Page 513 - FINAL MASTER 616pp 20-6-19 SOUND

-29- A SELECTION OF HILLGARTHISMS So I do and accused of ‘Vote Rigging’? @ “I INSIST ON HAVING A THIRD PARTY PRESENT” So she turns up with a Policeman? @ “SHE DENIES WRITING AN UNINTELLIGIBLE UNCASHABLE CHEQUE - OR RATHER WHEN & WHY, BUT.....” “YOU CHOOSE” And replies complaining of too short notice? It wasn’t. @ “I DON’T RECOGNISE THE MAN’S VOICE ON THE AUDIO RECORDING” Happens to be her co-Director and neighbour for twenty years? @ “SHE’S ADVISED I’M AWAY OVER A LONG WEEK-END” And replies wanting to know who’s looking after Mitre House in my absence? @ “WE’RE ACCUSED OF RUNNING AN OFFICE IN THE BASEMENT” And claims she has photos to prove it? @ “I’M CAUGHT OUT DOING SOME WORKINGS” Which is the only reason lessees were notified of savings? @ “WEAREREQUIREDTOHAVEAFIREALARMSYSTEM(2012)” We were not required to have one nor extinguishers, which we did have? @ “THE LIFT CAGE SHOULD BE THE SAME BRONZE COLOUR AS YOU’VE DONE THE DOORS” Later she says she and a majority wanted a black lift...? @ “I DID NOT AGREE TO MAKING SAVINGS” So what did “well then everybody will be happy” mean? @ “THERE’S NOBODY WORKING AT MITRE HOUSE” Because they were all on the scaffolding doing the exterior...! @ “THE SIGNAGE IS ALL CHEAP PLASTIC” It happens to be all brass and perspex @ “WORKINGS BY MHML COULD NOT HAVE COST MORE THAN £5000 AND NOT £31,756” The Lighting and electrics alone cost £12,500 “SHE’S ADVISED OF A BOARD MEETING” Please refer to attached “ADDENDUM/FURTHER REFERENCES” in suPPort of argument “that then was the distinctly unattractive state of the conversation when i called on mr Brown-constable the following dav, on 30 september 2014, accompanied by a police officer. the police officer witnessed his demand for "outstanding bills", but would not have understood precisely what was being referred to. i did hand over in the course of that conversation a cheque for £867.87, which was my share of the payment for the water tank. mr Brown-constable accepted that cheque at the time although he subsequently demanded that i should pay the money by bank transfer, because his bank Para 61 - Mrs Hillgarth’s Witness Statement allegedly ---i did not believe him - could not read my writing on the cheque. i have kept the cheque and one can see that the writing on it is no different from any other cheques i write.” Just how much can one rely on Mrs Hillagarth’s memory of events?