PARISH councillors who were prosecuted after pruning protected trees say the order was not valid in the first place - and they want their money back.

Members of Glusburn Parish Council believe they were made an example of by Craven District Council in September 2003 when magistrates fined them £200 and ordered them to pay £100 costs after pruning eight protected trees without permission.

The parish councillors admitted carrying out work on beech and ash trees, protected by a tree preservation order dating back to 1977, in the Higher Lodge Street area of Glusburn.

The parish council applied for retrospective permission two days after carrying out the work.

At the time, Tom King, acting for the parish council, said it had been an innocent mistake.

But, parish councillors are now taking on the district council, stating the order was not valid in the first place. They want back the £300, plus the £763 they paid out in solicitor's fees.

Members say the trees should have been numbered and types described. They also state, where necessary, a map of sufficient scale indicating their positions and types should be included.

In a letter to the director of planning, members wrote: "We submit this order is not valid nor is it legal and as such any costs spent by ourselves in connection with this order ought to be reimbursed by the authority that made the mistakes in the first place."

Parish Council chairman Roger Nicholson claimed: "The detail of the documentation wasn't sufficient to prosecute us. We think we should have the money back, tax payers have ended up paying out at both ends."

Replying to the letter, the district council's solicitor Michael Turnbull said the case was no longer open to legal challenge. He added the definition of what was protected by the order was "perfectly adequate".

Colin Walker, director of environmental and planning services at Craven District Council, told the Herald they would respond after considering the matter further.