CAN I inform Dr Garnett firstly it was not the four owner occupiers who brought this case against TRH but the complete opposite.

Can he please inform me why he would think that owner occupiers would want to opt into the paying of these charges, when they contributed more than £10,000 to the collections to fight against it?

Can he also explain to me why he thinks owners would want a say in how the estates are run, when again TRH would not allow us to be part of any discussion in the beginning.

Another of their tenant board members recently put in the paper that they would abide by the judges' decision which states that TRH failed to provide any evidence that owners had never used or enjoyed nor never will use the grassed areas.

I have got the minutes of meetings with TRH over service charges for 25/6/08 and 29/7/08 which their CEO clearly stated was represented equally by them and us, but this actually equated to six fighting fund committee members to no fewer than 13 either tenant board members and management (very equal in numbers?).

When he refers to the way they manage grassed areas, hedge cutting and so on is this the reason I have a hedge that is now nearly up to the top of a lamp post obstructing the view of various homes, and why they have not cleaned up around some garage sites for the entire eight years these estates have been in their ownership.

– A fighting fund committee member.