUNT”) EQUATING TO £31,756.21 IN TOTO OF SAVINGS MADE AND SAVINGS SPENT.
THERE WAS NO “detailed “cross-examination” in correspondence” NOR INDEED IS IT TRUE THAT “Paul Brown-constable eventually admitted in writing that the sum of £31,765.21 had
been “charged to the leaseholders by mhml in respect of the project” yet another misquote to suit your purposes? AS EVER YOU ARE AMBIGUOUSLY REFERENCING AN HONEST ANSWER TO AN AMBIGUOUS QUERY, NAMELY IN RESPONSE TO YOUR 21 JUNE 2016 LETTER:
You requested: and since you insist repeatedly that you have nothing to hide, please will you now specify, in respect of each of these items {as well as any included within your final "a lot
Please refer to attached “ADDENDUM/FURTHER REFERENCES” in suPPort of argument