Page 4 - 20_PBC to Begg_25-5-16 (10pp)

4
So I think it safe to presume (but I agree not certain as obviously she may have had a working signal for mobile or computer in the Sahara Desert but can’t get a signal in Bandol, France) Mrs Hillgarth was in the UK at 11.53h on 1st April 2016 because she emailed me, and again safe to say, 99% in the UK whilst doing her online banking payment to MHML for March Quarterly Demands at 13.54h on 11 April 2016.
If one were to take a Dr. Watson view of your pneumonia predicament and again Mrs Hillgarth’s Sahara trip, one might find both somewhat implausible given the circumstances as outlined, namely an apparent total shutdown of your goodself between emailing Mrs Hillgarth on 31 March with your Word.doc letter for her to forward to me etc, until your 15 April letter of apology for not having acknowledged our 1 April letter offering full compliance.
Mrs Hillgarth’s obviously fairly brief trip for such an adventure is also somewhat implausible given that if she was in the UK at 11.53h on 1 April, there’s no way she could have been abroad, landed etc until 2 April the next day and again, one would surmise, needing to have returned on 10 April to be doing online banking at 13.54h the next day!
And one thing you can bet your life on, there’s not a chance in hell that Mrs Hillgarth would have considered online banking payment of her March Quarterly Demands to be a priority on her immediate return to the UK from what would appear to have been a very short one week Sahara trip.
Hardly time enough to get thirsty, Dr. Watson would propose, and inopportune being absent re: your deadlines.
Consequently I find your non acknowledgement to our offer to comply to be questionable alongside our valid query as to why, due to your predicament, Mrs Hillgarth could not have obliged. Quite simply, were you totally infirmed and was Mrs Hillgarth deep in the Sahara on or around 1st April 2016.
We think not based on the above, admittedly, guesstimations if you’ll pardon the vernacular.
We would propose you again check her schedule as you might find it differs somewhat from that supplied to you and subsequently advised to us in your letter of 11 May 2016
Moving on to Mrs Hillgarth’s lease covenants which you appear to be considering “alleged” and simply “concerning” for me, as stated in your 11 May, posted 13 May, arriving Recorded but unsigned for on 17 May.
They are not alleged but fact as you well know, and like any contract term can be enforced (and please no reference back re: MHML/office) and that’s probably where Specific Performance comes into play?
If I or anybody else were to rent Mrs Hillgarth’s beautiful, stunning St Gervais apartment for £296 per night (minimum stay one week) and blatantly disregarded the well stated no smoking and no animals rules, I’m sure she would make comment, in fact more than one. In fact she’d go ballistic and would instigate instant litigation without doubt.
Goodness knows how complex her UK tax returns must be as the French authorities do have some bizarre rules!
Litigation also if happened with any breaches of the tenancy agreement she requires of her tenants in the two or three properties she rents out in London, including Mitre House for upwards of £600 per week.
Mrs Hillgarth is somewhat ambivalent when it comes to rental income/sub-letting/lease covenants at Mitre House and it is a sore point whenever raised, but it’s highly relevant, most especially as regards the recent works.
As you can explain to Mrs Hillgarth (indeed we did too on numerous occasions) there is a distinct difference between service charge costs for necessary repairs and those for requested cosmetic improvements, the latter requiring a 100% agreement from all lessees, which is obviously fair as not every lessee is fortunate enough to have a monthly income in excess of say £4000 or £5000 if not significantly more (St Gervais would cost £8880 plus an £800 deposit to rent for a month...) It does, though, appear to be somewhat short of bookings. My politeness excludes me from commenting on the decor for her property in direct contrast to her vitriolic observations for Mitre House?
As you have well perused in her voluminous correspondence (an orphan when viewed against mine) most if not all of the arguments regarding the recent 2014 interior/exterior works revolved around cosmetics and costs - nothing else. Mrs Hillgarth wanted to spend a fortune for a spic ‘n span total cosmetic overhaul with no regard whatsoever to funds in place nor affordability from less well off lessees (of which I regret I am one).
Mrs Hillgarth then canvassed some other lessees to implore them to also spend a fortune.
What she could not do though was to convince them to pay their share for her proposed workings, or in truth, not the workings, but the contractor she wanted, namely Wade for £219,150 (£170,202 externals/internals £48,947)
The contractor subsequently approved (by Mrs Hillgarth and others) was AR Lawrence, costed at £105,019 (£81,487 externals/internals £23,531). Quite a considerable difference from Wade’s but taking over 2 years delay to dispute.