14

​

​

Currently we have no control over Northwood Hall and if NWHLG have their way and the enfranchisement fails, that is precisely where we would stay, with no control.

 

The enfranchisement will give leaseholders actual control through corporate democracy.

 

Just as with the Triplark Question 8, NWHLG do not understand the distinction between the decision-making process for directors and that for shareholders. They conflate the two.

 

Firstly, the 2 Participant Directors are appointed by the vote of the participant shareholders (i.e. the leaseholders). If the Participant Directors are acting in a manner that the majority of leaseholder participants disagree with then they can vote to remove them and replace them with directors who will follow the will of the majority. It’s called democratic accountability. Lindmead has no say over the appointment of Participant Directors.

 

Secondly, there is the additional protection for participant leaseholders that major decisions on costs and developments cannot be made just by the directors but require a majority of participant leaseholders to vote in favour (the special resolution of 75% needs such a majority in addition to the Lindmead votes).

 

This is real corporate democracy providing real control, so do not be misled by the NWHLG’s suggestions to the contrary. All this is clearly provided for in the Articles and any independent legal advice will confirm this.