As reported in the T&A earlier this week, right, four widows in Bingley are involved in a legal fight against Bradford Council over the cost of repairs to their neighbours' windows. Councillor Jim O'Neill, chairman of the directorate of housing and environmental protection committee, here explains, in his own words, why the Council took the action it did.

THE COUNCIL, as landlord, has a responsibility to maintain and repair the structure and exterior of the building. This includes repair or replacement to windows, communal windows and doors, roofs, gutters, etc.

The lease which the owners signed contain maintenance provisions which entitles the Council to recover money spent on the building.

When the leaseholders bought their flats they were made aware of the details in the lease when they signed it, and received legal advice during the purchase process.

The Council has a duty to its tenants and council tax payers to levy maintenance charges where it has an obligation and entitlement to do so. This is not an option that the Council can choose or not and failure to do so is likely to result in criticism by the District Auditors.

Buying a council flat is not the same as buying a council house. The Council cannot ignore its obligations when flats are sold, nor can we allow leaseholders to be left to their own devises. They are quite simply not able to do as they please as they are leaseholders and not freeholders. Both the Council and leaseholders have obligations and these are outlined in their lease agreement.

The Council has a legal responsibility for the structure of the building. I have instructed officers to speak directly to all leaseholders to explain to them once again the details of their lease agreement and reach an agreement with them about how the service charge should be paid.

While this involves a relatively small number of people, the issue is important in that it involves a substantial amount of potential repair funding which could be used to help clear the district's backlog of repairs. I stress the Council's repair responsibility and, where those works are undertaken, it will seek to recover such expenditure. Lessees must realise their obligation in this respect. Needless to say, if an agreement cannot be reached regarding payments, the Council will consider action for recovery.

We shall be seeking to clarify lease agreements through our tenants' and residents' groups so that people who want to buy rather than rent flats in the district are fully aware that the Council is responsible for the exterior and the communal areas of the properties. All leaseholders must contribute to their upkeep.

I can understand how these leaseholders have got themselves into this situation and how they must feel. Nevertheless, if you were to purchase a flat in the private sector you would not be expected to put windows in your own flat, nor carry out maintenance to the block.

However, if any leaseholder does have difficulty in paying these charges they are welcome to discuss their individual circumstances with officers.

'I will go to jail if I have to'

Joyce Marshall, 76, of Myrtle Court, Bingley, and one of the leading fighters against the charges, said: "I will end up doing time over this. I do not intend to pay this money.

"I am absolutely livid over it and Coun O'Neill can say what he likes."

Mrs Marshall, a former chairman of Crosley Woods Tenants Association, added: "I do not understand how they have the nerve to do it. I think it is absolutely disgusting and I have written to the Home Secretary Jack Straw telling him how we are being victimised.

"The Government is supposed to have £11 million to spend to protect the elderly from burglary and we are being victimised by our own council

"If I won the lottery I still wouldn't pay on principle for someone else's windows. He is not pushing it onto me. I have not had a holiday for three years."

Converted for the new archive on 30 June 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.