(NB: Ms McGrath is covered in my 3 June 2008 (74 pg) Witness Statement; (4 pg) Main Points)

In my 9 November 2003 correspondence Ms McGrath, Head of the LVTs (LVT # 7) I asked her to ensure that the summary of the case on the LVT database is amended to reflect a

"factually accurate summary of the case" as "the current version is particularly misleading" .  

Indeed, the entry (I downloaded on 7 October 2003 ) reads as though I am the cause of the action. The first paragraph reads

"Dispute concerned works that, following delay caused by adjournment requested by Respondent, had risen from £564,467 (US$995,400) to £592,762 (US$1.045 million) or £600,904 (US$1.060 million) from 30 June 2003 to 30 September 2003" .

See the version of the 'very convenient' summary - ref #992 on the LVT database - with the addition of my comments. I guess that it helped secure payment by the majority of the leaseholders of the full service charge demanded : Pridie Brewster # 18

Please note that Cawdery Kaye Fireman & Taylor and Mr Barrie Martin, FRICS, Martin Russell Jones, have accused me of being responsible for the LVT action:

•  Mr Lanny Silverstone letter of 25 June 2003

"...without going through the costly LVT process which has now resulted in a percentage uplift in the contract figure and a significant delay in the project" .

•  Ms Ayesha Salim, in her libellous, scurrilous 21 October 2003 'offer'

"...and to continue to defend these proceedings is her own. Her decision to do so has caused inconvenience and expense to all the lessees of the building."

•  Mr Barrie Martin, in his equally outrageous, libellous and scurrilous letter of 4 August 2004, in which he states that:

" [I] refused to pay [my] contribution and this resulted in the proceedings before the LVT which of course resulted in the considerable delay in the commencement of the work" .

To my 9 November 2003 request, Ms McGrath replied in her 26 November 2003 letter that it had nothing to do with the LVT and that I needed to address my request to LEASE as they had responsibility for the database.

On my request to the Head of the LVTs I had copied LEASE. My request was ignored.

I find it very odd that the Head of the Leasehold Valuation Tribunals has no responsibility in relation to what is captured on the database given that the cases are from the LVTs.

WHO HAD A PART TO PLAY IN THIS?

Fair minded, reasonable visitor to the site, please remember that...

THE ROOT CAUSE OF ALL THAT HAS HAPPENED is due to...

Mr Ladsky et. al. and their aides deciding that I (and other leaseholders) would be made to pay for this (2.4MB): the CONSTRUCTION OF A PENTHOUSE FLAT, ADDITION OF THREE OTHER FLATS AND RELATED WORKS - FOR WHICH WE ARE NOT LIABLE.

(This pack (2.3MB), as well as this pack (1.1MB) contain key evidential documents. As to the pay-off, it is evidenced by the block sale of flats in the latter part of 2006, beginning of 2007 which, of course, are in addition to the sale of the penthouse flat BGL 54 458 for £3.9 million (US$6.9 million) in December 2005, etc.)

Jefferson House July 2002

Jefferson House September 2005

 

To be more precise:

( PDF of above diagram - at February 2006)

UNBELIEVABLE! ISN'T IT?

THE LEASEHOLD VALUATION TRIBUNAL AND ITS THEN OVERALL HEAD, MR JOHN PRESCOTT, HAVE CAUSED ME TO DEVELOP THIS WEBSITE.

THIS OUTCOME IS OF THEIR OWN DOING.

Back to top