FIRSTLY, let me set the record straight, 1,320 signatures were on the petition sheets handed to Two Rivers Housing (2RH) with regard to their proposal to demolish numbers five and seven Orchard Road, Lydney. That's a huge number of people who strongly believe that Mrs Watts should remain in her home until the evidence that number five is unsafe is verified.

It seems to me that Mr Roach is unaware of the facts regarding 7 Orchard Road. 2RH has not said that Mrs Watts's house at number seven is structurally unsafe but they think it might have problems in the future.

He also presumes that the survey categorically says the house is in danger of falling down and needs to be demolished – completely incorrect. 2RH will not allow Mrs Watts or her family to see the full and complete structural report relating to number five even though they initially said they would and invited her daughter to go and collect the report. What she was given was just a few pages of the report.

2RH says the survey of number five contains "commercially sensitive information that would be inappropriate to share." No-one can understand this comment and no answers are given by 2RH about this when asked. Mrs Watts is more than willing to pay for her own survey to be carried out. In fact she would invite several surveyors to carry out structural surveys to have several opinions in an effort to know the truth.

2RH has now quoted health and safety grounds – but said it was in danger of falling down two years ago and it is still standing. Nothing was mentioned to Mrs Watts by 2RH until earlier this year. Surely if it was thought to be unsafe two years ago due to ground movement they would have informed Mrs Watts? If number five is that unsafe what about surrounding houses, roads, shop, gardens etc? Should surveyors be checking the whole of the surrounding area?

I have attended all meetings relating to this issue with 2RH. At one such meeting they commented that they "would like to do what is best for Mrs Watts." When she suggested the best thing they could do for her was to repair the problems at number five that they as landlords had neglected over the years and allow her to stay in her home, their reply was: "It's our property and we can do as we wish."

Mrs Watts has maintained the inside and outside of the house in immaculate condition since becoming a widow with three young girls when aged 40 and she has lived in the house all her life. She uses her garden and relies on produce from the garden and always has done.

Another fact Mr Roach may not be aware of is that 2RH completely refurbished Mrs Watts's bathroom at the end of September 2012. New windows and more were installed at number five – why if it is so unsafe? I would say what a waste of money. Don't forget 2RH documented that the house next door was structurally unsafe as early as June 2011 apparently. Could 2RH really have done this and left Mrs Watts and her family in such potential danger?

Mr Roach would do well to remember the bullying tactics of the OAPs at Steel Avenue, Lydney – also threatened with demolition – and the grass-cutting fiasco which ended up in court.

I'm told that Mr Roach sits on the board of the Wilderness Project along with Dr David Garnett, chairperson of 2RH – not sure how Mr Roach can claim in his letter that he "has no direct link with 2RH". Win-win situation, he says. For whom? I ask myself.

Memories, health and well-being to some folk, Mr Roach, mean more than a shiny new house. I would presume Dr David Garnett is not a doctor of medicine or he would realise the anguish Mrs Watts is suffering and how this matter has made her extremely unwell.

– L. Minchin, 7 Orchard Road, Lydney.