Page 304 - FINAL MASTER 616pp 20-6-19 SOUND

-53- “HOW DID YOU THINK MHML WERE FUNDING THE NEW LIGHTING?” mail pigeon boxes and meter cupboards, Wade’s involvement etc, that neither you nor Mrs Hill- garth have any idea of what works’ were included to be done in our Surveyor’s Schedule of Works on which Wade finally quoted along with six other companies? Nor indeed the two initial Wade quotes nor the Hemi. Correspondence can be (has been) supplied to verify. The two initial Wade and the Hemi quotes included lighting and mail pigeon boxes/table and meter cupboards. Our Surveyor makes clear in his letter accompanying his tenders that no light- ing is included as “you were taking care of it”. Again, along with all his correspondence, invoic- ing, tenders, breakdown analysis, Wade’s initial two, Hemi’s and the Surveyor’s Schedule of Works, plus all independent quotes, s.20 Notices, MHML design presentations, Schedule of Works \[inte- rior\], £25,000 incl. vat costings were all on our greatly maligned and ignored www.mitrehouse.com for all to peruse and advised to do so on multiple occasions. Correspondence can be (has been) supplied to verify. References made to s.20 Notices, being either wrong, unruly or just downright incorrect is rubbish. All s.20 Notices were in fact incredibly detailed and had it not been for Mrs Hillgarth’s in- transigence, her RTM, her canvassing of other lessees with a pack of lies and misinformation, Inter- nals would have been completed in 2012 for well under £35,000 if not less and the Externals in 2013 for hopefully well under £70,000 with identical workings, improvements, cosmetics and décor as accomplished in 2014 without the need for a £2000 contribution from all nine lessees. As regards the panic Water Tank, all was accomplished legally and with all lessees’ full agree- ment and a good saving was made as indeed same for the TV/Sky install - it was again only Mrs Hillgarth’s bitching and again canvassing all lessees with misinformation and lies in pursuit of her vendetta against MHML, and made worse due to our insistence she comply with her lease covenants and desist in signing off tenancy agreements stating all consents had been obtained. De- manding a set of keys with a police officer in tow would get her sectioned in some countries, re- questing her tenant to make malicious gossip for her sick mind to use as ammunition, spreading malicious lies such as MHML running an office from the basement, MHML purloining window repair monies, me having my flat refurbed at the cost of leaseholders by our contractors, AR Lawrence (and you now saying Benitor) in 2014 when my flat wasn’t refurbed until 2015 as is well evidenced by your latest snooping, my dear Holmes. Mrs Hillgarth agreed to a call on lessees for a £2000 contribution to fund a £105,019 budget with only approx £98,262 in reserves, so hopefully leaving approx £11,243 in Reserves at end of works. In fact £16,201 was left in reserves after every penny owed \[or to be paid\] was accounted for admittedly in the way we wished to present the final outcome as opposed to your nit-picking obsti- nacy. Correspondence can be (has been) supplied to verify. Correspondence can be (has been) supplied to verify. Due also to an emergency over a failing Water Tank, MHML sensibly arranged a quick replacement whilst scaffolding was in place to facilitate and reduce cost. As time was critical \[health and safety as well as scaffolding in situ\] it was decided to request of lessees if they would agree to going without an s.20 \[cost and time\] and save a little by making their fair share contribution. Correspondence can be (has been) supplied to verify. Somewhat coincidentally, it had also been mooted by some lessees including MHML that a commu- nal TV/Sky system could also \[only\] be installed with scaffolding in place. An s.20 was not a require- ment due to cost but still needed 100% agreement from all lessees to again contribute their fair share. To both Water Tank \[no demand for s.20 although one was drawn up and provisionally issued due to Mrs Hillgarth’s behaviour\] and TV/Sky install contributions were agreed eventually by all lessees but made unbelievably fractious due to Mrs Hillgarth firstly insisting that the £2000 contribution to fund the £105,000 budget should and was always meant to be used for the TV/Sky install and could also cover the Water Tank. Mrs Hillgarth canvassed all lessees to withhold their £2000 contri- butions resulting in MHML making arrangements to reduce the Schedule of Works to reflect PLEaSE rEFEr to variouS attaCHED “PDF/FuRtheR ReFeRenCes” in SuPPort oF arguMEnt