No, the logical conclusion is that they don't feel it to be relevant. If it exists, then it only came into being after the restoration was substantially completed, which seems strange in itself.Renegadenemo wrote: ↑Thu Jan 30, 2020 3:39 pm Surely the logical conclusion has to be that the later document somehow affects the earlier one in a way that they don't want to reveal.
I've only noticed one participant in this sorry affair who has been reluctant to answer simple and direct questions, when it is not in his interest to do so.
I repeat: if you consider it to be so important, and to make the case so strongly in your favour, why not simply publish it yourself, instead of trying to use mysterious suggestions about its content to deflect from those very clear contractual obligations that are already in the public domain?