Page 28 - 70_PBC to Begg (Nuts)_16-11-16 (33pp)

been but simply innuendo, and lies and malicious accusations, all of which are well documented in this response and in all previous.
Even the items and facts requested which due to the tardy request to view them we are not obligated to comply (but of course we did offer to comply) have not been obfuscated. In fact we’ve been very obliging and given far more relevant information than you are entitled to.
lf you remain intent on withholding this information it is inevitable that proceedings will follow — both civil and criminal. That is your choice. But what you cannot do, if you are unwilling or unable to admit that MHML has paid you personally for this work, is to continue to manage
Mitre House. Persistent avoidance of this simple question is effectively tantamount to an admission, and in reality the only remaining question is exactly how much money you have taken. if you cannot deny that you have pocketed money that you led the lessees to understand had been paid to AR Lawrence, how can you possibly expect the lessees to entrust you with any further money?
(comment/reply): “that proceedings will follow - both civil and criminal” — if I had a pound for every time you’ve threatened this or that (including nefarious and misleading information to our Freeholders and RBK&C, let alone some lessees no doubt - all of whom accepted our explanations and denials, again with full supporting evidence) that I’d be rich and the reason you cannot is the evidence sup- plied to date (some of which we were not even obligated to supply) decimates the ludicrous slurs, innuendos and accusations made by your client to date - it’s simple - Had this all arisen within the statutory 6 month period and you had proved each and every accusation, slur and innuendo includ- ing the various financial shenanigans you have insinuated and claimed from your initial 23 March 2016 letter, from a perusal of the various documents you tardily demanded but which we still offered to comply, you would have the right to insist that MHML are not fit for purpose.
But you did not. You also did not accept our offer to comply. You also did not accept our offer to reconsider our position if we received confirmation that each and every accusation and innuendo has been totally disproved with supporting documentation, further examples of which are yet again, for the umpteenth time, outlined in this response.
You seem oblivious to the fact that we have also run and maintained Mitre House for two years since the works in 2014, resulting in a surplus of £770 in 2015 and an assured further surplus in 2016 and a planned reduction in Annual Service Charges/Reserves planned for 2017 - and to my certain knowledge not one single query, nor complaint from any Lessee in the 24 months since the works finished in December 2014 - save of course for your letter of 23 March 2016 outlining Mrs Hillgarth’s diatribe of accusations, innuendos, slurs, malicious gossip etc etc all of which have been fielded professionally, expertly, honestly and promptly - but never again.
If you really think you should be entitled to carry on under these circumstances, you need to convene a meeting of the lessees within the next two weeks to hear your explanations in person. However l suggest the simpler course, as a first step, would be to recognise that the game is up and to resign the management of Mitre House. If you won't do that, this is all going to end very badly for you as well as your colleagues.
(comment/reply): I suggest that any lessee wishing to have further explanations of anything to do with Mrs Hillgarth’s concerns contacts Mrs Hillgarth or yourself for the various relevant correspon- dence you have on file, or best forward a copy of this tome, which surely by now must be as com- prehensive in its clarity as any face to face verbal explanations could ever achieve. Our understand- ing is that they are as sick and tired of Mrs Hillgarth’s constant barrack room counselling as we are, aware as they are and bored to tears by it all, that Mrs Hillgarth does not like me, does not like MHML running Mitre House and wishes to instruct her own preferred Agents, does not appreciate the incredible savings being made on a weekly basis for her’s and all other lessees’ benefit.
I await to be corrected.
But to allay any further comment, the finances are as I’ve indicated previously, ad nauseam:
We had £98,262 in Reserves to fund the 2014 Works budget of £105,019 - a budget that was indicated on the 22 June 2015 s.20 Notice from AR Lawrence to include vat and fees.
Consequently we were short by £6757, and hence the required £2000 contribution from all 9 lessees which would then allow £11,243 to remain safely in Reserves for any unforeseen eventuality, be that additional costs from AR Lawrence for unforeseen works requiring attention (all exactly as explained in correspondence from our Surveyor - and surely a situation that Mrs “Property Developer” Hillgarth was more than familiar with in her dealings with builders over the years with her property portfolio, or any emergency repairs at Mitre House, a flood, the lift needing urgent repairs, a pipe blocked, a door broken etc etc.