AS the Commission of Inquiry into the operations of City Hall continued on Wednesday, it was heard that MCG Investments Inc., the company that owns Giftland Mall, contended that their rates and taxes were unfairly increased despite an agreement they had with the Town Clerk, Royston King.

According to a representative of the company, Paul Hugh, at a meeting in November 2017, King met with MCG Chairman, Roy Beepat, and it was verbally agreed that certain taxes and penalties would be waived and an amount to be paid was agreed upon.

“It was in 2017, a demand notice was sent to MCG Investments Inc. which is the holding company for Giftland Mall, for a total of $44,255,183. Now on the 2nd November, 2017, at a meeting at the Giftland Mall between Mr Beepat and Mr. King, it was agreed at that meeting that the rates and taxes for the years 2015 and 2016, including interest and penalties, will be waived and interest and penalties for 2017 would also be waived. The rates and taxes for 2017, with the interest and penalties being waived, was $11,467,500 and they would have agreed and the MCG Investments would have provided a payment schedule to the M&CC,” Hugh explained.

Beepat sought to have the amount confirmed in writing before commencing payment, but despite multiple correspondence, this was not done, and a subsequent increased amount was imposed.

“No reply was received. A [payment] schedule was to be given by Mr. Beepat to the Town Clerk on how they would’ve paid it, but Mr. King was supposed to reply to him stating that this was the agreement and it wasn’t sent. Mr. King was to reply first to say this is the agreement, and Mr. Beepat would have sent the schedule to Mr. King and we would’ve made payments. The Town Clerk should have put it in writing. A letter was expected from him at least to confirm this is what we spoke about,” Hugh related. He further relayed that “Then on the 3rd of April, 2018, Mr. King wrote back that the agreement no longer stood.”
According to that letter, this was due to the time that had elapsed since the agreement between King and Beepat.

“I must acknowledge receipt of your letter dated march 9, 2018. I must inform you that due to certain circumstances including the lapse of time, from the time of our conversation in 2018 and no follow up actions by MCG Investment Inc. on payments of rates and taxes to City Council, our discussion is no longer relevant to your account at City Hall. However, the chairman of the council’s finance committee has agreed to meet and discuss with you a way forward to settle your accounts with the Georgetown municipality. If you agree, then I can fix a date and time and place for this meeting,” that letter read.

Another correspondence from King informed that the taxes for 2017 had then been increased from the agreed $11 million to $25 million. However, Hugh argued, the lapse in time was due to the lack of correspondence from City Hall.

“The Chairman [Beepat] responded to Mr. King, reminding him of the meeting on November 2017, also indicated that he spoke with Mr. Lionel Jaikaran [then Deputy Mayor] who said that he would have the amount agreed upon put in writing; this was not done,” Hugh maintained.

“There was no response to that letter. Then there was another letter sent by Mr. King on 2nd May, 2018, indicating that on April 28, 2018, Council took the decision to waive the interest accrued by MCG Investments Inc and they would now have to pay $25, 263,750 instead of the agreed $11 million. I don’t know what Mr. King informed council, but he’s saying that council decided that they would waive certain interest, but it’s now $25 million and not $11 million.”

Hugh’s other contention is that while another meeting has been set with City Hall, the invitations continue to be delivered within hours of the meeting, making it difficult for Beepat and his finance controller to make themselves available for the meeting.

“We have just received an invitation to a meeting on 28 September, which came on the afternoon of 27th September, but Mr. Beepat and the company secretary were not available, so they did not go to that meeting. That’s the last position that I know of.

Another invitation was for a meeting on July 4, 2018, but again that was received at 12 noon on the 4th July, 2018, scheduled for 4 pm on 4th July, 2018. In his reply to them he asked to be given seven days notice to a meeting so he could make provisions to attend. It seems that was ignored,” Hugh said.

Hugh is hoping that the CoI can look into the matter as they continue to investigate matters at City Hall.