Page 444 - FINAL MASTER 616pp 20-6-19 SOUND

Thus on 13 August 2014 Mr Christopher Leigh-Pemberton (Flat 8) wrote to Mr Brown-Constable to ask for his confirmation that there was no element of personal benefit to him arising from the use of AR Lawrence as the contractors for the overall Mitre House project. In his response of the same date, timed at 10.35, Mr Brown-Constable wrote: “even if I was using A&R Lawrence (which I am not) its none of anybody’s business save mine”. This was consistent with an e-mail timed at 7.45 on the same date to Mr Diego Fortunati (Flat 9), when Mr Brown-Constable wrote: “I am doing the works in the flat myself”. However both of these e- mails appeared directly to contradict his earlier e-mail to Mrs Hillgarth on 12 August 2014, timed at 5.54 pm, in which Mr Brown-Constable had written: “My flat is being done by Benitor and AR Lawrence after hours and weekends” (this notwithstanding that work is not allowed after 6pm). Either Mr Brown-Constable was decorating his flat himself, or it was being done (whether wholly or partly) by contractors. It is not possible that both of these statements were true. Mr Brown- Constable has yet to answer Mr Leigh-Pemberton’s (perfectly appropriate) enquiry as to whether there has been any element of personal benefit to him. An invoice dated 9 June 2014 from Benitor for £1,971.60 referring to basement decoration may be relevant in this respect, as decoration of the basement had never been mentioned in the specification or authorized by anyone. It is believed that despite what it says on the invoice this money was actually used for Mr Brown-Constable’s own flat. Reply: This is yet another totally fabricated mischievous innuendo and not true as has been denied and proved a total fabrication on numerous occasions previously. Even a simple referral to whom Mr Brown-Constable was allegedly in receipt of workings from would allay any reasonable grounds for such an outrageous accusation. This is a perfect example of Mrs Hillgarth’s personal vendetta against both Mr. Brown-Constable, MHML and its directors. In conclusion it is important to appreciate that MHML is/was both a master and a servant in relation to the leaseholders. MHML and its directors were thus in a position of trust in relation to the leaseholders who (being MHML’s tenants) had very little alternative but to go along with MHML’s exploitation of their position, and to tolerate the rudeness and abuse that went with it. MHML and its directors have grossly abused that trust and must be held to account by the law. As I have already made you aware, Mr Raja (who is a certified accountant by profession) committed the company to producing audited accounts, but has not done so. Mrs Hillgarth has also been denied access to the income and expenditure accounts of MHML for the last few years and is convinced that substantial funds originally paid to MHML for the extension of individual leases at Mitre House have been misappropriated by the directors. Therefore it is submitted that the Registrar should not allow MHML to be struck off from the Register until we have the audited accounts that were promised to her, the books and records of MHML have been made available to her, and these matters have been properly cleared up to her satisfaction. Reply: The above statement along with all statements made in this application are either yet again fully answered, further explained and comprehensively denied with full repeat supporting evidence if required and as such there is no valid reason to not permit the progressing of the striking off of MHML which has no valid reason to further exist as its raison d’etre has